California’s Proposition 8 in Federal Court: Key Timeline, Briefs, and Opinions Leading to Hollingsworth Cert Petition

On July 30, 2012, California Proposition 8 proponents petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, petitioners (the original “Defendant-Intervenors”) ask the Court to review the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ opinion in Perry v. Brown (671 F. 3d 1052), which affirmed the district court’s determination that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional (Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921).

We have prepared a timeline of key events, and gathered the main briefs and opinions, for the Prop. 8 federal cases leading up to the Hollingsworth petition. These are intended as highlight compilations only. Both are linked below.

Prop 8 in Federal Court_Key Timeline

Prop 8 in Federal Court_Main Briefs & Opinions

 

“Happy Planet Index” (HPI): Measuring “What Matters”

The New Economics Foundation (nef) in the UK earlier this summer released:

The Happy Planet Index: 2012 Report — A global index of sustainable well-being

The Happy Planet Index is a new
measure of progress that focuses on
what matters: sustainable well-being for
all. It tells us how well nations are doing
in terms of supporting their inhabitants
to live good lives now, while ensuring
that others can do the same in the future.

In a time of uncertainty, the Index
provides a clear compass pointing
nations in the direction they need to
travel, and helping groups around the
world to advocate for a vision of progress
that is truly about people’s lives.

Hat tip to DocuTicker.com.

Cross-posted on Legal Research Plus.

New Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report: “Abortion: Judicial History and Legislative Response”

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has posted a new report:

Abortion: Judicial History and Legislative Response (July 9, 2012)

From page 1 of the report:

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), that the U.S. Constitution protects a woman’s decision to terminate her pregnancy. In Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), a companion decision, the Court found that a state may not unduly burden the exercise of that fundamental right with regulations that prohibit or substantially limit access to the means of effectuating the decision to have an abortion. Rather than settle the issue, the Court’s rulings since Roe and Doe have continued to generate debate and have precipitated a variety of governmental actions at the national, state, and local levels designed either to nullify the rulings or limit their effect. These governmental regulations have, in turn, spawned further litigation in which resulting judicial refinements in the law have been no more successful in dampening the controversy.

Although the primary focus of this report is legislative action with respect to abortion, discussion of the various legislative proposals necessarily involves an examination of the leading Supreme Court decisions concerning a woman’s right to choose.

Hat tip to DocuTicker.com.

Cross-posted on Legal Research Plus.