Writings and observations

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Tuesday invalidating California’s Proposition 8 – effectively a ban on same-sex marriage – got plenty of attention nationwide. But some of the implications, if the decision stands, may not yet have been fully digested.

Before that day was out, Oregon Attorney General John Kroger sent a letter to Governor John Kitzhaber and legislative leaders with some initial thoughts on the decision. He promised a detailed followup, which hasn’t yet materialized (publicly at least), but his initial letter had some provocative things to say about its impact on Oregon. (And we would suggest, following the logic out, on Idaho as well.)

Here’s some of what Kroger said:

This morning, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Perry v. Brown that California’s ban on same-sex marriage violates the United States Constitution. Ninth Circuit decisions apply to all states within the circuit, including Oregon, which has a similar state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. There are important differences between how this legal issue has developed in Oregon (where the constititional provision did not remove an existing statutory right to marry) and in California (where the constitutional provision took away that existing right). Neverthless, the Ninth Circuit’s decision will inevitably raise questions about the constitutionality and legal viability of Oregon’s state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

We are currently studying the decision and will be ready to provide the Governor with a complete analysis of the decision and its implications for Oregon law within forty-eight hours.

If the decision stands, then, there seems to be at least a credible chance that Oregon’s constitutional amendment against gay marriage, adopted in 2004, may be invalidated, and Idaho legal provisions as well.

Share on Facebook

Idaho Oregon

Boquist
Brian Boquist

It’s not everyday your own state senator makes the national news. But Brian Boquist, R-Dallas, senator for District 12 (a sprawling area in northwest Oregon), has.

The issue concerns not a legislative bill or a fiery statement, but business operations he and his wife are involved with. From today’s Talking Points Memo (the story is lengthy and detailed):

The issue revolves around a private military training facility that he and his wife help operate in Cheyenne, Wyo., and which is complete with live mortar and car bomb training as well as actors dressed up like radical insurgents.

Two of their longtime partners in the business recently accused the Boquists in federal court of mismanaging the facility and redirecting its profits to the couple’s favorite Republican candidates and causes back in Oregon.

The article noted that Peggy Boquist said the political contributions were proper and not wrongly taken.

But as with many lawsuits involving political figures, the central legal issue may be a lot less politically pertinent than the surrounding background.

Share on Facebook

Oregon