It was just about unanimous with all the justices except for Justice Clarance Thomas objecting to the courts decision to uphold Washington's public disclosure laws, and ruling that the signatures on the petitions for Ref 71 can be released. They how ever are not being released at the moment because Protect Marriage Washington, the group that got R71 on the ballot back in 09 has a case to be heard in a lower court to get the release of the names prevented. This is allowed as the case they brought before the supreme court was a challenge to conditionality of the States disclosure law that required disclosure of the names when requested, unless a court order prevented it.
The court found, with Justice John Roberts Jr. writing the ruling, that Washington's disclosure law, which only effects disclosing names of those that singed, dose not violate the first amendment. They of course left open as currently is the possibility for groups to seek action to prevent and stop the names from being released in special circumstance if they can sufficiently prove that the release of names would cause harassment and harm to those who singed. Whether that harm come from the government or the general public it self. (this is the option that Protect Marriage Washington is now going after)
It then went on to basically say that it is one of the states utmost responsibilities to conduct state business and election in the most open and public fashion possible. They related the points made in the oral arguments that this public disclosure helps to prevent fraud in the petition process by allowing the public access to be able to over look it them selves. It also allows the public to catch mistakes like names that should not be on the petitions but have wound up on them mistakenly(fraudulently) some how.
Now like was noted before the signatures still have not been released and may not be released for a while because Protect Marriage Washington, has another case pending this time to get an "special circumstances" exemption from having to release the names of those who signed to potions. They are starting in the lower courts, and their plan is basically to argue that across the country "traditional marriage supporters" are being harassed around the country and that should be enough to get the release blocked. This ignores the fact that the names of those who contributed to the Yes on R71(that was to overturn expanded domestic partnerships) have been out for some time now and those people have not been reporting getting harassed, and of any group of people that normally would be harassed in a political issue it is the group that is willing to bankroll that which you stand against. Coming as no surprise in the light of Protect Marriage Washington's basic argument, Rob McKenna is going to use as his basic case that they have brought forward no real evidence, something that I think should be plainly evident, as it sounds like the same case they tried to feed The U.S. Supreme Court.
Now we are in another stupid wait and see game, but it is becoming increasingly clear that those on the religious right who want to be bigoted and discriminate against others in what is a public but have their identity withheld so they can do it security are not having as much luck any more as they thought they wold running to the supreme court to protect them. Increasingly they are being forced to come to terms and progress beyond their bigotry or have to go into a closet of their own when it comes to their bigotry if they don't want others to find out about it. If their is not more ironic then the image of those who oppose us slowly but surly going into a socially induced closest while we all the more come vacate it then I'm not quite sure what is.
As always thank you very much for reading, and your comments, feed back and suggestions or very much appreciated, Have a great day, and be safe.
Comments
Post a Comment