Quote:
Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire
BUT in the U.S., unlike Canada, the courts cannot get involved in hypotheticals.
In order for a law to be ruled unconstitutional in ths U.S., it HAS to be written into law first and then brought to the courts on a challenge of constitutional grounds.
Or so my American girlfriend tells me.
|
Yep, that's correct. There has to be standing to bring a suit, which basically means there has to be a 'victim'. For something like this it's pretty easy to find that, but there are definitely constiutional issues that are left undecided as a case that fits the criteria to challenge a law might not come around for quite a while. There are means to stop a law, or parts thereof, before it becomes effective through injunctions (see the Arizona immigration law) but generally it will be applied to someone before the challenge is brought.
This is going to have a pretty big impact, not only in California but nationally as well. The ruling is pretty strong from what I've read of it, it basically tears apart any argument for being found valid and appears to say that Prop 8 faile da rational basis test, which is the easiest level for a law to pass. There's certainly a long way to go, but it's going to be a tough battle for people that support Prop 8. I mean the 2 lawyers who argued against it are the same 2 guys that faced off against each other in Bush v. Gore, so they're pretty much the best of the best.