Case Law Strauss v. Horton

Strauss v. Horton

Document Cited Authorities (68) Cited in (52) Related

207 P.3d 48

93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591

Karen L. STRAUSS et al., Petitioners, v. Mark B. HORTON, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, etc., et al., Respondents;

Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners.

Robin Tyler et al., Petitioners, v. The State of California et al., Respondents;

Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners.

City and County of San Francisco et al., Petitioners, v. Mark B. Horton, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, etc., et al., Respondents;

Dennis Hollingsworth et al., Interveners.

No. S168047.

No. S168066.

No. S168078.

Supreme Court of California.

May 26, 2009.

National Center for Lesbian Rights, Shannon P. Minter, Christopher F. Stoll, Melanie Rowen, Catherine Sakimura, Ilona M. Turner, Shin-Ming Wong, San Francisco; Munger, Tolles & Olson, Gregory D. Phillips, Jay M. Fujitani, David C. Dinielli, Los Angeles, Michelle Friedland, San Francisco, Lika C. Miyake, Los Angeles, Mark R. Conrad, San Francisco; Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Jon W. Davidson, Jennifer C. Pizer, New York, NY, Tara Borelli, Los Angeles; ACLU Foundation of Northern California, Alan L. Schlosser, San Francisco, James D. Esseks, Elizabeth O. Gill; ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Mark Rosenbaum, Clare Pastore, Lori Rifkin, Los Angeles; ACLU Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, David Blair-Loy, San Francisco; Law Office of David C. Codell, David C. Codell, Los Angeles; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe and Stephen V. Bomse, San Francisco, for Petitioners Karen L. Strauss, Ruth Borenstein, Brad Jacklin, Dustin Hergert, Eileen Ma, Suyapa Portillo, Gerardo Marin, Jay Thomas, Sierra North, Celia Carter, Desmund Wu, James Tolen and Equality California.

Allred, Maroko & Goldberg, Gloria Allred, Michael Maroko and John S. West, Los Angeles, for Petitioners Robin Tyler, Diane Olson, Cheri Schroder and Coty Rafaely.

Dennis J. Herrera, City Attorney, Therese M. Stewart, Danny Chou, Kathleen S, Morris, Sherri Sokeland Kaiser, Vince Chhabria, Erin Bernstein, Tara M. Steeley and Mollie Lee, Deputy City Attorneys, for Petitioner City and County of San Francisco.

Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin, Jerome B. Falk, Jr., Steven L. Mayer, Amy E. Margolin, Amy L. Bomse, Adam Polakoff, San Francisco, and Michelle S. Ybarra for Petitioners City and County of San Francisco, Helen Zia, Lia Shigemura, Edward Swanson, Paul Herman, Zoe Dunning, Pam Grey, Marian Martino, Joanna Cusenza, Bradley Akin, Paul Hill, Emily

Griffen, Sage Andersen, Suwanna Kerdkaew and Tina M. Yun.

Ann Miller Ravel, County Counsel, Tamara Lange, Lead Deputy County Counsel, and Juniper Lesnik for Petitioner County of Santa Clara.

Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney, Richard H. Llewellyn, Jr., Chief Deputy City Attorney, David Michaelson, Chief Assistant City Attorney, and Michael J. Bostrom, Deputy City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Los Angeles.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Leela A. Kapur, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Elizabeth M. Cortez, Assistant County Counsel, and Judy W. Whitehurst, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner County of Los Angeles.

Richard E. Winnie, County Counsel, Brian E. Washington, Assistant County Counsel, and Claude Kolm, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner County of Alameda.

Patrick K. Faulkner, County Counsel, and Sheila Shah Lichtblau, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner County of Marin.

Michael P. Murphy, County Counsel, Brenda B. Carlson, Chief Deputy County Counsel, and Glenn M. Levy, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner County of San Mateo.

Dana McRae, County Counsel, for Petitioner County of Santa Cruz.

Harvey E. Levine, City Attorney, and Nellie R. Ancel, Deputy City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Fremont.

Philip D. Kohn, City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Laguna Beach.

John Russo, City Attorney, and Barbara Parker, Chief Assistant City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Oakland.

Jan I. Goldsmith, City Attorney, and George F. Schaefer, Deputy City Attorney, for Petitioner City of San Diego.

John G. Barisone, City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Santa Cruz.

Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney, and Joseph Lawrence, Assistant City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Santa Monica.

