here is what the plaintiffs in baker said. this is the route the jurisdictional statement. >> there is no discrimination and the law against homosexuals. appellant of being denied a numerous right, they have been denied numerous rights order to assemble -- others similarly situated. this was clearly a case where they charge the classification is one based on sexual orientation as well as one based on gender. the levin case would have been the, on all fours, would have -- the baker case would have been on all fours with loving it same-sex sexual relations produced children the same as opposite sex sexual relations do. then mr. olson would have a laydown case. there were be no basis on which to draw a distinction to identify a distinguishing characteristic with respect to any interest the state has the authority to implement. there would be no difference. the question is, does the society have no interest in that distinct characteristic? we submit to you -- >> is there a state that suggests that? or do you have a good argument? -

we represe the plaintiffs. let me begin by interim one of the court's questions with respect to the effort to get a mandate requiring the attorney general to appeal. that was simply a one-sentence denial. the court did not provide any further analysis. i also would like to just be certain their record is clear that permanent injunction that was issued b judge walker relates only to the official defendants, and persons under the control or supervision of those defendants. >> sewed judge walker was wrong about the register -- so if judge walker was wrong, and she is not bound by the injunction, correct? did a that is correct. >> if she is not bound by the injunction, how does she have standing? >> we do not believe she does. weelieve the decision makes absolutely clear that individuals like mr. argus, even if she were the actual clerk, which he obviously is not, would not have standing. -- individuals like ms. vargas, even issue with actual clerk, which she obviously is not, would not have standing. >> what about

we represent the plaintiffs. let me begin by interim one of the court's questions with respect to the effort to get a mandate requiring the attorney general to appeal. that was simply a one-sentence denial. the court did not provide any further analysis. i also would like to just be certain their record is clear that permanent injunction that was issued by judge walker relates only to the official defendants, and persons under the control or supervision of those defendants. >> sewed judge walker was wrong about the register -- so if judge walker was wrong, and she is not bound by the injunction, correct? did a that is correct. >> if she is not bound by the injunction, how does she have standing? >> we do not believe she does. we believe the decision makes absolutely clear that individuals like mr. argus, even if she were the actual clerk, which he obviously is not, would not have standing. -- individuals like ms. vargas, even issue with actual clerk, which she obviously is not, would not have standing. >> what abo

we represent the plaintiffs. let me begin by interim one of the court's questions with respect to the efforto get a mandate requiring the attorney general to appeal. that wasimply a one-sentence denial. the court did not provide any further analysis. i also would like to just be certain their record is clear that permanent injunction that was issued by judge walker relates only to the official defendants, and persons under the control or supervision of those defendants. >> sewed judge walker was wrong about the register -- so if judge walker was wrong, and she is not bound by the injunction, correct? did a that is correct. >> if she is not bound by the injunction, how does she have standing? >> we do not believe she does. we believe the decision makes absolutely clear that individuals like mr. argus, even if she were the actual clerk, which he obviously is not, would not have standing. -- individuals like ms. vargas, even issueith actual clerk, which she obviously is not, would not have standing. >> what about cle

for instance, the plaintiffs in this case, chris perry and

we represent the plaintiffs. egin by interim one of the court's questions with respect to the effort to get a mandate requiring the attorney general to appeal. that was simply a one-sentence denial. the court did not provide any further analysis. i also would like to just be certain their record is clear that permanent injunction that was issued by judge walker relates only to the official defendants, and persons under the control or supervision of those defendants. >> sewed judge walker was wrong about the register -- so if judge walker was wrong, and she is not bound by the injunction, correct? did a that is correct. >> if she is not bound by the injunction, how does she have standing? >> we do not believe she does. we believe the decision makes absolutely clear that individuals like mr. argus, even if she were the actual clerk, which he obviously is not, would not have standing. -- individuals like ms. vargas, even issue with actual clerk, which she obviously is not, would not have standing. >> what about clerk

for instance, the plaintiffs in this case, chris perry and sandy styer. they are raising two sons. >> it's really interesting having to fight for the same rights other people have. i feel really proud to help lead this effort because i think it's incredibly effort not only for chris and i but for other gay couples. >> it's totally constitutional for the voters and lawmakers. >> reporter: in 2008, california voters approved prop 8, a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. >> all rise. >> reporter: this morning in front of a three-judge panel in federal court, prop 8 opponents had to first convince the judges that they had standing or the right to challenge the earlier decision. an attorney for the proponents never even finished his first sentence. >> the plaintiff thinks justice is served where the appellate review is frustrated in in case, where the state defendants circumvent -- >> i don't think they are t alking about justice. i think they are talking about procedural rules. >> reporter: a decision by the supreme court last year u pholding the vo

