Brief Memorandum to the Justice with Regard to the Case of Perry v Schwarzenegger



A decision will be made as to how Justice Robert’s will rule in this case. The answer given will be based on the knowledge we have concerning the work experience and beliefs of Justice Robert’s background. The experience and legal work of Justice Robert will also be reviewed in the process in bid to affirm why we believe that he will vote in a certain way as pertains to the case of discussion. In bid to garner an in depth understanding of Justice Roberts rulings and the bearing his experience will have on the case in question, prior Supreme Cases that he has ruled as pertains to equal protection will also be reviewed. Statement of Case Facts The facts of the case involve Arnold Schwarzenegger who is the official County Governor of California and Perry who represents a lesbian couple that has been denied marriage licenses on the basis of Proposition 8. The plaintiffs have adopted four children and they would like to get married so the children can be accorded benefits accorded to other children of heterosexual couples. The plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 which was voter enacted on November 2008 hence amending the California Constitution. Proposition 8 asserts that California will only recognize marriage between a man and a woman. The plaintiffs litigation is based on the notion that proposition 8 denied them due process and equal protection which is divergent to the Fourteenth Amendment hence the defendants violate2. With this genesis, this paper will be aimed at writing a memorandum as to how Justice Roberts should rule in the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger. The propositions in this paper will be anchored on reviewing Justice Roberts’ work experience, beliefs and previous rulings on equal protection to aid in giving an opinion of how he will rule in this case. Consequently, decision making theories of the judicial system will also be reviewed in the process and reference made to the case and how we expect Justice Robert to rule on this particular case. Argument Background information on Justice Roberts: work experience and beliefs Justice John G. Roberts was born in 1955 in Buffalo New York and in a religious conservative family. Just like his family, Justice John Roberts was and is still a strong Catholic who lives in belief of the Catholic ordinances. Justice John Roberts is a very outspoken icon in the American Justice system considering his repeated appointment into higher offices of the American Law. Justice John Roberts is remembered as a very close legal intimate of George W Bush after having received Presidential nomination to the US Supreme Court and in the position of Chief Justice in 2005. Justice John Roberts is also known for his attempts to reverse the proposals and Supreme Court’s approval of separation of the church from the state. I8in addition, Justice Roberts is demonstrated as one of the American legal practitioners who respect the American Constitution and would always live to protect and uphold it alongside any Federal approved jurisdictions. President George W. Bush had no support for homosexual marriage holding that heterosexuality was God’s wish for human being and had to be codified full in one way or the other (WND). Considering the relationship between Justice John Roberts and the former US President, one can predict the likely stand and ruling of Justice John Roberts on issues concerning homosexuality. For Justice Roberts to qualify for the office nomination by President Bush, it meant that they had a lot in common and that Bush had great obsession on Robert’s interpretation of the law. It can also be argued that Chief Justice of nay state acts as one of the eminent personalities who can advice the president on the