Tweet
The interesting thing is that the California Supreme Court is dominated by Republican appointees but they still agreed that this was an equal protection issue. It seems even the Republicans out here are to the left of the national party. 
-
Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate. -
I read that early on. When I mentioned this to one of my friends, he said, "Republicans in California are different from Republicans in other states."
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
More accurately, there are different kinds of people drawn to the Republican party; not all of us are christian fundamentalists. They just control some of the main elements of the party leadership right now
Frankly, that's the only wing of the party that would oppose gay marriage, that I can think of... the rest would be pretty solidly pro. (For example, the bathroom stall wing...
)
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.Comment
-
Originally posted by snoopy369
the rest would be pretty solidly pro. (For example, the bathroom stall wing... )
No they wouldn't; those bathroom stalls hypocrites are often the ones who are strongly homophobic.A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
OUCH! But then touche' MrFun
____________________________
"One day if I do go to heaven, I'm going to do what every San Franciscan does who goes to heaven - I'll look around and say, 'It ain't bad, but it ain't San Francisco.'" - Herb Caen, 1996
"If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn't worship that God." - Archbishop Desmond Tutu
____________________________Comment
-
Originally posted by Wittlich
OUCH! But then touche' MrFun
I speak the truth.A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.Comment
-
Pretty close.Originally posted by Vesayen
Reading is fun!
It is similar to the way many position in the federal gvmt work, they are appointed by some officer and then confirmed by the people via the legislature.
California has a similar process, they are appointed but then must be confirmed by the populace. This is not judicial activism, the law passed violated the constitution, the judges ruled the right way.
Theoretically, trial judges are elected. However, if an opening occurs between elections (which is the rule rather than the exception), then the Governor appoints. The trial judge is required to run when the term is up.
However, it is almost unheard of for anyone to run against a sitting trial judge. If a judge does not draw an opponent, then the judge's name does not even appear on the ballot.
As for Justices at the appellate court and supreme court level, they are appointed by the Governor. However, every so often, they must stand for a yea-or-nay retention vote by the citizenry.
George's retention vote is in 2 years.Comment
Comment