Re: On the Question of Prop 8 Proponents’ Standing on Appeal

by Ed Whelan

In an article in Time magazine, UC Davis law professor Vikram Amar (a former Blackmun clerk and not a conservative) raises the same possibility that I did:

[T]o add another twist, at least one constitutional-law scholar in California is suggesting that by trumpeting the issue of standing, Walker has opened a hornet’s nest he may have been better off leaving undisturbed. “If the proponents don’t have standing to appeal, then it’s entirely plausible that the courts will rule that they did not properly have standing to go to trial,” Vikram Amar, a law professor at the University of California at Davis, told TIME Thursday evening. “This is an issue he glossed over when he allowed them to intervene in the trial.”

Amar says that if the Ninth Circuit agrees with Walker that the proponents don’t have standing to appeal, the judges may well decide they shouldn’t have been allowed to intervene in the case at all. If they do, he says, they could decide to vacate the trial entirely, sending it back to Walker to start over.  [Emphasis added.]

Bench Memos

NRO’s home for judicial news and analysis.