Washington Post: "[The 9th Circuit's decision] came as a huge disappointment to the activists who sought to have Prop 8 declared unconstitutional. But it was a relief for the White House, meaning that a potentially divisive issue would not play out during the fall midterm elections. Democratic pollster Geoff Garin, who is close with top White House officials, said Obama has 'suffered through a season of distractions. He didn't need one more distraction.'"

"It’s been 40 days since U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Tauro ruled—in two cases—that the federal benefits provision in the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional . . . the government has not yet decided whether it will appeal."

"From the dawn of the American Revolution, which was preached from the pulpits, to the abolitionist preachers who rallied the antislavery cause, to the religious leaders who inspired the civil rights movement, religion and morality have always played a prominent and entirely proper role in American political life,' he wrote."

Robert W. Wood writing at Forbes: "[T]he biggest tax issues often come up on the unraveling of a marriage. Whether a couple is heterosexual or gay, the tax aspects of unraveling a relationship are very different inside and outside marriage. You might be shocked how these tax rules work."

National Review Online editorial: "In other words, it’s not simply that Walker was overriding the votes of the more than 7 million Californians who voted for Proposition 8. He also tried to make himself essentially a one-man federal judiciary by preventing meaningful review of his ruling by the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court . . . We won’t venture a prediction here whether the Supreme Court will ultimately misinterpret the Constitution and invent a right to same-sex marriage. But under the orderly appellate review that the Ninth Circuit order allows, we hope very much that Walker endures a fourth and final reversal."

"Should the Supreme Court step unwarily into the firestorm of the same-sex marriage issue, with a ruling that upholds the radicalism of Judge Walker (even if rewritten in less inflammatory terms), it will go down in history not as Brown-like 'statesmanship,' but as Roe-like usurpation. And this for the simple reasons that no plausible connection can be made between same-sex marriage and the principles of the Constitution . . . "

The Christian Institute: "[T]he Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a religious liberty organisation which is involved in the case, welcomed the ruling. ADF's [Jim Campbell] said: 'It made no sense to impose a radical change in marriage on the people of California before all appeals on their behalf are heard, so the Ninth Circuit’s decision is clearly the right call.'"

Michael Foust reports at Baptist Press: "'It made no sense to impose a radical change in marriage on the people of California before all appeals on their behalf are heard, so the Ninth Circuit’s decision is clearly the right call,' said [Jim Campbell], an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, which is involved in the case. 'Refusing to stay the decision would only have created more legal confusion surrounding any same-sex unions entered while the appeal is pending. This case has just begun.'"

OneNewsNow: "'Refusing to stay the decision only created more legal confusion surrounding any sort of unions that would have been created while the appeal was pending,' [ADF Attorney Daniel Blomberg] explains, 'so the Ninth Circuit clearly made the right call . . . This case has just begun, and ADF and the rest of the legal team are confident the right of Americans to protect marriage in their state constitutions will ultimately be upheld.'"

News By the Second: "Governor Schwarzenegger has issued a statement in support of overturning Prop 8 and does not believe the state should pursue an appeal. Private groups, such as the Alliance Defense Fund and the ProtectMarriage.com organization who sponsored the bill, are continuing to fight to keep same-sex marriage from becoming legal."

Washington Blade: 'It made no sense to impose a radical change in marriage on the people of California before all appeals on their behalf are heard,' said [Jim Campbell], litigation staff counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. 'Refusing to stay the decision would only have created more legal confusion surrounding any same-sex unions entered while the appeal is pending . . . ADF and the rest of the legal team is confident that the right of Americans to protect marriage in their state constitutions will ultimately be upheld.'"

Catholic News Agency: "ADF litigation staff counsel [Jim Campbell] added that it 'made no sense to impose a radical change in marriage on the people of California before all appeals on their behalf are heard, so the 9th Circuit’s decision is clearly the right call.'"

SCOTUSblog: "The Ninth Circuit Court on Tuesday morning ordered an expedited review of a second appeal on California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage — a plea by local officials in Imperial County, Calif., to enter the case in order to defend the ballot measure’s constitutionality. The motions panel of the Circuit Court, in a two-page order, set the county’s appeal to be heard at argument along with the appeal by the backers of Proposition 8 — that is, during the week of Dec. 6. The written briefing schedule will be the same in both cases, concluding on Nov. 1."

Christian Today: "The conservative and religious communities are fighting for the right to vote on the issue of same-sex marriage – rather than allowing legislature or the courts to rule on the issue. At the same time, they are also trying to defend their religious liberties."

Claudia Cowan writing at Fox News Insider: "[Walker] said an appeal may hinge on getting Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger or Attorney General Jerry Brown to join the defense team, which is highly unlikely . . . 'If the Prop 8 proponents don’t have standing, that means that millions of California voters have no one to represent or defend them . . . so we feel very confident about this standing issue and believe, at the end of the day, the 9th Circuit is going to agree that we do have standing,' says [Austin Nimocks], with the Alliance Defense Fund."

ADF attorney Daniel Blomberg appeared on the Rob Schilling Show to discuss the Cal. marriage litigation. | MP3 10:08 mins | Among others, the broadcast includes discussion of the following recurring questions. 1. Should the state get out of the marriage business? 2. A recent study showed that homosexual parents do just as well as biological parents. How do you respond? 3. It doesn't matter if the majority opposes marriage redefinition. If it violates the Constitution, the judge can overrule the vote? How do you respond?

ADF attorney Doug Napier appeared on the Hugh Hewitt Show yesterday to provide an update on the 9th Circuit stay. | MP3 7:28 mins

Joseph Farah writing at WorldNetDaily: "Glenn Beck may hate socialism and communism, but he showed he shares a materialistic worldview with Marx, Engels and Saul Alinksy in a recent conversation with Bill O'Reilly . . . Beck doesn't care about one of the most blatant and despicable examples of judicial tyranny in the history of our country. He doesn't care about the institution of marriage and its 5,000-year history . . . [M]aterialists like Beck don't understand how upsetting God's order can have far-reaching effects much more devastating even than a tax increase. I would suggest that many of the dire economic problems we face today are a direct result not of government fiscal policies but of government social engineering."

WorldNetDaily: "Very simply, most people in today's America, including conservatives, are afraid of 'the gay issue.' Although most know deep down there's something wrong with homosexuality, they don't want to be called 'intolerant,' 'bigoted,' 'hateful' or 'homophobic.' Even though they don't really want open gays in the military, and disapprove of same-sex marriage, are repulsed by Obama's appointment of notorious gay activist Kevin Jennings as the nation's 'safe schools' czar, and on and on – the 'gay issue' no longer registers on their radar screen as one on which they should take a public stand."

". . . [D]espite their massive advantage in resources, Olson and Boies have lost to Cooper and his team on every issue that has been decided by any court other than Walker’s."