The Iowa Supreme Court will issue its ruling on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage tomorrow morning. Iowa apparently has no residency requirement for marriage.

The opinion will likely be posted here around 8:30 a.m. Central Time.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the lawsuits that have been filed against Prop 8. The lawsuits made me uneasy. I wrote:

I don’t think this is a good idea. Not only is it awful public relations, but it will probably lose.

Well, I’ve changed my mind. I actually changed my mind a week or two ago. Here’s why.

First, I’ve decided that it’s not necessarily a losing proposition after all. The cramped legal reasoning I linked to on volokh.com ignores the following: if a bare majority of Californians can vote to strip a constitutionally protected right from one minority group, what’s to stop them from stripping a constitutionally protected right from another minority group? One of the points of a constitution is to prevent majorities from taking away certain rights of minority groups. Simply put: if a majority can take away your rights, then you have no rights to begin with. An unprotected right is an oxymoron.

Second, it might not be awful public relations, and even if it is, who the hell cares? If the California Supreme Court throws out Prop 8, what can the anti-marriage crowd do? The state legislature won’t ban same-sex marriage; it’s already twice passed bills to legalize it, only to be vetoed by Schwarzenegger because he said, nonsensically, that the decision should be left to the courts. There’s not going to be a Federal Marriage Amendment to ban same-sex marriage nationwide: if it couldn’t even muster the necessary 2/3 of the House and Senate under Republican control, it’s not going to happen under Democratic control. (More here. I disagree with Andrew Sullivan on this. His reader is right.)

There’s still an iffy chance of success. But it’s possible the California Supreme Court will make the right decision. I hope so.