Bench Memos

NRO’s home for judicial news and analysis.

More California Dreamin’


Matt Franck’s reflections on the latest exemplar of West Coast judicial arrogance are, characteristically, on the mark. To answer Matt’s question: I am inclined to think that the plain sense of the people — in case they enact the proposed amendment — would be: no same-sex marriage in California. Zero. Zilch. And that’s that. I am further inclined to think that, given this plain sense of the proposal, any same-sex marriages entered into between June and November are, and should be understood by those entering into them, as annullable — lawful in form, but possessed of a latent defect such that, at a later time, it might be determined by further legal action to be no marriage at all.


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review