9th Circuit releases its ruling that Justice Kennedy stayed (WA state anti-gay petition names)

[usregimechange]

Unanimous panel ruling by Circuit judges:

Pregerson, Harry. - Nominated by Jimmy Carter on August 28, 1979.
Tashima, Atsushi Wallace. - Nominated by William J. Clinton on April 6, 1995. Assumed senior status on June 30, 2004.
Smith, Norman Randy. - Nominated by George W. Bush on January 16, 2007.

"The district court applied an erroneous legal standard when it applied strict scrutiny to the PRA. The proper analysis was to apply intermediate scrutiny. Applying this analysis, we conclude that the PRA is constitutional as applied to referendum petitions.
The district court’s grant of the preliminary injunction is REVERSED."

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/10/22/0935818.pdf


Justice Kennedy's stay:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6814812
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/AMK-order-09A356-10-19-09.pdf

WA state response:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/response-09A356.pdf

[Trekologer]

1. A quick run down of what this is about

A petition was floated to put a referendum on the Washington state ballot to outlaw gay marriage (similar to Prop 8 in California).

The names of signers of petitions are a public record, unlike the actual ballots, which are secret. And so, opponents to the referendum requested the names of the signers under the state's public records law and intend to post the names on the website WhoSigned.org.

Proponents of the referendum sued to block the release of the names.

The US District Court issued a stay to bar the release. The US Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the stay.

[usregimechange]

2. And Justice Kennedy put it back in place for now

thanks for the summary, I probably needed to include it.

[Trekologer]

3. I had an interesting thought about this the other day after reading about this on another site

There was discussion about whether or not the signers would have signed knowing that their names would be made public. This is, of course, a public record and it should be made public. But if the proponents of the petition were telling people that their singing of the petition would be kept secret, the same as voting, then perhaps the names should be kept secret AND the petition thrown out due to misconduct on the side of those gathering signatures.