I've read the decision. Much of it deals with peripheral issues such as who has legal standing to attack or defend the proposition. For the main issue, the court cited Romer v Evans 1996 517 US which was a supreme court decision.
Per wiki.
The California court applied the precedent. The Supreme Court, under the concept of stare decisis (the thing is already decided) is not even under any obligation to consider any appeal.
Quote:Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case dealing with civil rights and state laws. It was the first Supreme Court case to deal with LGBT rights since Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), when the Court had ruled that a law criminalizing homosexual sex was constitutional.[1]
An amendment to the Colorado state constitution ("Amendment 2") that would have prevented any city, town or county in the state from taking any legislative, executive, or judicial action to recognize gay and lesbian citizens as a protected class was passed by Colorado voters in a referendum. A state trial court issued a permanent injunction against the amendment, and upon appeal, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the amendment was subject to "strict scrutiny" under the Equal Protection Clause. The state trial court, upon remand, concluded that the amendment could not pass strict scrutiny, which the Colorado Supreme Court agreed with upon review. Upon appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that the amendment did not even pass the rational basis test, let alone strict scrutiny.
Per wiki.
The California court applied the precedent. The Supreme Court, under the concept of stare decisis (the thing is already decided) is not even under any obligation to consider any appeal.