Lawrence W. McLaughlin, City Attorney, for Petitioner City of Sebastopol.

Proskauer Rose, Clifford S. Davidson, Lois D. Thompson and Albert C. Valencia, Los Angeles, for Anti-Defamation League, Asian Law Caucus, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Japanese American Citizens League, Southern California Chinese Lawyers Association, Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Public Counsel, Orange County Asian Pacific Islander Community Alliance, National Senior Citizens Law Center, API Equality—LA, API Equality, API Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (Los Angeles Chapter), Chicana Latina Foundation, American Jewish Committee, Barbara Jordan/Bayard Rustin Coalition, Asian Pacific Americans for Progress, BIENESTAR, Asian Law Alliance, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, Gay Vietnamese Alliance, South Asian Network, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Gay Asian Pacific Alliance, Gay Asian Pacific Support Network, Korean Resource Center, Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice, And Marriage for All, Korean Community Center of the East Bay, Advocacy Coalition of Tulare County for Women and Girls, Asian & Pacific Islander Wellness Center, Filipinos for Affirmative Action, National Korean American Service & Education Consortium, Asian & Pacific Islander Family Pride, Ô-Môi, Asian and Pacific Islander American Health Forum, Asian Pacific AIDS Intervention Team, Asian Pacific Policy & Planning Council and Philippine American Bar Association as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Ronald Steiner, M. Katherine Baird Darmer, Richard Faulkner, Jenny Carey, Kurt Eggert, Los Angeles, John Hall, Jayne Kacer, Steven Krone, Francine Lipman, Elizabeth L. MacDowell, Henry Noyes; Crowell & Moring, Steven P. Rice, Irvine, Deborah E. Arbabi; Ashleigh E. Aitken, Casey Johnson, Los Angeles, Michael Penn; Roman E. Darmer II; Rosanne M. Faul; Sallie Kim, Mountain View; Stephanie Mullen; Alexis Penn-Loya; Emily Samuelsen Quinlan; and Jeffrey L. Van Hoosear, Irvine, for Chapman Outlaw, Chapman Queer-Straight Alliance,

Chapman Feminists and Chapman SPEAK (Students for Peaceful Empowerment, Action and Knowledge), Wylie Aitken, Deepa Badrinarayana, Rimvydas Baltaduonis, Marisa Cianciarulo, M. Katherine Baird Darmer, James Doti, Kurt Eggert, Kelly Graydon, Elizabeth MacDowell, Steven Krone, Francine Lipman, Lynn Mayer, Dale A. Merrill, Nancy Schultz, Suzanne Soohoo, Ronald Steiner, Sheri Maeda-Akau, Lisa Clark, Sandra L. Hague, Brain Scott Hamilton, Annie Knight, Mark Lawrence, AJ Place, Erin M. Pullin, Demisia Razo, Tara Riker, Christopher J. Roach, Gloria Rogers, Zara Ahmed, Sasha Anderson, Elliot Balsley, James E. Blalock, Claudia Brena, Anne L. Card, Tiffany Chang, Doug Clark, Kimberlee Cyphers, Alexa Hahn-Dunn, Linnea Esselstrom, Sara Gapasin, Ashley Ann Hanson, Cortney Johnson, Anais Keenon, Breanna Kenyon, Samantha Kohler, Timothy Lam, Craig Leets, Jr., David Nungary, Michelle Pascucci, Kitty Porter, Regina Rivera, Brian Rouse, Angela Wilhite, Preston Whitehurst, Emily Wilkinson, Lauren Jessica Wolf, Orange County Equality Coalition, James Albright, Thomas J. Peterson, Karla Bland, Laura Kanter, Lindsey Etheridge, John Dumas, James Nowick, Hung Y. Fan, Michael David Feldman, Mary Katherine Holman-Romero, Deborah Ann Romero-Holman, Jeffrey L. Van Hoosear, Gregory T. McCollum, Heather Ellis, Rosanne Faul, Sharon Nantell, Judy Gordon, Linda J. May, Dean Erwin Chemerinksy, James D. Herbert, Cécile Whiting, Dean Inada and Emily Quinlan as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Alice O'Brien; Altshuler Berson, James M. Finberg, Eve H. Cervantez and Barbara J. Chisholm, San Francisco, for California Teachers Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Raoul D. Kennedy and Elizabeth Harlan, San Francisco, for Professors of State Constitutional Law Robert F. Williams, Lawrence Friedman, Vincent M. Bonventre, Daniel Gordon, Ann Lousin, James G. Pope and Jeffrey M. Shaman as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Joel Franklin, Monterey; Michelle A. Welsh, Pacific Grove; Michael W. Stamp, Monterey; and Amy M. Larson, Monterey, for The Constitutional Law Center of the Monterey College of Law as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Prodigylaw.com and Dennis W. Chiu, San Jose, for Steven Mattos, Amor Santiago, Harry Martin and Paul J. Dorian as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

