the ninth circuit chose a narrow approach that applies only to california. and based upon the panoply of rights that are already given to lgbt people in califormiania, there was no rational basis to have prop 8 be declared constitutional. they said it was so focused on taking the dignity away from same-sex couples that there was no rational basis whatsoever. it could not be reconciled with the panoply of rice that are already provided to lgbt people in california. they aplpiplied it only to california. we are very gratified by how thoughtful and well-reasoned to the ninth circuit's opinion was , and we continue to a look forward to making the arguments. >> [inaudible] >> i can say we are disappointed of zero. the most important thing is to make sure that we have the ability to marriage same-sex couples in california. that is what san francisco has been focused on from when we started this fire eight years ago. it is another brick in the wall, another step in the process. if you look at how far we have come in eight years, six states, the district of columbia

right now there is a stay in place from the ninth circuit court of appeals. we will have to wait in see what happens. the other side has the opportunity to seek a hearing or to try and competition for the u.s. supreme court. for now, the state stays in place and we will take it one step at a time and to monitor as the legal proceedings developed. i will be in close contact with the mayor if that should change. he has assured me that the city mechanisms and machinery stand ready to do whatever it can to expedite marriages in the event that it was to be something that we could do. right now, we are taking it one step at a time. [inaudible] >> i have instructed the county clerk to immediately communicate with all of the county clerk's across the state to make sure we are using the same forms. we want the dignity to be reflected in every jurisdiction of this state when the decision is handed down. and that has also been the wonderful part of it. we treated everyone with a the same dignity, that is what people wanted. >> [inaudible] >> the earliest that they could

. >> the proponents could petition and ask the ninth circuit to extend the stay. i would not be surprised if they did. they will have to do that before the mandate issues. >> [inaudible] >> i think you are correct, it is very unlikely that it will be denied. right now we have to see if they will petition for review in the next 14 days. the earliest that if there was not a petition for review, the very earliest something could happen would be going before the supreme court if they were to accept its in the late fall or early winter of this year, but that is a very aggressive timeline. >> [inaudible] >> i did. >> [inaudible] >> that's correct. that's correct. that's correct. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. i mean, this is -- if you go back and look at a briefing in this case, that is the exact argument that the city made and terry argued in the ninth circuit. in the chronicle this morning, there could of been a variety of ways that this case went. the ninth circuit chose a narrow approach that applies only to california. and based upon the panoply of rights that are already

the ninth circuit chose a narrow approach that applies only to california. and based upon the panoply of rights that are already given to lgbt people in califormiania, there was no rational basis to have prop 8 be declared constitutional. they said it was so focused on taking the dignity away from same-sex couples that there was no rational basis whatsoever. it could not be reconciled with the panoply of rice that are already provided to lgbt people in california. they aplpiplied it only to california. we are very gratified by how thoughtful and well-reasoned to the ninth circuit's opinion was

i have spoken to the chief, the chief has a copy of the ninth circuit opinion. we have been working in a with the asian law caucus, one of the attorneys involved. they were one ofd8 the attorneys that presented this case and the ninth circuit. into this. i just want to let people know that we will meet our promises. commissioners, and the announcement? let's call the next item. >> i phone numbertem -- item2d, issues for other meetings. the parks district will be held out gratin street at the elementary school, and there will be a use meeting held -- youth meeting held on march 7. >> we will be meeting on friday morning with members of lthe youth commission and possibly someone from supervisor campos's office. we are looking forward to doing this. we will hear from the kids and the officers. it will be similar to what we did with the human rights commission, but it is a big step, because a lot of what we deal with is a juvenile. we have two experts on this panel. >> that is terrific. >> will baby -- will they be discussing this? ç>> that is part of it, to hear f

the ninth circuit chose a narrow approach that applies only to california.nd based upon the panoply of rights that are already given to lgbt people in califormiania, there was no rational basis to have prop 8 be declared

the district judge rendered a meticulous, thorough decision and the ninth circuit did so. this is the issue that should go to the united states supreme court someday. the people that we're representing and others like those people are not asking for anything special. they're asking for the right to be treated with decency and respect and dignity and afforded the same rights that we afford to other citizens in this country. they're not asking for much. just equality. i do think this issue will go to the supreme court. i think it will go to the supreme court in this case, and there could not be a better record or a better foundation for this important principle to get to the supreme court. >> hearing you speak about it in those terms makes me want to, i guess, put a question to you that causes -- will require a little extrapolation. the mormon church was the main financial backer and the main provider of early volunteers to the proposition 8 effort. all the republican candidates for president except for ron paul today put out statements deploring today's ruling that went you

