The California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state's Proposition 8 declaring that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," but said the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples married before the initiative passed would remain legally married.

In the 136-page majority decision made public May 26, the court said its role was not to determine whether Proposition 8 "is wise or sound as a matter of policy or whether we, as individuals, believe it should be part of the California Constitution" but to determine "the scope of the right of the people, under the provisions of the California Constitution, to change or alter the state constitution itself through the initiative process."

On that question, the opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George concluded that "Proposition 8 constitutes a permissible constitutional amendment" rather "than an impermissible constitutional revision" and "does not violate the separation of powers doctrine…. We further conclude that…the marriages of same-sex couples performed prior to the effective date of Proposition 8 remain valid."

In a Nov. 4, 2008, vote, 52 percent of the state's electorate approved Proposition 8, which the California Catholic bishops had strongly supported. Oral arguments before the California Supreme Court took place March 5, and the deadline for the Court's decision was the first week of June.

The majority decision drew immediate praise from the Campaign to Protect Marriage, a coalition that had included the state's Catholic bishops and other Catholic groups.

"We are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has acknowledged the right of voters to define marriage in the California Constitution," said Andrew Pugno, the coalition's general counsel. "The voters have decided this issue and their views should be respected."

Speaking for the California Catholic Conference of Bishops, Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton said, "We laud the California Supreme Court's confirmation of Proposition 8 which preserves the traditional understanding of marriage in the state's constitution. We, however, are disappointed that the same Court validated the interim same-sex 'marriages.' We believe - as do the majority of Californians - that marriage between a man and a woman is foundational to our culture and crucial for human perpetuity."

Bishop Blaire stressed that Catholic bishops "are strongly committed to protecting the dignity and worth of every human person. We endorse the intent of law to provide equal protection for all. However, such purpose does not have to trump the natural and traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman. The law has found other ways to regulate civil unions without destroying the traditional understanding of marriage."

Organizations that had opposed Proposition 8 said they would work to repeal the measure through a ballot initiative in 2010.

All but one of the court's seven justices concurred in the majority decision, and all seven agreed that the ban on same-sex marriages could not be applied retroactively.

The only dissenter, Associate Justice Carlos R. Moreno, said the majority opinion "places at risk the state constitutional rights of all disfavored minorities" and "weakens the status of our state constitution as a bulwark of fundamental rights for minorities protected from the will of the majority."

Ron Prentice, California Family Council's executive director, said, "Both the historic definition of marriage and the will of the people has been bolstered today in California. We thank the Court for their sound legal decision. More than 100,000 people gave of their time and resources to reinforce the meaning and purpose of marriage, and now, the broad coalition of organizations and individuals known as ProtectMarriage.com moves ahead to strengthen the essential role of marriage in California's future."

---CNS and Tidings staff