the plaintiff's are the state's themselves. >> part of our health care needs to be fixed. yeah, expenses are out of the control and everyone's needs are not being met right now but there are better solutions than giving up our freedom. >> reporter: the senior obama administration official tells abc news the department of justice will most likely appeal the case. a case that may well end up in the supreme court. >>> michael steel is the chairman of the national republican party but will he keep that job? he's expected to let us know tonight if he's interested. there's criticism about his leadership and he's lost a lot of backing. >>> if all you want for christmas is a job, we may be able to help you. for every open job there's at least four other people looking at the same job. we'll tell you how to stand out in the crowd. >>> a massive storm covering much of the u.s. is now heading east. a look at the blizzard conditions the storm left behind and a look at what we can expect, coming up. >>> take a look at these pictures and realize things could have been worse. temperature

. >> reporter: these cases are high-profile and the plaintiffs are the states themselves. >> part of our healthcare system needs to be fixed. he imac come expenses are out of control and everyone's needs are not being met right now. but there are better solutions -- yeah, our income expenses are out of control. >> reporter: the department of justice most likely will repeal the case. >>> some sad news to share tonight. richard holbrook has died or he was hospitalized friday after collapsing at the state department be he underwent 20 hours of surgery to repair a tear in his ardrey. he played a key role in the afghan peace efforts. he was 69 years old. >>> call him the man of steel. michael steele announces tonight he wants to run again for a second term. it is no secret this'll be the toughest fight of his political career because five other republicans want the same job. he said, i am asking you tonight for your support for a second term. a lot of republicans are unhappy with his fundraising efforts and management style. >>> republicans, independents, and democrats are joining forces

court houses have become all too familiar for the plaintiffs. their fate is in the hands of this panel. which must decide whether to up hold a ruling that the voters 2008 ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. this panel needs to decide if sponsors have legal right to argue this case since the state top lawyer has decided not to. >> did you ever seek an injunction or an order or anything suggesting the attorney general should appear and appeal? >> we didn't. >> the judges seemed skeptical of an effort by imperial county to intervene. one worried about having no one to defend prop 8. >> if the state doesn't defend it, this is tossing in the tower. >> the judges deciding whether prop 8 violates the constitutional rights of gays and lesbian autos this proposition marginalized and stripped over a million zbai lesbian californians of access to what the supreme court of the united states is characterized as most-important relation in life. >> this weather the definition of marriage, that issue is one for the people them selves to resolve through

and the plaintiffs believe a different level of funding needs to be established. ey need to go either to the legislature or back to the people. >> the state also argues the plaintiffs are suing the wrong party by targeting governor arnold schwarzenegger. >> we made clear in our papers the governor does not have the constitutional authority to appropriate money. >> we sued the state of california and the governor. i think we're talking to the right people here. and these rather a silly argument. >> the lawsuit is now in the hands of judge steven brick. he's expected to decide if the case should go to trial by the end of january. in oakland, laura anthony, abc 7 news. >> the street preacher just convicted of kidnapping elizabeth smart could face life in prison when he is sentenced next march. yesterday a salt lake city jury rejicted brian mitchell's insanity defense. he kidnapped smart at knife point in 2002 and held her for nine months. she testified that during her ordeal, she was kept chained refer raped almost daily and forced to drink liquor and smoke pot, all t

the plaintiffs are the state themselves in the florida case, 20 of them. >> part of the health care system obviously needs to be fixed. yeah, expenses are out of control, and everyone's needs are not being met right now. but there are better solutions than giving up our freedom. >> reporter: that's a point courts could take months or years to decide. a senior obama administration says the department of justice most likely will appeal the case. a case that may end up in the supreme court. abc news, washington. >>> time 5:34. 21 degrees outside. president obama says diplomat richard holbrooke was true giant of american foreign policy. president went onto call him one tough son of a gun. he died last night after having heart surgery. holbrooke was hospitalize after colappetting -- collapsing at state department e played a key role in the afghan peace effort and brokered a peace agreement between the warring bosnian factions. >>> michael steele plans to run for a second term as the head of the republican national committee. this will be one of the toughest fights of his political career becaus

