Prop 8 Plaintiffs’ Frivolous Motion to Vacate Stay Pending Appeal

A week ago, on the same day that the Obama administration announced its decision to abandon its defense of DOMA, the plaintiffs-appellees in the Prop 8 appeal filed a motion to vacate the stay pending appeal that a Ninth Circuit motions panel (with two very liberal Clinton appointees) had previously issued. The plaintiffs’ motion is objectively frivolous, but given the fact that Judge Stephen Reinhardt sits on the merits panel that will rule on the motion, that fact doesn’t guarantee that the motion will be denied. (I think, though, that it ought to be very difficult for Judge Michael Hawkins, who is on the merits panel with Reinhardt and was on the motions panel that issued the stay, to reverse course.)

Prop 8 plaintiffs cite three new developments—the Ninth Circuit panel’s order certifying a question to the California supreme court, the California supreme court’s response to that certification request, and the Obama administration’s decision no longer to defend DOMA—that they claim amount to “materially changed circumstances that warrant vacatur of this Court’s decision to grant a stay pending appeal.” But these developments don’t materially change anything:

1. Prop 8 plaintiffs claim that the Ninth Circuit’s certification order “makes it unmistakably clear that proponents cannot make the requisite ‘strong showing that [they are] likely to succeed on the merits’ of their appeal.” (Emphasis and bracketed material in original.) But Prop 8 plaintiffs’ identical claim about proponents’ supposed lack of standing was at the heart of their previous opposition to a stay pending appeal, and nothing in the certification order alters the legal assessment of this issue.

2. Prop 8 plaintiffs claim that the briefing and oral argument schedule that the California supreme court has established indicates that the ultimate resolution of the appeal will take longer than previously anticipated and that this schedule thus alters the balance of hardships. But (as I discussed in point 2 here) it was clear from the moment that the Ninth Circuit motions panel issued the stay pending appeal that ultimate resolution of the appeal (including the Supreme Court review process) could easily take until June 2013 or 2014. Nothing in the certification process materially alters that timetable.

Moreover, Prop 8 plaintiffs have little standing to complain about delay. Had they not encouraged Judge Walker’s resort to an unnecessary show trial, the case could have been decided at the trial level on cross-motions for summary judgment a good six to nine months earlier than it was. Further, by encouraging state officials not to appeal Walker’s ruling, Prop 8 plaintiffs have engineered the standing issue that has led to the certification process that they now complain about.

3. Prop 8 plaintiffs claim that the Obama administration’s conclusion (as part of its decision to abandon DOMA) that “heightened scrutiny applies to classifications based on sexual orientation is clearly correct.” It’s absurd to expect the Ninth Circuit decide this hotly contested question on a motion to vacate a stay.

I’ll also note the curiosity that the new attorney general of California, Kamala Harris, has filed a statement in support of plaintiffs’ motion. Given that Harris’s predecessor, Jerry Brown, declined to take part in the appeal and that Harris hasn’t taken any steps to undo Brown’s decision (or to seek amicus status), I don’t understand on what basis Harris purports to take part in this matter.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More