>> they put this request into the ninth circuit.here are 25 judges, they have to get a majority of the judges to vote yes to rehear the case. if they do, we have the chief judge plus the 10 other judges that are drawn randomly. then, they will we hear the case. it they did i get a majority of the 25 to say yes, the only other option is to go directly to the supreme court. >>pam: what are they going back to the ninth circuit? >> they say it is just the proper process, exhaust the possibilities before going to the supreme court. they say even if they did not win they could get a stronger this said that they got from the three judge panel. another option is they might win. depends of a lot of the draw which judges you get. the bottom line is they do not want same-sex marriage, by going this route it continues the delayed because same-sex marriage remains on hold. >>pam: members of the occupy movement and other groups concerned with the foreclosure crisis stormed a union bank branch in oakland. this was the scene. protesters were there

>> the accord is more conservative than the ninth circuit reputed to be.his is a very conscious decision that think the fed would never a skate or it's the voters decide to take away that right that is already in existence they must do so with some reason related to the group of people they're taking it away from. i think will make it tougher for the supreme court to vote against it. i think this decision was a fairly cautious one. >>pam: how does the record balance the right of the people that have been a year back and how is that made? >> certainly the court said a lot today about power of the voter initiative in california. on the other hand, the court said the constitution still trump the people and people have to have some legitimate reason for taking away a right. they just did not have any good reasons. >>pam: are their broader implication from this? >> there could be some broader if patience for the states that have granted the right and then taken them away. now it looks like this may be too slim to to california. >>pam: alright professes to be ni

and that case, the ninth circuit ruling is final and it would apply here in the state of california, and we can move forward. >> [inaudible] >> i think that the city's position has always been clear, that we are dealing with civil marriage. we are not dealing with the religious traditions of the faith with respect to marriage. we have been consistent with that for the last 80 years -- 8 years. that is always been the city's position that each faith leves iaves it up to them to exercise their decisions. any other questions? >> any frustration on the fact you have a winning opinion, but there won't be any marriages in the foreseeable future? >> we have been dealing with this for eight years, and there have been ups and downs. we have to wait the years, but progress has been made in that time frame. i choose to be an optimist and focus on the progress that we have made, understanding that history is on the side of marriage and quality. certainly, i wish that when we dealt with this years ago, that was the end of it. it is hard to fight, but you have to. i want to focus on the progress w

and the ninth circuit will be busy. they have oral argument starting monday. >> monday, anti-discrimination ban in california is going to be taken up. governor brown interestingly enough is on the side of the paragraphs. we'll see what happens. >>> we're going to turn to tom vacar. i'm sure everybody's seen the signs about the closure of the bay bridge. can you talk about what we can expect with that closure? >> let's go to the video. what we're going to look at is a cal trans-generated piece of tape. basically what you have to understand is that the westbound lanes, what i mean by that is the lanes that are going into the city, are going to be closed. the other eastbound lanes going to oakland will be fine. what's happening here is if you look at what you're seeing there at the toll plause zarks you're going to see that the traffic is going to be moved off to the left. and what that means is that the lanes have already been built, they're simply shifting these lanes during this closure on which happens over the weekend

. >>> the ninth circuit court of appeals is set to hear another legal challenge this morning. this one has to do with affirmative action. >> new information about the death of whitney houston. what police rompedly found in her who -- reportedly found in her hotel room. mornings on 2 begins right now. >>> good morning. >>> it is monday february 1. we are following developing news in the east bay. several blocks of the hayward neighborhood are blocked off right now as police investigate a death. ktvu is from c and seventh streets from what we are learning now. good morning. >> reporter: good morning. we just talked with a lady who lives across the street from where the man's body was found over there behind me. she spent the night at a friend's house and headed back here to check on her mother when she called saying she heard gunshots. we heard the scanner traffic around 4:00 a.m. and then later shot this video of police searching the area with a canine. police discovered the man's body on the sidewalk near 7th and c streets. since blocked several streets on the perimeter. peopl

