LAKE COUNTY – In a decision issued Tuesday, the California Supreme Court upheld last November's Proposition 8 ballot initiative.
Proposition 8 amended the state constitution's definition of marriage to be between a man and a woman.
Statewide, it passed by a margin of just over seven million yes votes, or a 52.3 percent approval margin, to 6.4 million no votes, or 47.7 percent. In Lake County, it was a 52 percent to 48 percent vote in the initiative's favor, with 13,036 yes votes and 12,080 no votes, according to the California Secretary of State's Office.
Tuesday's ruling was greeted with sentiments on both sides that suggest the issue is far from resolved.
Local same-sex marriage rights supporters vowed to continue networking and educating the public about what they argue is a basic civil rights issue.
The Yes on 8 Campaign heralded the decision as a “major victory.”
“We are very gratified that the California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8,” said Andrew Pugno, general counsel of ProtectMarriage.com. “This is the culmination of years of hard work to preserve marriage in California. Hundreds of thousands of volunteers worked diligently to uphold the institution of marriage.”
Pugno said that voters twice have decided that marriage in California should be only between a man and a woman. “We are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has acknowledged the right of voters to define marriage in the California Constitution.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger encouraged everyone to respond to the decision “peacefully and lawfully.”
“While I believe that one day either the people or courts will recognize gay marriage, as governor of California I will uphold the decision of the California Supreme Court,” he said. “Regarding the 18,000 marriages that took place prior to Proposition 8’s passage, the court made the right decision in keeping them intact.”
State Sen. Patricia Wiggins (D-Santa Rosa) said that, while the decision wasn't surprising, it was “nevertheless a profound disappointment to everyone who supports marriage equality.”
Wiggins added, “But in our disappointment, we can also find comfort in the fact that the trend is moving away from discrimination and towards equal freedom and opportunity for all loving couples, regardless of gender or orientation. And despite today’s decision, the day will come, perhaps soon, when Proposition 8, like other discriminatory measures before it, is in fact overturned.”
Proposition 8, the majority of justices noted, “carves out a narrow exception applicable only to access to the designation of the term 'marriage,' but not to any other of 'the core set of basic substantive legal rights and attributes traditionally associated with marriage …', such as the right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship with the person of one’s choice and to raise children within that family.”
The court, however, upheld as valid an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages performed prior to Proposition 8, which must continue to be recognized in California.
“Applying well-established legal principles pertinent to the question whether a constitutional provision should be interpreted to apply prospectively or retroactively, we conclude that the new section cannot properly be interpreted to apply retroactively,” the decision noted.
In the 25-page dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote that such a fundamental shift in rights shouldn't be left up to the initiative process, but should be a matter of constitutional revision.
Moreno said Proposition 8 “represents an unprecedented instance of a majority of voters altering the meaning of the equal protection clause by modifying the California Constitution to require deprivation of a fundamental right on the basis of a suspect classification.”
He wrote that the ruling “is not just a defeat for same-sex couples, but for any minority group that seeks the protection of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution,” noting that under the majority's reasoning, state voters could change the Constitution to limit the religious rights of Catholics, property ownership of blacks and rights of women to pursue professions.
Last year, after the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, Lake County Clerk/Auditor-Controller Pam Cochrane's office began issuing marriage licenses and reissued all county marriage forms to allow for same-sex couples.
However, all of those forms – which had been revised with the help of a committee set up by the state association for county clerks – went out of use with Proposition 8, said Cochrane, so Tuesday's ruling won't require any additional paperwork or policy changes for the department.
Cochrane said her office didn't count the number of same-sex marriage licenses it issued.
Local residents react to decision
Same-sex marriage advocates gathered for rallies in downtown Lakeport on Tuesday morning and again in the evening, on the corner of Third and Main streets in front of the Courthouse Museum.
About two dozen people carried rainbow flags and signs with slogans including “We all deserve the right to marry,” “Equal rights for all” and “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all,” receiving honks and, in some cases, silent stares, from drivers passing through the area.
Laurie Lamonaco of the Lake County LGBTIQ Pride Group said the important thing now is to have local gay rights groups network to get out their message of an attack on their civil rights. Educating the community also will be important.
Lamonaco was encouraged and moved by the show of support on Tuesday.
Joey Luiz, vice president of the county's Stonewall Democratic Club, said he believes same-sex marriage advocates will seek a ballot initiative of their own.
That's the next logical step, said Luiz. “I think we've done everything we can about making as much noise as we can.”
Gay rights advocates also reported late Tuesday that they may take a challenge to Proposition 8 to the US Supreme Court.
The Yes on 8 Campaign indicated that its work also isn't done. ProtectMarriage.com Executive Committee Chairman Ron Prentice said they're shifting their long-term goal to continuing to protect marriage and strengthen family values.
"We will now turn our attention to public education and outreach so that citizens come to better understand and appreciate the many benefits that traditional marriage provides for society and our families," said Prentice.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