City of West Hollywood Legal Services Division, Michael Jenkins and J. Stephen Lewis, Los Angeles, for City of Berkeley, City of Cloverdale, City of Davis, City of Emeryville, Town of Fairfax, County of Humboldt, City of Long Beach, City of Palm Springs, City of Sacramento, County of Sonoma and City of West Hollywood as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Bryan Cave, Jonathan Solish, Julie E. Patterson, James C. Pettis, Meghan C. Sherrill, Curt M. Dombek, Michael B. Zara, Marwa Hassoun and Vanessa A. Sunshine, Santa Monica, for Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Santa Monica Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Orange Grove Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends and Claremont Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Townsend and Townsend and Crew, Eugene Crew, Timothy R. Cahn, Nancy L. Tompkins, Holly Gaudreau, David J. Tsai, San Francisco, and James D. Kiryakoza for Dr. Frank M. Alton, Immanuel Presbyterian Church, Netivot Shalom Synagogue, Reverend Dr. Jane Adams Spahr, Reverend Dr. John T. Norris, Reverend Dr. Glenda Hope, Rabbi David J. Cooper, Kehilla Community Synagogue, Reverend Laura Rose, Reverend Dr. Janet McCune Edwards, Reverend Kathryn M. Schreiber, Reverend Susan A. Meeter, Mira Vista United Church of Christ, Nancy...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Start a free trial
5 cases
Document | California Supreme Court – 2021
McHugh v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
"... ... (See, e.g., Quarry , supra , 53 Cal.4th at p. 956, 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 3, 272 P.3d 977 ; Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364, 472, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 ; Elsner v. Uveges (2004) 34 Cal.4th 915, 937, 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 530, 102 P.3d ... "
Document | California Court of Appeals – 2015
Stevens v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
"... ... due process clause[ ] with respect to the subject matter encompassed by the new provision.” 14 ( Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364, 407, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48.) By giving the Legislature plenary powers over the workers' compensation ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit – 2015
Chula Vista Citizens for Jobs & Fair Competition v. Norris
"... ... Manheim & Howard, supra, at 1184 (footnotes and paragraph break omitted). See also Strauss v. Horton, [46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591] 207 P.3d 48, 84 ([]2009). The initiative system was designed as an antidote to this capture of the ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit – 2014
Protectmarriage.com-Yes On 8, Renewal v. City of Montgomery
"... ... Thus, the only precedential appellate decision addressing the merits of Proposition 8 is the California Supreme Court's opinion in Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 (2009), which held that challenges to Proposition 8 “lack[ed] merit” under California ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California – 2010
Perry v. Schwarzenegger
"... ... Brown Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of California; Mark B. Horton, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health and State Registrar of Vital Statistics; Linette Scott, in her ... Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 (2009) ... Strauss leaves undisturbed the 18,000 marriages of same-sex couples ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 books and journal articles
Document | Núm. 10-1, January 2011 – 2011
Is same-sex marriage a threat to traditional marriages?: How courts struggle with the question.
"...federal complaint was filed after the Supreme Court of California upheld the ban under the California Constitution. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48 (Cal. 2009). For other recently raised challenges to same-sex marriage bans under other provisions of the Federal Constitution, see infra no..."
Document | Núm. XXIII-2, January 2022 – 2022
Equal Protection
"...state equal protection clause. 416 The court further declined to follow the decisions of the highest courts 405. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009). In Strauss v. Horton , the California Supreme Court conf‌irmed that Proposition 8 overruled In Re Marriage Cases by carving ou..."
Document | Núm. 59-4, 2010
Laura A. Rosenbury & Jennifer E. Rothman, Sex in and Out of Intimacy
"...legally married in California before voters passed a referendum limiting civil marriage to different-sex couples. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009) (describing the effect of Proposition 8 and upholding it). 36 The states are California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Ne..."
Document | Núm. 39-2, December 2010 – 2010
Barriers, Hurdles, and Discrimination: The Current Status of LGBT Intercountry Adoption and Why Changes Must Be Made to Effectuate the Best Interests of the Child
"...Id. California recognizes same-sex marriages that were performed between May 15, 2008 and November 4, 2008. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 119 (Cal. 2009). 32 See infra Part V. 33 See infra Part V.E. 34 As used in this article, the term ―sending country‖ refers to the country of the ch..."