. >> backers say there is no way this entire ninth circuit would sign off on a decision like this year. assists >>james: we will follow this with proposition 8, we will take a quick break and be right back. here is a live look at the golden gate. bear the heavy traffic on 101. shares of some of which are already off to a pretty warm stopped third -- start. check out where the temperatures will go into the afternoon. san abundance of 70's. here is a look at your expected highs. morgan hill could actually lead to 76. some of the colts also stay in the upper 60s. here is a quick look at storm tracker 4. there is no wet weather to speak up. we do have hothouse have over our area right now billionths we have a lot of warm air flashing into the area. if your 7 day around the day forecast shows nothing but sunshine as we finish the work week. temperatures in the low-mid- 70s. as we head into the weekend things will cool down a bit with temperatures in the low 60s for. overall, relatively mild conditions for the next work week. in the traffic center there are hot spots is the death. the approa

what if anything could the ninth circuit say today that would change that path?'m sure whoever loses here will ultimately try to get to the supreme court. but based on how it's written, the court may or may not want to take to the u.s. supreme court. so what we'll be watching for is does the court of appeals write a really broad ruling that says states cannot ban gay marriage, period, broad, sweeping. that would make more likely the supreme court would take it. or will the court as i think is more likely, and this is just a guess, write it more narrowly. and say for example a state like california that gives all the civil union benefits of marriage, but just doesn't use the word marriage, there's no good reason for the court to make that discriminatory decision. about it does that, then that's not as sweeping. any say the for example that doesn't give civil unions under the logic of the decision if that's the way it comes out would not have to grant gay marriage. that i think would make it less likely the supreme court would take it. but to answer your question d

the ninth circuit court of appeals ruled that the voters approved ban is unconstitutional. added two-1 v the ninth circuit said preventing gays and lesbians from marion is a violation of the equal protection clause. that does not mean that same-sex marriages will resume right away. marriages will be held on hold until an appeal is made. for supporters of same-sex marriage, today's ruling was a major hurdle. plaintiffs, families and attorneys were in san francisco to discuss the impact of the ruling. the families say they're close to achieving their dream of marriage of quality. >> brick by brick, the dark walls of discrimination are being dismantled. >>alejandra: their son is looking for to the next step in there to quality. allow parents a like mind to marry. it says that our family, that my brothers and my mother's should not belong. that we do not get to be the same as my friends' parents. >>alejandra: many believe the waiting is now over. >> i never dreamed i could wake up and know that the person i love, i love this person more than i can explain to you. knowing that m

it's really important to see what the ninth circuit did not do, which is glowingly uphold everything about judge walker's determination and hand what would have been really a smoking bomb to the supreme court and said, here. the most liberal circuit in the kun, the one that you overturn all the time wants you to have this gift. i think they were too kanne to do that, and i think in the long run that was probably a smart move. >> in terms of the next steps here, to be clear this does not mean that people can start getting married again in california. same sex couples are still not allowed to do that. that part of that is stayed. what we expect now is a decision by the people who lost today about whether or not they're going to appeal it straight to the supreme court or to a larger group of the ninth circuit. if it goes to the supreme court it looks like it's written directly to anthony kennedy to make him a swing justice. which choice do you think the losers today will make to appeal it, and do you think that's very important? >> it is important. i think that there's some reason to bel

supporters of gay marriage marched on city hall after learning that the ninth circuit had struck down proposition eight. here city leaders celebrated as did frank and joe capliafano. married in 2008. >> this document means everything to me actually. it's always been a dream of mine to fall in love and get married ever since i was a kid and i have. >> frank and joe were among a small number of gay couples legally married before the current ban took effect. their marriage a preview of what others hope to achieve. >> having this valid marriage license meant the difference to whether or not i got health care. and we found one of those people hoping to get married at the victory celebration after the court ruling. >> we were really overjoyed. the only thing that could have made it better if they said the stay had been lifted. i would have been married by now if it would have been. >> reporter: teresa said she and her partner missed that small window to get married. >> it could be a couple of months, it could be several years if the u.s. supreme court says yeah we'll pick it up and go with

