Wednesday, 02/18/04

While concluding that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail eventually, a second California judge last night declined to enjoin San Francisco from handing out marriage licenses to same-sex couples. I've heard this story repeated several times on the radio this morning, but none of them mention that this second judge, James Warren, determined that the reason he was unable to issue an injunction was a a misplaced semicolon in the plaintiffs' brief.

"I am not trying to be petty here, but it is a big deal. That semicolon is a big deal," Warren told attorneys, according to an account by Associated Press.

I think that's adorable.

update: Thom suggests that there's a reason this wasn't reported more widely -- it's basically rubbish. He says the plaintiffs used their obfuscatory semicolon to create the impression that the city had to both cease & desist handing out licenses, and also appear in court later to explain their actions, when something legally compels the city to do only one or the other.

I haven't figured out what that something is yet. I was under the impression that the only relevant law was Prop 22, which is fourteen words long, including the words "a" (twice), "and", "or" and "in".

Court filings would be helpful. The SF Superior Court site refers me to to the Superior Court Electronic Information Center, a site I recommend you visit if only to take in its stalwart resistance to both usability and good taste. I can't provide a direct link, but it's case number CPF-04-503943, and as of yet there don't appear to be any filings available for download. 10:19AM «

Bits pushed by Movable Type