Ted Olson, Busy Prepping for Next Court Battle, Is No-Show at Same-Sex Marriage Program
Many of the early arrivals at the ABA’s 2010 Annual Meeting in San Francisco who attended a program Thursday on same-sex marriage were no doubt disappointed when Theodore Olson, a key member of the team of attorneys that successfully argued against California’s ban on same-sex marriage, was a last-minute scratch from the panel of speakers. But under the circumstances, no one in the audience should have been surprised that Olson was a no-show.
As the program got underway, the audience was told that Olson couldn’t get away from his office in Los Angeles because he was preparing for the next stage in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case. On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco ruled that Proposition 8, a voter measure making same-sex marriage illegal in California, violated the U.S. Constitution.
At the same time, however, Walker issued a stay order prohibiting any new same-sex marriages from being performed. He gave the two sides in the case until Friday to file briefs on the question of whether the stay should be lifted or continue at least through the early stages of an appeals process that is expected to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Taking Olson’s place on the panel was Therese Stewart, the chief deputy city attorney for San Francisco. The city was allowed by Judge Walker to intervene in the case on the plaintiff’s side on grounds that its interests were harmed when marriages were denied to gay couples under Proposition 8.
Even with the expected lengthy appeals process, Stewart said it was important for opponents of the same-sex marriage ban to get a win at the trial court level. “It’s very important to get a strong ruling in the lower courts, especially one built on a very strong evidentiary record,” said Stewart.
ABA President Carolyn B. Lamm also issued a statement Thursday on this week’s ruling, which will lend a dramatic context to any debate in the association’s House of Delegates on a recommendation by the Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities and a number of co-sponsors that urges state, territorial and tribal governments “to eliminate all of their legal barriers to civil marriage between two persons of the same sex who are otherwise eligible to marry.” The House will take up the recommendation during its sessions on Monday and Tuesday.
The ruling “certainly points out what a very significant legal issue or series of issues marriage equality raises,” Lamm, a partner at White & Case in Washington, D.C., said in her statement. “We know that marriage equality impacts issues in families’ lives—taxation, succession, custody of children, breakup and others. As the nation’s largest organization of lawyers, we in fact need to consider these issues because it impacts the lives of the public.”
