Chris Crain wonders if the California court decision and the possible intiative aren’t on an unexpected collision course. Money quote:
If voters amend the state’s constitution to prevent gays from marrying, it’s hard to see how the same four justices wouldn’t conclude that the only way to pass constitutional muster is to open up "domestic partnerships" to straight couples and eliminate civil marriage entirely in the state.
But the court would be obliged to defend the constitution in this regard, even if such a constitution is amended to mandate discrimination against gay citizens.
The Dish 