Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { <http://wikidata.dbpedia.org/resource/Q16847744> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 72 of
72
with 100 triples per page.
- Q16847744 subject Q6996562.
- Q16847744 subject Q6998020.
- Q16847744 subject Q6999008.
- Q16847744 subject Q8195182.
- Q16847744 subject Q8380290.
- Q16847744 subject Q8578722.
- Q16847744 abstract "Template:Infobox court caseIn re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (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.On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled in a 4–3 decision that laws directed at gays and lesbians are subject to strict scrutiny and same-sex couples' access to marriage is a fundamental right under Article 1, Section 7 of the California Constitution. The court found that two statutes barring same-sex marriage in California, one enacted in 1977 by the legislature and the other in 2000 by state voters (Proposition 22), were unconstitutional. The decision was the first in the United States to establish sexual orientation as a suspect classification. On June 4, 2008, the court denied a request for rehearing and a request to put a hold on the ruling, affirming that the decision would take effect as scheduled. The writ of mandate directing the state government to comply with the ruling and grant same-sex marriages was issued by the Superior Court of California on June 19, 2008.On November 4, 2008, California voters approved Proposition 8, which limited marriage under the California Constitution to opposite-sex couples. This decision did not disturb that part of the court's holding that gay men and lesbians constitute a suspect class for purposes of equal protection under Art. I § 7.The Supreme Court of California joined the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts as the second state to have its highest court rule prohibitions on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, although for somewhat different reasons. Later in 2008, the Connecticut Supreme Court handed down a similar decision, as did the Iowa Supreme Court in April 2009 (see Varnum v. Brien).The judgment In re Marriage Cases was in part mooted by Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364 (2009).".
- Q16847744 wikiPageExternalLink BAGAVNC5K.DTL.
- Q16847744 wikiPageExternalLink sct_030408.mp3.
- Q16847744 wikiPageExternalLink 199950-1.
- Q16847744 wikiPageExternalLink S147999.pdf.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q1022311.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q11206.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q139103.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q16105881.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q1643587.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q17422.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q17476.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q17505.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q1768233.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q17888.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q196195.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q2002625.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q2629503.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q2685.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q30.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q312424.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q3125101.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q3237872.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q3242821.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q3406489.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q384014.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q461391.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q4732297.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q48277.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5020373.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5020803.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5027782.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5042520.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5044295.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5161630.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5337638.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q5868161.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q589889.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6297556.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6377146.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6394409.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6778460.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6971347.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6996562.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6998020.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q6999008.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7167921.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7233523.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7251240.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7295753.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7327140.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7365075.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7605086.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7622331.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7623621.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7643515.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7649163.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q7916063.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q8195182.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q820655.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q8380290.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q8578722.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q883211.
- Q16847744 wikiPageWikiLink Q883942.
- Q16847744 comment "Template:Infobox court caseIn re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (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.On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled in a 4–3 decision that laws directed at gays and lesbians are subject to strict scrutiny and same-sex couples' access to marriage is a fundamental right under Article 1, Section 7 of the California Constitution. ".
- Q16847744 label "In re Marriage Cases".