From the Brief:
But regardless of the level of scrutiny, Proponents cannot meet their burden to demonstrate that Prop. 8 serves a single compelling, important, or even legitimate state interest. Like the state constitutional amendment adopted by initiative and struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), Prop. 8 repealed the constitutional protection against “discrimination based on sexual orientation,” and put gay and lesbian individuals “in a solitary class” with respect to marriage. Id. at 627. Prop. 8 is therefore an irrational measure that targeted only gay and lesbian Californians and purposeful stripped them—and only them—of their fundamental state constitutional right to marry, in violation of equal protection.
Plaintiffs will demonstrate at trial that discriminatory laws such as Prop. 8, “once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress.” Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 579 (2003). Because Prop. 8 violates the fundamental liberties guaranteed by our Constitution, it cannot stand.”
Update: Date corrected.