03/07/00: California votes to limit marriage to one man and one woman with prop.22 ref, ref2.
05/15/08: The California Supreme Court legalizes same sex marriage saying prop.22 violated the state constitution. pdf
11/04/08: California passes prop. 8, a voter approved marriage amendment, by a simple majority.
"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." California Const., Art. I, sec. 7.5
05/26/09: California Supreme Court upholds prop. 8 against the view that prop. 8 was not first approved by the legislature. Prop. 8 is a voter initiative amendment and the court stated that it would not limit the public's ability to amend their own constitution. ref
05/27/09: Opponents to prop. 8 appeal the case to the Northern District on the basis that it violates the 14th amendment. ref
08/04/10: Judge Vaughn Walker voids the prop. 8 amendment by equating that gender identity is the same as racial discrimination and that the voters enacted the amendment based on hatred towards a particular group of people. He also ignored much of the defendant's evidence. The ruling has been regarded by many as highly questionable. Judge Walker even believed that the defendants most likely did not have standing to appeal since the defendants, Gov Schwarzenegger and the California Attorney General refused to defend the case anymore as is their legal duty. ref
08/13/10: Ninth Circuit agrees to defendant's appeal of Judge Walker's ruling. ref1, ref2
02/16/11: California Supreme Court agrees to hear whether the prop. 8 lawyers have legal standing to appeal on behalf of the public when the principal defendants, California Governor and Attorney General, refuse to do so. A decision is expected 12/5/2011. ref
04/27/11: Federal judge James Ware agrees to hear on 6/13/2011 whether District Court Judge Vaughn Walker was biased in his decision and thus the case should be thrown out. This is also the date that the same judge James Ware will rule on public access to the prop. 8 trial tapes. ref
06/14/11: Federal judge James Ware heard arguments in court 6/13/11 on whether District Court Judge Vaughn Walker was biased in his decision and thus the case should be thrown out. The next day he ruled that Vaughn Walker was not biased in his ruling and had no obligation to recuse himself even though he kept hidden the fact that he was homosexual and in a 10 year relationship with another man. ProtectMarriage.com has said they will appeal the decision.
The matter of the prop.8 videotapes being released has been postponed to 8/29/2011. ref
09/19/11: Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware rules that the prop.8 videotapes are to be released on 9/30/11. ref ADF says they will immediately appeal to the Ninth Circuit. ref
09/26/11: A Ninth Circuit panel of judges delay release of video tapes. ref
11/17/11: After hearing oral arguments on 9/6/11 the California Supreme Court states unanimously in an opinion to the Ninth District that prop.8 defenders do have the legal standing to defend an amendment when those in authority who are required to defend the law refuse to do so. ref
02/02/12: Ninth Circuit Orders Prop.8 videotapes to remain sealed. ref
02/07/12: The 3 Panel court ruled 2 to 1 Prop.8 amendment is unconstitutional. ref
02/21/12: ProtectMarriage.com appeals to the Ninth Circuit en banc ref.
06/05/12: Ninth Circuit refuses en banc review. ref, pdf
07/31/12: Prop.8 defenders formally appeals to U.S. Supreme Court. ref
12/07/12: U.S. Supreme Court announce that they will consider Prop.8. ref
01/23/13: Prop.8 defenders file opening brief before the U.S. Supreme Court defending Prop.8 ref
03/26/13: Oral arguments are heard before the U.S. Supreme Court. ref
06/28/13: U.S. Supreme court rules 5–4 the defenders of prop.8 lack standing to defend the amendment and voided the Ninth Circuit's decision. ref
06/28/13: Ninth Circuit allows same sex marriages to resume in that state. ref
06/29/13: Prop.8 legal team files emergency petition to Justice Anthony Kennedy to vacate the Ninth Circuit's motion. ref
06/30/13: Justice Kennedy refuses to vacate Ninth Circuit's motion. ref
07/12/13: ADF petitions California Supreme Court to uphold prop.8 ref
07/15/13: California Supreme Court declines to halt marriage licenses, but formally agrees to consider the case. ref
08/14/13: The California Supreme Court en banc dismissed the Prop.8 petition to have the law enforced. This ends the long litigation to have Prop.8 upheld unless and until California elects officials who will uphold the law. ref