Calif. high court to review challenges to gay marriage ban

SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court agreed yesterday to review legal challenges to Proposition 8, the voter initiative that restored a ban on same-sex marriage, but it refused to permit gay marriages to resume pending a ruling.

Meeting in closed session, the state court asked litigants on both sides for more written arguments and scheduled a hearing for March. The court also signaled its intention to decide the fate of existing same-sex marriages, asking litigants to argue that question.

Yesterday's decision to review the lawsuits against Proposition 8 did not reveal how the court was leaning. The court could have dismissed the suits, but both opponents and supporters of Proposition 8 sought review to settle legal questions.

Some legal challengers also sought an order that would have permitted same-sex couples to marry until the cases were resolved, a position opposed by California Attorney General Jerry Brown and Proposition 8 supporters. Only Justice Carlos R. Moreno voted in the private conference to grant such a stay.

The order was signed by six of the court's seven justices. Justice Joyce Kennard did not sign, and the court said she would have invited a separate filing to determine the fate of existing same-sex marriages.

The court overturned a ban on same-sex marriage on May 15 in a 4-3 historic decision. Opponents of gay marriage gathered enough signatures to place Proposition 8 on the ballot as a proposed constitutional amendment.

Gay rights advocates argue that the measure was actually a constitutional revision, instead of a more limited amendment. A revision of the state Constitution can be placed before the voters only by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature or a constitutional convention.

Lawsuits to overturn the initiative contend it was a revision because it denied equal protection to a minority group and eviscerated a key constitutional guarantee.

Supporters of Proposition 8 counter that it merely amended the constitution by restoring a traditional definition of marriage.