Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Strauss v. Horton

California Supreme Court

Decided June 17, 2009No. S168047, S168066, S168078Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

MORENO, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

“[T]he ‘absolute equality of all’ persons before the law [is] ‘the very foundation principle of our government.’ ” (Varnum v. Brien (Iowa 2009) 763 N.W.2d 862, 877.)

In In re Marriage Cases (2008) 43 Cal.4th 757, 855-856 [76 Cal.Rptr.3d 683, 183 P.3d 384] (Marriage Cases), we held that denying same-sex couples the right to marry denies them equal protection of the law. Proposition 8 partially abrogated that decision by amending the California Constitution to deny same-sex couples fully equal treatment by adding the words: “Only marriage between a man and a…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Nordlinger v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Romer v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Plessy v. FergusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  4. Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. Cruzan Ex Rel. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of HealthSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API