But before that, there is another order of business. Seems master Bigot William Tam wants his testimony STRICKEN. Originally he tried to pull out because he "feared for his safety", but he testified anyway. Now, the defense is arguing on some basis yet to be heard that this testimony should be stricken. Of course he makes the case beautifully that opposition to GLBT rights is sheer wingnuttery.
We'll see what happens. Of course, closing arguments don't mean a decision. We're still in the waiting game.
So what happens if Dr. Tam’s testimony is taken out? Dr. Tam was powerful evidence that Prop 8 was driven by animus and a hatred of homosexuals, which would be enough to strike Prop 8 — even under the more lenient “rational basis” grounds set up in Romer v. Evans (1996.) But while Dr. Tam’s testimony is damning and it should be kept in, there was a whole lot of other evidence that our side presented. In fact, when it came time for the defense to produce their “experts,” there wasn’t a whole lot of reason they could provide.