the plaintiff, a lesbian couple and a gay couple hoping what happens here will make it legal for them to marry. >> we want the court to up hold the district court ruling proposition 8 is unconstitutional. >> inside, three-judge panel must decide on two key points. whether supporters have legal standing to continue defending this case. and then, whether or not that lower court ruling this summer will stand. the judges questioned why the governor and attorney general were not defending prop 8. they question whether a deputy clerk near san francisco had legitimate handing to join this case. >> the deputy clerk is a commissioned officer, under california family code, she's a civil commissioner of marriage. >> she's not bound by the injunction, correct? >> that is correct. >> if not bound by the injunction, how does she have stand something. >> we dmot believe she does. >> if the judges decide to let proponents continue they'll are to decide larger issue. whether the 2008 initiative about violate the rights of gay and lesbian couples. and both sides are confident they will prevail. >> if w

the couple is among the plaintiffs behind the suit that challenged the law defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. that was narrowly passed in california in 2008. >> this proposition marginalized and stripped over a million gay and lesbian californians to access to what the supreme court of the united states has repeatedly characterized as the most important relation in life. >> reporter: cast of characters took their positions both inside and outside the court city of san francisco as the backdrop again. this time, each side was address the federal court decision from august that prop 8 was unconstitutional and discriminatory this three-judge panel of the ninth circuit court of appeals was ready for the attorneys, firing off tough questions throughout the two-hour hearing. >> you are not answering my question. we are take up other people's time. yes or no, did judge walker say your client, ms. vargas, was bound by the injunction? >> no your honor. >> reporter: those defending prop 8 say judge walk her no right to strike down the measure. >> the place for this question t

the plaintiffs are two businessmen whom the governor dismissed from the los angeles state building authority last spring. >>> a bay area woman is ready for a legal battle with the dmv. amber is suing claiming she got a nasty letter from the agency. she completed several years transitioning from a man to a woman. she went to the dmv on fell street in san francisco and filed a document for a license. soon thereafter she allegedly got a letter from the clerk who helped her. >> this essentially is telling me that i'm, you know, what i'm doing is evil, what i am is evil, that i'm going to hell, that i should die... >> it's inconceivable that they would allow someone who discriminated against to continue to have access to private information. >> now, no one at dmv or the state level office would respond to our requests for comment. >>> time now 6:05. let's get another check of weather and traffic. we have rain and drizzle, tracy. it's freezing in the studio. >> yeah. it's going to be a wet cloudy morning and again with fog out there we have delays on arrivals at sfo around an hour for the morning.

. >> courthouses have become all too familiar for the plaintiffs trying to overturn prop 8. their fate is now in the hands of this three-judge appeals court panel which must decide whether to uphold a district judge's ruling that the voters' 2008 ban on same sex marriage is unconstitutional. they will decide if sponsors even have the legal right to argue the case since the state's top lawyer has decided not to. >> did you ever seek an injunction or an order or anything suggesting that the attorney general should appear and appeal? >> no, we didn't. >> the judges also seem skeptical of an effort by imperial county to intervene but at least one worried about having no one to defend prop 8. >> and if the state doesn't defend it, it's just tossing in the towel. >> the judges are also reviewing the merits of the case, whether prop 8 violates the constitutional right of gays and lesbians. >> this proposition marginalized and stripped over a million gay and lesbian californians of access to what the supreme court of the united states has repeatedly charactered as the most important

. >> people have decided at what level of funding is required for the california schools. plaintiffselieve if a different level of funding needs to be established, they need to go to legislature or back to the people. >> the state also argues the plaintiffs are suing the wrong party by targeting governor arnold schwarzenegger. >> the governor does not have the constitutional authority to appropriate money. we sued the state of california and the governor, think think we're talking to the right people here. that is rather a silly argument. >> the lawsuit is in the hands of judge steven brick which decides if indicates goes to trial by the end of january. >>> the street creature just convicted of elizabeth smart could face life in prison. yesterday a salt lake city jury rejected brian mitchell's defense, he kidnapped smart from her home at knifepoint in 2002 and held her for nine months. she testified during her ordeal she was kept chained and raped daily and force order drink are and smoke pot violating her mormon faith. she says she feels vindicated by the verdict. >> this is an exam