Document | Vol. 73 Núm. 3, March 2010 – 2010
The Court of Appeals's decision in Godfrey v. Spano: a troubling exercise of indecision.
"...ban); see also In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384, 399 (Cal. 2008) (striking down same-sex marriage ban), superseded by Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009) (upholding Proposition 8, which prohibits marriages by same-sex couples, but holding prior marriages remain valid). The city..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 books and journal articles
Document | Núm. 10-1, January 2011 – 2011
Is same-sex marriage a threat to traditional marriages?: How courts struggle with the question.
"...federal complaint was filed after the Supreme Court of California upheld the ban under the California Constitution. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48 (Cal. 2009). For other recently raised challenges to same-sex marriage bans under other provisions of the Federal Constitution, see infra no..."
Document | Núm. XXIII-2, January 2022 – 2022
Equal Protection
"...state equal protection clause. 416 The court further declined to follow the decisions of the highest courts 405. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009). In Strauss v. Horton , the California Supreme Court conf‌irmed that Proposition 8 overruled In Re Marriage Cases by carving ou..."
Document | Núm. 59-4, 2010
Laura A. Rosenbury & Jennifer E. Rothman, Sex in and Out of Intimacy
"...legally married in California before voters passed a referendum limiting civil marriage to different-sex couples. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009) (describing the effect of Proposition 8 and upholding it). 36 The states are California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Ne..."
Document | Núm. 39-2, December 2010 – 2010
Barriers, Hurdles, and Discrimination: The Current Status of LGBT Intercountry Adoption and Why Changes Must Be Made to Effectuate the Best Interests of the Child
"...Id. California recognizes same-sex marriages that were performed between May 15, 2008 and November 4, 2008. See Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 119 (Cal. 2009). 32 See infra Part V. 33 See infra Part V.E. 34 As used in this article, the term ―sending country‖ refers to the country of the ch..."
Document | Vol. 73 Núm. 3, March 2010 – 2010
The Court of Appeals's decision in Godfrey v. Spano: a troubling exercise of indecision.
"...ban); see also In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384, 399 (Cal. 2008) (striking down same-sex marriage ban), superseded by Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009) (upholding Proposition 8, which prohibits marriages by same-sex couples, but holding prior marriages remain valid). The city..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | California Supreme Court – 2021
McHugh v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
"... ... (See, e.g., Quarry , supra , 53 Cal.4th at p. 956, 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 3, 272 P.3d 977 ; Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364, 472, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 ; Elsner v. Uveges (2004) 34 Cal.4th 915, 937, 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 530, 102 P.3d ... "
Document | California Court of Appeals – 2015
Stevens v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
"... ... due process clause[ ] with respect to the subject matter encompassed by the new provision.” 14 ( Strauss v. Horton (2009) 46 Cal.4th 364, 407, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48.) By giving the Legislature plenary powers over the workers' compensation ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit – 2015
Chula Vista Citizens for Jobs & Fair Competition v. Norris
"... ... Manheim & Howard, supra, at 1184 (footnotes and paragraph break omitted). See also Strauss v. Horton, [46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591] 207 P.3d 48, 84 ([]2009). The initiative system was designed as an antidote to this capture of the ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit – 2014
Protectmarriage.com-Yes On 8, Renewal v. City of Montgomery
"... ... Thus, the only precedential appellate decision addressing the merits of Proposition 8 is the California Supreme Court's opinion in Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 (2009), which held that challenges to Proposition 8 “lack[ed] merit” under California ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California – 2010
Perry v. Schwarzenegger
"... ... Brown Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of California; Mark B. Horton, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health and State Registrar of Vital Statistics; Linette Scott, in her ... Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 (2009) ... Strauss leaves undisturbed the 18,000 marriages of same-sex couples ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Used by the world's leading companies

Herbert Smith Freehills Logo Princeton University Logo University of Oxford Logo K2 Intelligence LLC Logo Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP Logo Kobre & Kim LLP Logo Wiley Logo ABA Logo Perez Lorca Logo Fisher Phillips Logo
vLex Footer Logo
© 2025 vLex. All rights reserved.