Matches in DBpedia 2015-04 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Strauss_v._Horton> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 63 of
63
with 100 triples per page.
- Strauss_v._Horton abstract "Strauss v. Horton 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48, was the consolidation of three lawsuits following the passage of California's Proposition 8 on November 4, 2008, which went into effect on November 5. The suits were filed by a number of gay couples and governmental entities. Three of these six were accepted by the Supreme Court of California to be heard together. The oral arguments were made in San Francisco on March 5, 2009. These cases were new to the California Supreme Court, and Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar stated that it will set precedent as "no previous case had presented the question of whether an initiative could be used to take away fundamental rights".The court rendered its decision on May 26, 2009. The ruling established that Proposition 8 was valid as voted, but that marriages performed before it went into effect would remain valid. On June 26, 2013, Strauss v. Horton was mooted by Hollingsworth v. Perry.".
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink 17212645_1_same-sex-religious-freedom-civil-union.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink sct_03052009.mp3.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink sc_030509.html.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink douglas-kmiec.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink prop8.htm.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink S168047.pdf.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageExternalLink kupka.pdf.
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageID "20832986".
- Strauss_v._Horton wikiPageRevisionID "645400485".
- Strauss_v._Horton align "right".
- Strauss_v._Horton arguedate "--03-05".
- Strauss_v._Horton argueyear "2009".
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Carlos_R._Moreno.
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Carol_Corrigan.
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Joyce_L._Kennard.
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Kathryn_Werdegar.
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Marvin_R._Baxter.
- Strauss_v._Horton associatejudges Ming_Chin.
- Strauss_v._Horton chiefjudge Ronald_M._George.
- Strauss_v._Horton citations "25920.0".
- Strauss_v._Horton citations "46".
- Strauss_v._Horton concurrence "Kennard".
- Strauss_v._Horton concurrence "Werdegar".
- Strauss_v._Horton dissent "Moreno".
- Strauss_v._Horton decidedate "--05-26".
- Strauss_v._Horton decideyear "2009".
- Strauss_v._Horton fullname "Karen L. Strauss et al., Petitioners, v. Mark B. Horton et al., State Registrar of Vital Statistics, etc., Respondents; Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners. ---- Robin Tyler et al., Petitioners, v. State of California et al., Respondents; Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners. ---- City and County of San Francisco et al., Petitioners, v. Mark B. Horton et al., as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, etc., Respondents; Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners.".
- Strauss_v._Horton hasPhotoCollection Strauss_v._Horton.
- Strauss_v._Horton holding "The Amendment to the State Constitution referred to as Proposition 8 is valid and enforceable from the moment it was passed. It cannot be applied to retroactively annul marriages that were transacted while the practice was legal in the State of California.".
- Strauss_v._Horton joinmajority "Kennard, Baxter, Chin, Corrigan".
- Strauss_v._Horton litigants "San Francisco v. Horton".
- Strauss_v._Horton litigants "Strauss v. Horton".
- Strauss_v._Horton litigants "Tyler v. California".
- Strauss_v._Horton majority "George".
- Strauss_v._Horton quote "The Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative. Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote.".
- Strauss_v._Horton source "Attorney General Jerry Brown".
- Strauss_v._Horton width "270".
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:2008_in_LGBT_history.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:2008_in_United_States_case_law.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:2009_in_California.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:2009_in_LGBT_history.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:2009_in_United_States_case_law.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:California_Proposition_8.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:California_state_case_law.
- Strauss_v._Horton subject Category:United_States_same-sex_union_case_law.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Abstraction100002137.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Abstraction105854150.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Cognition100023271.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Concept105835747.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Content105809192.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Idea105833840.
- Strauss_v._Horton type LGBTRightsInCalifornia.
- Strauss_v._Horton type PsychologicalFeature100023100.
- Strauss_v._Horton type Right105174653.
- Strauss_v._Horton comment "Strauss v. Horton 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48, was the consolidation of three lawsuits following the passage of California's Proposition 8 on November 4, 2008, which went into effect on November 5. The suits were filed by a number of gay couples and governmental entities. Three of these six were accepted by the Supreme Court of California to be heard together. The oral arguments were made in San Francisco on March 5, 2009.".
- Strauss_v._Horton label "Strauss v. Horton".
- Strauss_v._Horton sameAs m.0541psw.
- Strauss_v._Horton sameAs Q7622331.
- Strauss_v._Horton sameAs Q7622331.
- Strauss_v._Horton sameAs Strauss_v._Horton.
- Strauss_v._Horton wasDerivedFrom Strauss_v._Horton?oldid=645400485.
- Strauss_v._Horton isPrimaryTopicOf Strauss_v._Horton.