Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Applicants v. Kristin M. Perry et al. (558 U.S. 183)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 13, 2010 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 558 U.S. 183 · 130 S. Ct. 705
- Decided
- January 13, 2010
- Term
- October Term 2009
- Vote
- 5–4
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Stay, petition, or motion granted
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. We are asked to stay the broadcast of a federal trial. We resolve that question without expressing any view on whether such trials should be broadcast. We instead determine that the broadcast in this case should be stayed because it appears the courts below did not follow the appropriate procedures set forth in federal law before changing their rules to allow such broadcasting. Courts enforce the requirement of procedural regularity on others, and must follow those requirements themselves. * * * This lawsuit, still in a preliminary stage, involves an action challenging what the parties refer to as Proposition 8, a California ballot proposition adopted by the electorate. Proposition 8 amended the State Constitution by adding a new section providing that “[o]nly marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Cal. Const. Art. I, § 7.5. The plaintiffs contend that Proposition 8 violates the United States Constitution. A bench trial in the case began on Monday, January 11, 2010, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The District Court has issued an order permitting the trial to be broadcast live via streaming audio and video to a number of federal courthouses around the country. The order was issued pursuant to a purported amendment to a local Rule of the District Court. That Rule had previously…
Excerpt of a 30,687-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.