how could the plaintiffs submit more than they did when the state said it's enough? 2008 should be the cutoff. >> well, there's a huge difference in not allowing formal tours and all that goes with that which is what the state specifically objected to, but what the state wanted to do and what the interveners on our side and others wanted to do was to bring forward evidence that proved that in the interim period of time there have been in fact significant improvements. as i sit here today, justice kennedy, you say it's conceded we're in constitutional violation. it is conceded we have been in constitutional violation. i don't know whether -- >> if you -- you can see that you have been in constitutional violation, then it seems to me that you have the burden of showing that is no longer the case. that's generally so in -- >> counsel, did you -- >> can i answer justice ginsberg's question first in >> yeah. >> i understand what would be in violation, but an order entered under the prisoner's reform act and it's clear it shifts the burden significantly on to the plaintiff

the plaintiffs are two business men who the governor dismissed from the los angeles state building authority last spring. >>> 4:35. >>> she went to the dmv for a license and ended up getting a nasty letter she claims was a personal attack. and now she is suing. she has completed several years transitioning from a man to a woman. she went to the dmv, filed a dockment and soon after, got a letter allegedly from the clerk who helped her. >> essentially telling me that i am, you know, what i am doing is evil, that i'm going to hell. that i should die. >> it's inconceivable that they would allow someone who discriminated against to continue to have access to public and private information. >> no one at the state level office would respond to request for comment. >>> president barack obama still trying to get many democrats onboard with his new tax cut proposal. house democrats say there will be no vote until tax cuts for wealthy are scaled back. the package is moving forward. >> reporter: the new tax cut proposal is up for debate many the senate, but house democrats refuse to budge. >> our caucus

. >> the aclu has filed briefs in this case, they have consulted with the attorneys for the plaintiffs in this case. >> reporter: the 79-year-old judge from los angeles who was recognized as a liberal said his impartiality is impact. the executive director of equality california agrees that he should hear the case. >> it's sort of an outrageous claim. first of all, his wife, who had been executive director of the aclu in southern california, they're not a party to this case. >> reporter: the panel was selected at random and includes federal judge michael hawkins, a moderate from arizona, and judge randy smith of idaho. some gay marriage supporters have questioned smith's impartiality since he attended brigham young university, which is a mormon school, considering the mormon church helped to fund the campaign to ban same-sex marriage in california. incoming governor jerry brown and kamala harris have said they will not defend prop 8 in court and one primary issue before the judges is whether the yes on 8 campaign even has a legal standing to defend the ban. he is optimistic monday's ru

there is very little left for the plaintiff at the end of the day. >> reporter: trial attorneys say the loans un clog the loans since no one is investing in cases that won't bring a big return. and early settlement are better for everyone. >> better for the client. better for the lawyer. better for the system. it's a sure thing when there is a settlement. and when you go to a jury, you don't know. >> firms that support legal lending say the biggest opponents are major corporations who can outlast almost any small company or individual in cases that might take years to resolve. while investments and lawsuits have gone up over the past decade the number of cases filed in court has gone down. in new york, rick leventhal fox news. >> bank of america today joined other financial institutions by cutting off service to the controversial wikileaks website. the bank is no longer offering financial services to wikileaks which has released thousands of pages of u.s. government documents. mastercard and paypal have already pulled the plug on payments to the site. bank of america's announcement come

we represent the plaintiffs. he court's questions with respect to the effort to get a mandate requiring the attorney general to appeal. that was simply a one-sentence denial. the court did not provide any further analysis. i also would like to just be certain their record is clear that permanent injunction that was issued by judge walker relates only to the official defendants, and persons under the control or supervision of those defendants. >> sewed judge walker was wrong about the register -- so if judge walker was wrong, and she is not bound by the injunction, correct? did a that is correct. she have standing? >> we do not believe she does. we believe the decision makes absolutely clear that individuals like mr. argus, even if she were the actual clerk, which he obviously is not, would not have standing. -- individuals like ms. vargas, even issue with actual clerk, which she obviously is not, would not have standing. >> what about clerks? day klerk's issued the licenses. are they found by the injunction? >> th

fate of the plaintiffs trying to over turn prop 8 is now in the hands of this 3 junk passengers court panel. judges will decide whether to uphold the district judge ruling that the initiative voters approved in 2008 to ban same sex marriage is unconstitutional. but first the panel has to decide if prop 8 sponsors even have the legal right to argue this case. since the state top lawyer has decided not to. >> did you ever seek an injunction or an order or anything about suggesting that the attorney general should appear and appeal. >> your honor we didn't. >>reporter: judges are also reviewing the matters of the case. whether prop 8 violates the constitutional right of gay and lesbian. >> this proposition marming national and stripped over 1 million gay and lesbian californians access to what the supreme court of the united states has repeatedly characterized as the most important relation in life. >> whether definite figures of marriage, that momentous issue is one for the people themselves to rae solve through the democratic process as they did in enacting proposition 8. or whet our c

