Utah V California, Inequal Federal Treatment: Any Californian Has Standing Now

[Silhouette]

County clerk Dronenburg of California requested and was denied a clarification and stay on gay marriage pending appeal. His job relies on an Oath to the People to uphold duly-enacted initiative law regarding who may and may not marry. He had standing but was denied. Natually LGBTers are witch-hunting his job as result of his "insolence" for appealing California's right to self-rule.

County clerk Ernest Dronenburg remains a target for those who wish to unseat him for petitioning the state supreme court to reconsider their decision to overturn the same-sex marriage ban, also known as Prop 8.
#Dronenburg's challenge sparked outrage from supporters of marriage equality. That spark seems to have caught fire.
#On Tuesday, January 28, LGBT leaders in San Diego will call for Dronenburg's resignation amid revelations of abuse of power. New allegations against San Diego county clerk San Diego Reader#

Dronenburg was threatened from the top down as well:

Dronenburg’s petition argues that his plea for a stay is different because he is directly affected by state Registrar Tony Agurto’s June 28 order to the 58 county clerks to license gay marriages.
The San Diego County clerk said he is in a “legal limbo” because he believes the licenses should not be issued, but state Attorney General Kamala Harris has threatened to take action against clerks who refuse to allow the nuptials.
“Navigating this landmine of uncertainty on a daily basis is an ongoing and ever-present injury” that justifies an immediate stay, Dronenburg argued in the lawsuit. San Diego County Clerk Seeks End To Gay Marriages CBS San Francisco

The status right now is that Utah's AG sought a stay on gay marriage and was granted that stay on the argument that not to do so would be damaging to democracy in his state. There is no federal protection for gay marriage currently so while in limbo, Utah's AG argued successfully that the default status of a state's right, his state to be exact, is the democratic process of voters regulating marriage there.

In California as well as all other states hashing out this question, there is inequal application of the right to democratic rule. California is now fully under fascist control. This isn't a joke or hyperbole. Lead gay-sympathetic officials are forcing lower officials there to defy 7 million voters' civil rights that should have the same interim protection as Utah's voters....but who don't...

SCOTUS cannot treat different states differently when it comes to federally-protected civil rights...even in the interim. There can never be a five minute period where the votes in one state count while the votes in another do not according to how they enact laws respectively to self-govern.

Ergo, any person in California could petition under violation of their civil right to have their vote count to gain an immediate stay on gay marriage. ANY PERSON IN CALIFORNIA NOW HAS A LEGAL RIGHT TO STANDING TO OBTAIN A STAY ON GAY MARRIAGE IN CALIFORNIA. And they've had that right at least since the day Utah obtained their stay.

July 18, 2014 | by Chris Johnson Supreme Court halts recognition of Utah same-sex marriages

Supreme Court halts recognition of Utah same-sex marriages

State recognition of same-sex marriages performed in Utah when the state briefly had marriage equality will continue to be on hold for time being, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Friday. The court issued an order without explanation granting the request from Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes to place on hold a preliminary injunction from a district court requiring the state to recognize the marriages. After the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the injunction, Reyes took up the matter with the Supreme Court. Supreme Court halts recognition of Utah same-sex marriages

No explanation given.

His argument was this:

"We said from the beginning that Judge Shelby should have issued the stay, and the Supreme Court seems to be affirming that — not only one justice but the entire court, and we assume without any dissent since there was none noted in the decision this morning," he said.
The court is agreeing with the state's position that it hasn't spoken on the issue so it's not time for lower courts to invalidate state marriage laws, said Duncan, who also works as the Sutherland Institute's director of the Center for Family and Society. U.S. Supreme Court puts same-sex marriage in Utah on hold Deseret News

 

[Silhouette]

I see Utah's point...

The Utah Eagle Forum said Monday it was "grateful" for the high court's stay.
"The Supreme Court sent the message that activist federal judges, such as Judge Shelby, do not have the authority to invalidate state constitutional provisions. Amendments are added to the state constitution by a supermajority of Utah legislators and the voters of Utah jointly, and their will should not be set aside so easily by a single appointed judge," Ruzicka said in a prepared statement. U.S. Supreme Court puts same-sex marriage in Utah on hold Deseret News

But I disagree that it was a clear message. Because California and other states' voters remain without that constitutional protection of their civil right to self-govern. In California, no initiative may be overturned without the express consent of the voters. Neither the governor, nor the legislature has power there to overturn initiative law outside a new referendum on the ballot.

SCOTUS' stay issued in Utah was and is legally-inseperable from an implied-stay granted to California in the interim-period. Any Californian...even like a preacher or gas station attendant, could appeal for the right for their vote on Prop 8 to count and a stay would now have to be granted on standing. Because SCOTUS created standing for each individual voter [also in California and any other state] in Utah by granting that stay protecting the democratic process there.

 

[Silhouette]

Maybe the GOP is missing a vote-harvest festival? They can just drop the drone of "Obama/dems are losers" and let this little trick speak for itself at the polls?

[from the 32-states thread] 32 states Ask scotus to settle Gay marriage Page 33 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

When the US Supreme Court ordered the stay on gay marriage in Utah when the AG there pled to not do so would irreparably harm Utah's self-governance, the SCOTUS created standing for any voter in any state where laws are passed by referendum or initiative to plea for their constitutional civil right to self-govern. Ergo, ANY citizen in California has standing to begin a lawsuit and take it straight to the top. To deny their standing would create an atmosphere of distrust around SCOTUS and force their hand on the "which is more important in the interim....voters rights or gay marriage" cards. It would be a HUGE embarassment for the High Court which is walking a thinning tightrope on lack of clarity and bias towards certain states vs others with respect to granting stays based on self-rule trumping gay marriage....but then remaining conspicuously quiet about how this is inequal treatment for other states who seem to enjoy no similar protection.
One person speaking up would call this to a head.
Just one.
And oh what a gain for the GOP votes if that spectacle was made right now and CA looney dems came out en masse on one of their classic LGBT witch hunts against pro-traditional people right on the eve of an election...
...hmmm.....