a panel of judges on the ninth circuit court of appeals saying proposition 8 is unconstitutional. last night there was celebration in the district's castro district. guy rights groups know at this point this is only another step in their legal journey that will likely end with the u.s. supreme court. legal analysts say there are still many options. >> the prop 8 backers would ask for a review by the entire ninth circuit. but if that doesn't go forward, they then would seek review in the united states supreme court. but if the united states supreme court does not hear the issue, then it won't go back to the ninth circuit for further proceedings. the three-judge decision would take effect. >> and while the court says prop 8 is unconstitutional, it also continued its stay on same-sex marriages. >>> the man accused of groping four women will return to court today. michael escobar is scheduled for a pretrial hearing. the 21-year-old is charged with five counts of battery and sexual battery for ely allegedly assaulting women in their rooms as they slept. >>> san francisco sheriff return

when you say the ninth circuit, you're talking about, basically, a panel of three judges. it's a 2-1 ruling. we're going to have a live report on this, but you can expect that those who backed prop 8 are either going to ask for a review by the entire ninth circuit, all the judges -- which you can do -- and/or appeal up to the u.s. supreme court. more on that shortly. >>> well, we are closely watching a developing story involving the efforts to free 19 americans blocked from leaving egypt. up next, we will speak with a man who came close to being one of those hostages, and find out why he says he wants to go back and challenge egyptian leaders. does that seem like a good idea? >>> and did the army break the law when it told chaplains to be quiet about the obama administration's new health care rule requiring catholic institutions to pay for birth control? we'll show you what happened and see why critics are so angry about this. >>> and supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg just told one country shot to use the -- not to use the u.s. constitution as a model as it tries t

the ninth u.s. circuit court of appeals is set to announce its decision on whether california's proposition eight violates the federal constitution. the voter approved measure banned same-sex marriage in the states, that was back in 2008. these are live pictures you are looking at. today's decision by a panel of three judges follows the rulings of this judge, retired judge vaughn walker declared proposition 8 unconstitutional in 2010. saying it violates the constitution's equality guarantee. sponsors of the ballot appealed walker's ruling to the ninth circuit court which brings us to today. either way the court rules the battle over same-sex marriage could be headed to the supreme court. the moment that we get that decision, we are going to bring it to you live. now to a country where it seems all humanity is dissolving. a government is killing its own people. syrian government forces continue to fire heavy shells into the city of homs and other areas today. homs is ground zero of the uprising against presi

yes, this is a long awaited ruling from the ninth circuit court of appeals. a three-judge panel will today rule on the constitutionality of proposition 8. prop 8 defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. it was approved by california voters in november of 2008. prop 8 came after the california supreme court ruled in may of 2008 that the state's constitution prohibited the state from discriminating against same-sex couples in marriage laws. prop 8 was found to be unconstitutional by a federal court judge in august of 2010. now, that judge was vaughn walker who the proponents of prop 8 said should have recused himself from the case because he is gay and has a long-time partner. the ninth circuit court will rule on judge walker's recusal and the prop 8 proponent's standing. the proponents want to appeal the judge's ruling, hence the constitutionality of proposition 8 which the judges will decide today. >> that is to say this proposition evidence hostility on an effort that shows dislike for a minority group and that is gays and lesbians. if you

well, here the ninth circuit court of appeals said that has no standing whatsoever. that judge walker's ruling stands, and that his sexual orientation has no bearing on the case. from here you'll be seeing a number of rallies across the state of california with same-sex marriage supporters, proposition 8 supporters. this group is called protectmarriage.com. they're sort of quiet in the sense you don't really see them gather here on the street, voicing their opinion. they feel like in a city of san francisco they'll be demonized by their opinion. but, of course, a lot of supporters here today and very happy with this ruling. >> i was going to ask you if the crowd is very boisterous or were they when they heard the news? oh, there they go. >> as you can see, holding just a little impromptu rally here in front of the courthouse. we imagine that the likely head over to city hall. that's where this whole odyssey began here in 2004, when then-mayor gavin newsom allowed same-sex marriage, marriages to take place. there on the steps of the city hall. and we would anticipate

