The Campaign for California Families (CCF) has a reputation as a rival to Yes on 8, the organization of the official Prop. 8 proponents. The proponents are defendant-intervenors in Perry v. Schwarzenneger, the federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Prop. 8. In June, CCF sought to intervene in the case, on the grounds that Yes on 8 would not adequately represent its alleged interest in upholding Prop. 8. Proponents have opposed CCF's attempts to intervene in both Strauss v. Horton and Perry.
Judge Vaugn Walker denied CCF's motion to intervene, and CCF appealed. Now a 9th Circuit panel has affirmed in part, and denied in part, Judge Walker's order. Writing the panel's opinion, Judge McKeown has ruled that CCF is not entitled to intervene.
(Notice the part of the ruling that the Alliance Defense Fund presents at ADF Alliance Alert. ADF here relies on the ruling to misleadingly suggest that CCF and the Prop. 8 proponents have no real differences in goals about the legal status of same-sex relationships.)
11/20/09 Daily Journal, page 5 (subscription required):
Andrew Pugno, an attorney for the official proponents of Proposition 8, said he was "pleased" with the decision, saying it wouldn't be "fitting that [CCF] should have full status on the defense of [Prop. 8]. CCF opposed Prop. 8 at first and resisted our efforts to qualify it for the ballot. They wanted to go beyond what we thought voters would support and roll back gay rights with a much more aggressive measure.