. >> reporter: why the plaintiffs in the prop 8 case this morning that the tradition of marriage needs a major changes. >>> a high-speed pursuit after stolen car yields more than a parolee and explanation coming up. >>> homicide detectives in the east bay looking for leads in the tragic case. the victim, a 4-month-old baby. >>> last night's wind and rain has moved on. but are we done for the rest of the week? the second hour of "mornings on 2" starts right now. >>> this morning a crowd is f orming and growing outside the federal appeals court in san francisco. two hours from right now, a panel of judges will hear arguments about proposition 8. ktvu's kraig debro is out there wall street latest -- with the latest on what's going on. >> reporter: good morning, dave. we're at 7th and mission. many of these people are out here because they are opponents of proposition 8. many of them have come out as early as 4::00 a.m. to be out here to hear oral arguments which begins at -- begins at 10:00 in the morning. we talked to two plaintiffs in this case, katie and sandy. they got married back in

the plaintiffs are two businessmen whom the governor dismissed from the los angeles state building authority last spring. >>> today, a judge in alameda will hear arguments on whether two cases related to education funding should go forward. parents, civil rights groups and the california school board association have sued the governor. they say the state is failing to provide its students a level of education required by the state constitution. attorneys representing california say there is no such guarantee. >>> a driver telling the dmv of a sex change got a religious warning instead in the mail. now amber is suing. the person completed several years transitioning from a man to a woman. she went to the dmv on fell street filed a document and soon got a letter allegedly from the clerk who had helped her. >> essentially telling me that what i'm doing is evil, what i am is evil, that i'm going to hell, that i should die. >> it's inconceivable that they would allow someone who discriminated against to continue to have access to public -- private information. >> well, no one at this dmv or the s

established, they need to go either to the legislature or back to the people. >> the state also argued the plaintiffs the wrong party by targeting governor arnold schwarzenegger. >> we made clear in our papers the governor does not have the constitutional authority to appropriate money. >> we sued the state of california and the governor. i think we're talking to the right people here. and that's rather a silly argument. >> the lawsuit is now in the hands of judge steven brick. he's expected to decide if this case should go to trial by the end of january. in oakland, laura anthony, abc 7 news. >> the street preacher just sentenced for kidnaps elizabeth smart. he kidnaped 14-year-old elizabeth smart from her home at knife point in 2002 and held her nine months. she testified during her ordeal she was kept chained, raped almost daily and forced to drink liquor and smoke pot. smart now 23 says she feels vindicated by the verdict. >> not only this is an example that justice can be served in america but that it is possible to move on after something terrible has happened. >> smart is returning to a mormon

david levine says it's likely the panel will deem the plaintiffs unqualified to appeal and uphold thejudge's decision. federal states where the state to go to the u.s. supreme court. >> the likelihood is the u.s. supreme court is taking the case not because they really want to endorse what judge walker did but because they want to stop what judge walker did. >> professor levine says no matter what the decision is, the supreme court will want to review the case. we have posted extended clips from today's post hearing at www.ktvu.com. look for the top story. >>> california correction officials saying it came from a british company. california paid the company about $36,000 for sodium biopenthal. the american civil liberties union filed suit and argued it's illegal to use foreign- made drugs for execution. >>> sheriff's department wrapped up its investigation into an inmate's escape. he broke free from a department trying to shackle him last monday, he ran with the deputy in pursuit. outside, he took her gun and taser, then tased the deputy before fleeing the scene. deputies corners him

then there's an option later to separate out the suits and send each of the plaintiffs a separate wayrtrooms or to continue from there, especially if ings e moving toward global settlement. >> suarez: well, you mentioned this specific judge and new orleans. can we assume that the federal government, that that's where the federal government's case will be heard or is it where b.p. is headquartered? is it in washington, d.c.? and will it be heard by a judge or will a jury be impaneld? >> well, all those are questions to be worked out later. but, you know, from the start b.p., halliburton, and the other companies have said they'd love to have their trial in houston where their headquarters are, where their arican headquarters are and a place that would be more convenient for them. the united states government might prefer new orleans because that's the... that's where a lot of the other cases are being tried but it could go anywhere. >> suarez: john schwartz of the "new york times." thanks for joining us. >> happy to be here. >> ifill: still to come on the "newshour": c.e.o.s at the whit

