Perry v. Schwarzenegger

On May 22, 2009, two same-sex couples filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging California’s Proposition 8, which amended the California Constitution to prohibit marriage by same-sex couples.

The NCLR, the ACLU, and Lambda Legal filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case on June 26, supporting the argument that Proposition 8 violates the federal Constitution.

The lawsuit argues that Proposition 8 violates the United States Constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection of the laws. In an order issued June 30 and confirmed at a hearing on July 2, Chief United States District Judge Vaughn R. Walker granted a motion to intervene by supporters of Proposition 8 and declined to rule on a request by plaintiffs for an immediate injunction staying the marriage ban. He called instead for the parties to develop a plan to move the case toward a final judgment and identified several specific factual questions that may require resolution at trial, including questions about same-sex couples as parents, whether Proposition 8 was passed with discriminatory intent, and whether allowing same-sex couples to marry undermines the stability of heterosexual marriages.

On July 8, 2009, NCLR, the ACLU, and Lambda Legal filed a motion to intervene in the case on behalf of several organizations representing the wider LGBT community in California, including Our Family Coalition, Lavender Seniors of the East Bay, and Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). This motion was denied on August 19, 2009. The trial began on January 11, 2010.

On August 4, 2010, Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Proposition 8 violates the United States Constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection of the laws.

read the decision (pdf)

read the amicus brief filed by NCLR, the ACLU, and Lambda Legal on February 3, 2010(pdf)

read the amicus brief filed by NCLR, the ACLU, and Lambda Legal on June 26, 2009(pdf)

read the California Lawyer article, "Challenging Prop. 8: the Hidden Story"

read the American Constitution Society issue brief, "The Prop 8 Court Can Have it All: Justice, Precedent, Respect for Democracy, and an Appropriately Limited Judicial Role" (pdf)

read daily summaries and legal analyses of the proceedings

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Day 6

Day 7

Day 8

Day 9

Day 10

Day 11

Day 12

Closing arguments

The ruling