skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

San Diego County clerk seeks end to gay marriages

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The San Diego County clerk has asked the state Supreme Court to stop gay marriages.

Ernest Dronenburg Jr. urged the state high court to immediately halt same-sex weddings while it considers his legal arguments that gay marriages remain illegal in California despite a U.S. Supreme Court's decision widely regarded as authorizing gay weddings.

Dronenburg asked for the halt Friday while the state Supreme Court considers his petition, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court decision applies only to the two couples named in the original federal lawsuit, and to the clerks in Alameda and Los Angeles counties where the couples applied for marriage licenses.

Dronenburg also argues that county clerks aren't bound by orders from the governor, the state attorney general and other state officials to marry gay couples.

"County clerks carry out their duties, including the issuances of marriage licenses, without supervision or control of the governor or attorney general," Dronenburg wrote in his petition. "Indeed, no statute requires county clerks to report to the governor or attorney general."

The state Supreme Court on Monday refused a similar request to immediately stop gay weddings made by backers of California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in the state when passed by voters in 2008.

The supporters have made the same legal arguments as Dronenburg.

"The filing offers no new arguments that could deny same-sex couples their constitutionally protected civil rights," state Attorney General Kamala Harris said. "The federal injunction is still in effect, and it requires all 58 counties to perform same-sex marriages. No exceptions."

Harris filed written arguments with the state Supreme Court last week urging it to ignore the petitions and take no action to impede same-sex marriages.

Supporters of Prop. 8 applauded Dronenburg's move.

"The attorney general's obsession with redefining marriage has put the integrity of the people's power of initiative, and the rule of law itself, in great jeopardy," said Andrew Pugno, general counsel for "We hope other county clerks will bravely step forward, as well."

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for gay marriages to resume in the nation's most populous state on June 28 by dismissing the backers' appeal of a lower court ruling that found the ban unconstitutional. The high court decided the backers lacked authority to defend Proposition 8 after the governor and attorney general refused to do so.

As a result, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's 2010 ruling finding Proposition 8 unconstitutional became the definitive ruling. Walker found the same-sex marriage ban violated constitutional equal protection guarantees.

The California Supreme Court still plans to separately consider whether the lower court ruling that invalidated the ban and a companion mandate prohibiting the state from enforcing it applied statewide or only in Los Angeles and Alameda counties.

Lawyers for Proposition 8 sponsors also have argued that because the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule directly on Proposition 8's constitutionality, state officials are bound by state law to abide by the measure.

The state high court has asked for additional written arguments on those issues by Aug. 1.

Edwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California, Irvine's law school, said it appeared unlikely that the state Supreme Court will stop gay marriages because the county clerk and Prop 8 supporters are raising federal court issues.

"Judge Walker's order invalidates Prop 8 for the entire state," Chemerinsky said. "If there is to be a challenge to Judge Walker's ruling, it must be in federal district court, not state court."

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.


Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | July 20, 2013 at 10:29 a.m. ― 3 years, 8 months ago

This seems like a re-run.

Didn't some other group just make this same argument to the court a week ago and it got rejected?

Hey Ernest, focus on your own family instead of trying to ruin others.

Even if the court granted your request, which they won't, we would simply have a vote to repeal prop 8.

Look at the numbers, you won't win with you bigotry in California.

Try Arkansas, mr. Dronenburg sweetie, I think you would be happier there.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | July 20, 2013 at 10:30 a.m. ― 3 years, 8 months ago

Yes, I see it's in the article, someone else made this exact same argument and it failed.

This is simply a political move by a dope we have as county clerk.

Is this dope elected or appointed?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'LFDeL'

LFDeL | July 21, 2013 at 3:35 a.m. ― 3 years, 8 months ago

Dear Mr. Dronenburg,

Please do the job we San Diego County taxpayers pay you for, and stop forcing other public servants we also pay for to spend their precious time and money on your pet projects.

By the way, my friends and I all vote -- I'm not seeing a vote for you in our future.

P.S. Will someone please tell me who's considering a run against Mr. Dronenburg for San Diego County Clerk, so I can send some money their way.

( | suggest removal )