. >> reporter: the two--hour hearing starts with the two sides arguing if the plaintiffs, prop 8 supporters have legal standing in this case. in san francisco, i'm john sasaki, ktvu channel 2 news. >>> and you can final the history of the proposition 8 case by going to ktvu.com and clicking on the prop 8 trial tab. ktvu also plans to have a live streaming broadcast of tomorrow morning's hearing. >>> tomorrow up in sacramento lawmakers are expected to open a special session looking to resolve of the current deficit in the state budget, but some legislators said they would rather wait until governor- elect jerry brown takes office. it's governor schwarzenegger who called for the session. this year's budget is running $6 billion short and legislative analysts predict an additional $19 billion deficit next year. >>> two violent crimes, two men dead in vallejo. a shooting in an alley between marin and pennsylvania streets. 25-year-old anthony castillo was shot and killed. another map was wounded. investigators say that man tonight is in dangerous condition at kaiser permanente medical center in

citizen entitled to all the protections of the constitution -- >> that was the case in which the plaintiffs included u.s. citizens, claiming the in a very perilous situation -- claiming that special privileges for illegitimate children to reunite with the mother were an unconstitutional discrimination against the fathers of such children, and it was a u.s. citizen fathers and children among the plaintiffs, and the court nonetheless said that there is no constitutional right to pass citizenship. this is a question of congress's judgment about who is believe should be made citizens, and one important fact congress looked at is connection to u.s. citizens, that is in turn a proxy for what the likely connection is. >> i understand that, but what you are doing is applying a lesser standard to gender discrimination that is ordinarily apply to gender discrimination. is there any reason to do that? i think that was the thrust of the question. >> that was the thrust of the question. >> does the same thing applied to racial discrimination? do you also apply a lesser standard to racial discrimination?

david levine says it's likely the panel will deem the plaintiffs unqualified to appeal and uphold thege's decision. federal states where the state to go to the u.s. supreme court. >> the likelihood is the u.s. supreme court is taking the case not because they really want to endorse what judge walker did but because they want to stop what judge walker did. >> professor levine says no matter what the decision is, the supreme court will want to review the case. we have posted extended clips from today's post hearing at www.ktvu.com. look for the top story. >>> california correction officials saying it came from a british company. california paid the company about $36,000 for sodium biopenthal. the american civil liberties union filed suit and argued it's illegal to use foreign- made drugs for execution. >>> sheriff's department wrapped up its investigation into an inmate's escape. he broke free from a department trying to shackle him last monday, he ran with the deputy in pursuit. outside, he took her gun and taser, then tased the deputy before fleeing the scene. deputies corners him fiv

one of the plaintiffs is michael alamy. he served 18 years before being discharged. >> just completely devastated. i hit rock bottom. i was actually suicidal for a little while. >> reporter: legislation has been introduced in the u.s. senate but no vote has been scheduled. the bill will die if it's not acted upon by the end of the year and if that happens, expect more legal challenges because other veterans discharged under don't ask don't tell say they will file additional lawsuits challenging that ban. >>> no new pot clubs will win approval in san jose any time soon. those that are in business will be allowed to keep their licenses. the city council today stopped short of imposing a ban. ktvu's robert handa has this report. >> stop the wait. >> reporter: medical marijuana supporters crowded into today's special session of the san jose city council. council members are trying to craft pop club regulations even as dispensaries -- >> i would believe that it would help in stopping the raids that are having the guidelines to fo

one of the plaintiffs is michael alamy. he served 18 years before being discharged. >> just completely devastated. i hit rock bottom. i was actually suicidal for a little while. >> reporter: legislation has been introduced in the u.s. senate but no vote has been scheduled. the bill will die if it's not acted upon by the end of the year and if that happens, expect more legal challenges because other veterans discharged under don't ask don't tell say they will file additional lawsuits challenging that ban. >>> no new pot clubs will win approval in san jose any time soon. those that are in business will be allowed to keep their licenses. the city council today stopped short of imposing a ban. ktvu's robert handa has this report. >> stop the wait. >> reporter: medical marijuana supporters crowded into today's special session of the san jose city council. council members are trying to craft pop club regulations even as dispensaries -- >> i would believe that it would help in stopping the raids that are having the guidelines to fo

