In re Marriage Cases
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal. 4th 757 (Cal. 2008) was a California Supreme Court case where the court held that laws treating classes of persons differently based on sexual orientation should be subject to strict judicial scrutiny, and that an existing statute and initiative measure limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate the rights of same-sex couples under the California Constitution and may not be used to preclude them from marrying.
Wikipage redirect
2000 California Proposition 222008 California Proposition 82008 in politics2008 in the United StatesAmerican Civil Liberties UnionBrad PittCampaign for California FamiliesCarol CorriganCheryl Chase (activist)Chris & DonCivil unionCover chargeDarla K. AndersonDebra SaundersDel Martin and Phyllis LyonDennis HerreraDiane SabinDomestic partnership in CaliforniaEllen DeGeneresEquality CaliforniaFederal Marriage AmendmentGoodridge v. Department of Public HealthHistory of marriage in CaliforniaHollingsworth v. PerryIn Re Marriage CasesIn reIn re marriageIn re marriage casesIntermediate scrutinyKathryn WerdegarKerrigan v. Commissioner of Public HealthKori RaeLGBT history in CaliforniaLGBT rights in CaliforniaLadies' nightList of California ballot propositionsLove Honor CherishMark LenoMarvin R. Baxter
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
primaryTopic
In re Marriage Cases
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal. 4th 757 (Cal. 2008) was a California Supreme Court case where the court held that laws treating classes of persons differently based on sexual orientation should be subject to strict judicial scrutiny, and that an existing statute and initiative measure limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate the rights of same-sex couples under the California Constitution and may not be used to preclude them from marrying.
has abstract
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal. ...... Hollingsworth v. Perry (2013).
@en
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
Wikipage page ID
16,173,089
page length (characters) of wiki page
Wikipage revision ID
1,023,234,806
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
ArgueDate
ArgueYear
AssociateJudges
ChiefJudge
Concurrence
Kennard
@en
Concurrence/Dissent
Baxter
@en
Corrigan
@en
DecideDate
DecideYear
fullname
In re MARRIAGE CASES. [Six consolidated appeals.]
@en
Holding
#Sexual orientation is recogni ...... couples are unconstitutional.
@en
JoinConcurrence/Dissent
Chin
@en
JoinMajority
Kennard, Werdegar, Moreno
@en
LawsApplied
Cal. Const. art. 1 §§ 1, 7, and Cal. Fam. Code §§ 300, 308.5
@en
Litigants
In re Marriage Cases
@en
majority
George
@en
Prior
Subsequent
superseded
California Proposition 8 Pro ...... l legal effect of the decision
@en
wikiPageUsesTemplate
subject
hypernym
comment
In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal. ...... o preclude them from marrying.
@en
label
In re Marriage Cases
@en