American Foundation for Equal Rights

Prop. 8 Case Heads to End with Defendants’ Own Witnesses Making Plaintiffs’ Case


Purported Experts’ Credibility Severely Undermined; Testimony Undermines Their Side, Helps Plaintiffs Case
Miller testifies that Prop. 8 vote partly based on “anti-gay stereotypes” and “prejudice”

Blankenhorn testifies children better off if gay and lesbian parents marry

JANUARY 27 — Testimony is expected to come to an end today in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the trial over the unconstitutionality of Prop. 8.

The trial is culminating with the defendants’ own witnesses making the plaintiffs’ case, and crumbling under cross examination.

The plaintiffs’ legal team, led by Theodore Olson and David Boies, who were brought together for this case by the American Foundation for Equal Rights, have demonstrated through 17 of their own witnesses, and through the defendants’ own witnesses, that :

·         Marriage is vitally important in American society.
·         Prop. 8 causes grievous harm to gays and lesbians and their children throughout California, and adds another chapter to the long history of discrimination they have endured
·         Prop. 8 perpetrates irreparable, immeasurable, discriminatory harm for no good reason.

Star defendants’ witness David Blankenhorn today was just-barely allowed to testify after he admitted under questioning from David Boies that he does not possess a doctorate; has never taught a college or university class; has only two peer-reviewed publications, none of which are germane to this case; that his masters degree thesis, one of those two publications, focused on two Victorian cabinetmakers; and has never conducted any scientific research on same sex marriage. His cross examination by Boies will start off the morning in court.

Along with undermining his credibility, Blankenhorn’s testimony helped make the plaintiffs’ case.
“I believe homophobia is a real presence in our society,” he testified. “We would be more American on the day we permit same-sex marriage than the day before.”

Blankenhorn also testified that allowing gays and lesbians to marry would improve the wellbeing of their households and their children. Among the reasons cited for opposing marriage equality, he testified, was the specter of polygamy and polyamory.

“This is the game that they’re playing,” Ted Olson said. “They define marriage as a man and a woman. They call that the institution of marriage. So if you let a man marry a man and a woman marry a woman, it would de-institutionalize marriage. That is the same as saying you are deinstitutionalizing the right to vote when you let women have it. It’s a game. It’s a tautology. They’re saying, ‘this is the definition. You’re going to change the definition by allowing people access that don’t have it now, and that would change it so that people who currently have access won’t want it any more because it’s changed.’ This is all nonsense. They are not proving that. This is a syllogism that falls apart. The major premise, minor premise and conclusion are empty.”

The day started with Boies continuing his withering cross-examination of the defendants’ witness Prof. Kenneth Miller, who was attempting to make the case that gays and lesbians are not politically vulnerable. Miller testified, however, that Prop. 8 was passed at least in part due to “anti-gay stereotypes” and “prejudice.”

Also entered into the record today was the fact that Miller could not remember whether attorneys defending Prop. 8 provided at least 65 percent of the materials he based his research on, totaling well over 200 documents, articles, etc. Yesterday he admitted his testimony was at least in part based on materials provided to him by the defendants’ attorneys.