BubbleUp Forum

November 17, 2011: The California Supreme Court dominated, in Perry v. Brown, that sponsors of Proposition eight have the right to defend the initiative in court docket, permitting the case to be heard within the Ninth Circuit. The case is known as One, Inc. v. Olesen. West Virginia 1,850,326 October 9, 2014 October 9, 2014 Binding federal courtroom precedent → actions of state officials → federal court docket determination Governor Earl Ray Tomblin and state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, recognizing the precedent established by the Fourth Circuit ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer, dropped their defense of the state's identical-intercourse marriage ban. Prior to the election date, backers of Proposition 8 also filed a lawsuit after Attorney General Jerry Brown modified the title of the initiative from "Limit on Marriage" to "Eliminates the best of Same-Sex Couples to Marry". Governor Brown then directed all county clerks to comply with district court ruling. Of those same-sex marriage licenses issued, eighty two couples both decided not to undergo with a marriage or did not register their marriage with the county before the California Supreme Court stay was issued, that means 3,955 accomplished identical-intercourse marriages have been registered within the county. During the identical interval, the San Francisco City Hall issued 103 reverse-intercourse marriage licenses.