the los angeles county office and they were both denied. so they argue that is an injury, a legal injury caused by proposition 8. >> i'm sorry. when i said plaintiffsant the proposition 8 supporters who are arguing this appeal, how do they prove they've been harmed by this? >> what they would say is they were interveners in the original trial, parties of the case so they're bound by judge walker's decision. they would say that harms them because they were the supporters of prop 8. they believe it's good policy. they put their money and time and effort into it and they think it's good for the state. and that's the problem. because standing requires something more particular than just a strong belief that something is good policy. you have to show that you have some particularize the harm that's directed to you that you're ordered to do or not do subpoenaing by the court in order to have standing by the defendant. >> so the panel listening to arguments today and come back with a decision in -- >> we think a couple months. >> when they do, does that mean their ruling goes into effect right away, their decision? >> no. we think the stay on same sex mar

there have been enormous developments -- >> the state has said that they do not want plaintiffs to tourthese facilities anymore. they do not want something to go beyond the date in 2008. it was at this stage that was urging -- we do not need any more discovery. we not want any more inspections. so how could they submit more than eight dead when the state said, that is enough, to the -- morris then invade did, when the re than they- mo did, when the state says specifically, that is enough. >> what the state wanted to do was bring forward evidence that proved that there have been significant improvements. justice kennedy conceded that we are in constitutional violation. we have been in constitutional violation. i do not know -- >> do you concede -- if you can see bet you have been a constitutional violation then it seems jimmy -- if dickensian that you have then in -- if you concede that you have been in constitutional violation, then it seems to me -- >> it is quite clear, the statute could not be any clearer, that the burden is shifted to the plaintiff. if potentially 46,000 inmates are

the court will sever section 1501 from the balance of the act and deny the plaintiff's request for injunctive relief. it's gone. so the part that says you have to buy insurance is gone. >> let me back up for a minute. because i think, you know, this is very complicated stuff. an expert i talked to said, elizabeth, imagine the three-legged stool and you chopped off one of the legs, falls over. that's what's going to happen to health care reform if this decision stands. >> because this is how it became practical to pay for it, that everybody had to buy insurance. >> exactly. again, to back up again, health care reform does this wonderful thing of getting insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. which is in this huge problem in this country. it's extremely expensive to insure someone who has cancer or heart disease or something like that. how do you pay for it? well, the way you pay for it is you tell healthy people who don't have insurance because they don't want insurance. you tell them, hey, buddy, you've got to get insurance. you've got to fork over the money for insurance or else w

the two plaintiffs are suing the restaurant claiming they were injured. >> we each reported to mr.amacho that we had been scalded on our faces by the escargo, exploding and spraying our faces and clothing with hot grease as soon as we began to eat it. >> reporter: the restaurant had something different to say of course. >> but they sat there for an hour and a half and continued on with their meals. so this scalding, i can't see where they were so scalded and scarred that they could sit there and endure an entire meal. >> reporter: the judge listened carefully but in the end -- >> we'll have the decision within two weeks in the mail. >> reporter: meanwhile, the restaurant reports that escargo sales have nearly doubled. it will be an additional two weeks now while the judge decides the case of the marin exploding escargo. in marin county, don ford, cbs 5. >>> well, not much sympathy from viewers posting online. dr. from kate, it's so patently obvious that they just want an easy buck. "to sue over something like this is ridiculous." >>> well, another injury claim by something explodin

reporter: the two hour hearing will start tomorrow at ten with the two sides arguing over whether the plaintiffsgal standing in this case. live in san francisco, ktvu channel 2news. >> three people are expected to learn their punishment tomorrow for torturing a teen. the sentencing two years after the 16-year-old kyle ramirez escape from the home wearing only shorts, and a chain. the teen had burns and bruises on his body. the boy's legal guardian and another man and his wife pled guilty to felonies including the use a deadly weapon, they face up to 30 years in prison. a 4th man convicted of torturing the boy will be sentenced next month. >>> a sex offender who assaulted a 2-year-old in fremont is due back in court tomorrow. he was arrested wednesday after witnesses saw him assaulting the girl in the aisle of a store. the 36-year-old has yet to enter a plea. >> despite the gray weather the mood was bright at a celebration in oakland this afternoon. ♪ [ music ] the celebration at slash pad park between grand and lake shore avenues. those who came out found a bit of shelter as well as tasty treats

