Civil Rights

Perry v. Schwarzenegger — Study Notes

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

Study notes for Perry v. Schwarzenegger: This landmark case addresses the constitutionality of Proposition 8 and its implications on same-sex marriage rights. It serves as a pivotal point in the discussion of equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Proposition 8 is unconstitutional as it violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment by denying marriage rights to same-sex couples.
Professor Notes

In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the court's decision underscored the importance of marriage as a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. The judge emphasized that the historical context of marriage could not be used to justify discrimination against same-sex couples, as such discrimination fell squarely within the purview of the Equal Protection Clause. Furthermore, the court highlighted the lack of legitimate state interests that would justify the government's interference in the marriages of same-sex couples, reinforcing the principle that personal liberties must not be subjected to majority rule when it infringes on fundamental rights.

One key aspect that professors would likely emphasize is the court's deliberate approach to scrutinizing the motivations behind Proposition 8. The court found that the amendment was driven primarily by animus against the LGBTQ+ community, rather than any legitimate governmental interest. This demonstrates how courts may assess legislation not only on the basis of its language but also on the intent and effects of the law as applied, which could have broader implications for future civil rights cases.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1Explain the significance of the court's holding regarding the Fourteenth Amendment.
  2. 2What were the key arguments made by the plaintiffs in this case?
  3. 3Discuss how the historical context of marriage was considered in this ruling.
  4. 4Can you identify the court's reasoning behind striking down Proposition 8?
  5. 5What precedents did the court reference in support of its decision?
  6. 6How does this case contribute to the evolving landscape of LGBTQ+ rights in the U.S.?
Mnemonic Device

Perry Protects: Love No Longer Prohibited.

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
Baker v. NelsonBaker dealt with the lack of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage at a time when legal standards were vastly different from those applied in Perry.
Lawrence v. TexasLawrence primarily focused on the decriminalization of same-sex relationships, which is different from the specific constitutional question of marriage rights addressed in Perry.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Supporting Proposition 8 promotes traditional marriage and reflects the societal norms of California voters.

Against the Rule

Opposing Proposition 8 is rooted in the belief that marriage is a fundamental right that should not be denied based on sexual orientation.

Class Discussion Points
  • What are the implications of the court's findings on legislative actions targeting LGBTQ+ rights?
  • How does this case fit within the broader narrative of civil rights movements in the United States?
  • In what ways could this precedent influence future cases concerning marriage equality?
Exam Angle

Perry v. Schwarzenegger often appears in exams as a case that examines the intersection of equal protection and due process. Students should be prepared to analyze the court's application of these constitutional principles in the context of marriage rights.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.