it is a long-awaited ruling from the ninth circuit court of appeals. a panel of three federal judges issues their ruling on the constitutionality of proposition 8. background information prop 8 defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. it was approved by california voters in november of 2008. prop 8 came after the california supreme court ruled in may of 2008 that the state's constitution prohibited the state from discriminating against same-sex couples in marriage laws. now, prop 8 was found to be unconstitutional by a federal judge in august of 2010. that judge, vaughn walker, who proponents of prop 8 should have recused himself because he is gay and has a long-time partner. now, the ninth circuit court will rule today on judge walker's recusal and the prop 8 opponent's standings. proponents want to appeal the judge's ruling, hence the constitutionality of prop 8. there are arguments on both sides, of course. >> it could be reheard before a larger segment of the ninth circuit and then it could be appealed to the u.s. supreme court. a

the ninth circuit is one of the more liberal courts of appeal in the country. there are conservatives, so going for the full ninth circuit may make sense for the backers of prop eight. but it was a mix on this decision. >> if you believe there's more that you feel we need to share, let us know. i assume you are happy about this decision, but, it was, it appears to be it's a narrow decision, it's a california decision, not necessarily having to do with same-sex marriage as a whole. >> i think pete's quick analysis is the way we would see it. it's a day, right now a moment of excitement for members of our community because it community, because it affirming that same-sex couples have the right to marry who they love and are protected. even in the most narrow of rulings what this case and court would have found is that government has no role in discriminating against gays and lesbians according to their sexual orientation, so it propels this issue forward in a positive way. whether it be to you know, a larger panel at this next court or eventually it would go to t

the ninth circuit deals with washington. we have an important decision going up there, still washington state. i hope it goes to the supreme court. why? because we learned through this process of standing up and fighting for our rights, especially when you consider don't ask don't tell being repealed, there are soldiers serving overseas right now, and if they happen to be gay and they have a loving partner at home, what if they die? what the soldier dies, and you drape a casket with the american flag? are you supposed to say, let's cut out some stars and say, you know what? you're only equal in some of those states? no. we fight for an american and all of those states. i believe that love is really something that's worth fighting for. >> dan choi, melissa harris-perry, great to have you with us. melissa, you know having your own show that time flies when you're having fun. >> of course. >> i wish we had more problem. >> we'll talk about it when it goes to the supreme court. we'll do it again. thank you to much. scott walker

you can also find more on today's ninth circuit decision by going to ktvu.com. there you can read the entire court decision on our website. >>> we have breaking news. police say they arrested a man who shot federal agents in newark today. maureen naylor is here with more about the shooting and the arrest. >> reporter: the news came down about 4:30 this afternoon. police say they arrested a piedmont man with no criminal history and say he's accused of trying to murder an off duty agent who lives here and was found here outside his newark home where he lives with his wife and her daughter. the shooting happened outside the agent's home. the gunshots woke many neighbors. >> just, crack, crack, boom, boom. very quick right behind each other. >> reporter: evidence markers show where an off duty federal agent was shot once after a confrontation with a suspect. several neighbors who didn't want to appear on camera told us what they heard. >> some kind of scuffle, that was what originally got my attention. and then within five minutes of that noise, so i would say about

this is the oral argument that took place before the ninth circuit in had december 2010. it's about an hour and 20 minutes. >> good morning again, ladies and gentlemen. we'll proceed to the second half of this consolidated proceeding. perry versus hollings worth, perry and city of san francisco versus hollingsworth. good morning, mr. cooper. >> good morning, your honor. the people of california and americans tlouhroughout the couy are engaged in an earnest and profound debate about the definition of marriage. the issue is a momentous one, for it goes to the nature of a ubiquitous institution that is fundamental to the very existence and survival of the human race. so this court is presented with, in our submission, this fundamental question. it is whether the definition of marriage, that momentous issue, is one for the people themselves to resolve through the democratic process as they did in enacting proposition 8, or whether our current institution takes that issue essentially out of their hands and decides it for them as the plaintiffs argue here. >> could the people o