the taxpayer plaintiffs. this lawsuit fails each of the three necessary elements. point is this, that not a cent of the respondents money goes to find religion. if you place an electronic path to track and monitor each cent that the respondent -- responded plaintiffs pay in tax, not a cent would go to any religious schools. >> their point is that this tax money does belong to the state. money does belong to the state. it is money that even at by the new engine and then says, either you pay it to the state or you use its purpose. it is the state's money and it is giving you the right to be directed. that is their argument. they can sustain their claim. >> there are two problems. with respect to injury, our point is that as you track the taxpayers, it does not fund any religious program. their complaint is not that the government was spending money that the tax payers -- that has been extracted and spent of the taxpayers, but that someone else's money is not being extracted and spend enough. the relevant language says for taxpayers standing to occur, it is his tax mo

those are before a florida judge where other states are the plaintiffs and from whom we expect a rulingter christmas. ship when the next couple of years, maybe, or so? jug the attorney general of virginia is trying to get the supreme court to take a direct appeal. there is a rule that allows the supreme court to take a case directly from a trial judge when it will get there anyway. but the supreme court does not like to do that because there are 20 of these and it wants all of them resolved and then go to the appellate court and then the supreme court soy are talking a process of two or three years. >>shepard: well ... shoot me. the judge is on every day, 8:00 eastern, 7:00 p.m. in eastern on the fox business network, the fastest growing business in television news. if you don't get the fox business network, demand it. demand it. that will help. a lot. you saw the little tripping incident with the jets game. jets, no touchdown in, what, 12, ten quarters? the assistant coach reached out and tripped the guy there is now something new. boom. boom. injured. we just got the strength and cond

first they will determine whether the plaintiffs have standing since it's not directly responsible forarriage laws. in the second hour the judges will hear arguments on the constitutionality of proposition 8. you can see that there are a handful of people already lining up to get seats in this argument this morning. you will hear from some of them coming up new at 6:00. that's the story here in the city. juliette, back to you. >> thank you, mark sayre. >>> an emergency budget session gets under way in sacramento today. governor schwarzenegger called the emergency session so lawmakers can try to figure out how to close a $6.1 billion deficit. the governor's spokesman warns ugly cuts are coming and it's only going to get worse. governor-elect jerry brown takes over next month facing a $19 billion deficit for the next fiscal year. >>> public schools bracing for new cuts it state funding. the "mercury news" reports school official across the state are bracing for a possible shortening of the school year by another week. plus layoffs of counselors librarians and also coaches. >>> 5734. a we

the plaintiffs are seeking $7500 for alleged negligence, pain and suffering. a decision is expected in the next two weeks. >>> well, a big problem with the benjamins. more than $1.1 billion worth of new $100 bills have been put in quarantine while officials tackle a printing problem that has rendered some of the notes useless. the bills represent the first run of a new high-tech note designed to combat counterfeiting by including a 3-d security ribbon. the flaw, a creasing problem during the printing process. the bills were scheduled for release early next year. the fed says most of the bills will eventually be put into circulation, but a new release date has not yet been set. >>> winter may still be two weeks away but you wouldn't know that in the northeast. an arctic blast has pushed the jetstream well into the deep south, in its place dumping several feet of snow. even florida bracing for freezing temperatures, which has farmers worried. >> there's going to be losses, it's just a matter of finding out how bad the losses are. that's something that we won't kn

in other words, what the plaintiffs said we don't need to sue these nonexecutive directors. they have done their honorable best to try and sort things out. the fact is they were deceived by the management, by some of the bankers, and by some of the professional advisers. and it was the nonexecutives directors of enron were, in my opinion, the finest board i ever served on. but we were deceived. and anybody in public life who goes on these big companies has to be able to trust somebody. if you can't trust the management, you shouldn't be on the board. you are entitled to trust your professional advisers. if they aren't trust worthy, that's not very good. and, thirdly, if i may just finish that side, and thirdly you have to use your brains to ask the right questions and try and understand it. but if you're deceived, it's very difficult. >> when was the last time you had anything to do with enron? >> it would be about 1995, i should think. >> what's your memory of what you felt like when all this came down? >> i thought that for the eight or so years i was on the board, the firs