<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' xmlns:georss='http://www.georss.org/georss' xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5550389171341329480</id><updated>2011-07-08T02:31:06.441-07:00</updated><title type='text'>The Ignorant Heterosexual</title><subtitle type='html'>This blog is dedicated to
Leonard Matlovich (1943–1988)
and
Hank Wilson (1947-2008)</subtitle><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://theignorantheterosexual.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5550389171341329480/posts/default?max-results=100'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://theignorantheterosexual.blogspot.com/'/><link rel='hub' href='http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/'/><author><name>Ken McPherson</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/18168987028053740568</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>12</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>100</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5550389171341329480.post-6901740698327428256</id><published>2010-01-28T12:59:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-28T13:00:06.680-08:00</updated><title type='text'>Prop 8 Transcripts - Day Twelve</title><content type='html'>1 P R O C E E D I N G S&lt;br /&gt;2 JANUARY 27, 2010 8:33 a.m.&lt;br /&gt;3&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Very well, good morning, counsel.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Counsel greet the Court.)&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Good morning, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE WITNESS: Good morning, sir.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Now, you understand that you're still&lt;br /&gt;9 under oath?&lt;br /&gt;10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: The oath that you took yesterday&lt;br /&gt;12 applies to this testimony as well; is that clear?&lt;br /&gt;13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: Proceed, Mr. Boies.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;16 We have a binder to hand out.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Whereupon, binders were tendered&lt;br /&gt;18 to the Court and the witness.)&lt;br /&gt;19 DAVID BLANKENHORN,&lt;br /&gt;20 called as a witness for the Defendants herein, having been&lt;br /&gt;21 previously sworn, resumed the stand and testified further as&lt;br /&gt;22 follows:&lt;br /&gt;23 CROSS-EXAMINATION RESUMED&lt;br /&gt;24 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Good morning, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2839&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Good morning, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I'm going to try this morning to start with some things&lt;br /&gt;3 that perhaps we can agree on.&lt;br /&gt;4 You agree that marriage is an important public&lt;br /&gt;5 good, as you use that term, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And could you explain for the record what you mean by a&lt;br /&gt;8 "public good"?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I mean that it serves important public purposes, and&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage makes a distinctive contribution to society.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And you believe that marriage is something that benefits&lt;br /&gt;12 both the participants in the marriage, the couple that are&lt;br /&gt;13 married, as well as any children that the couple may raise,&lt;br /&gt;14 correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And you believe that legalizing gay and lesbian marriage&lt;br /&gt;17 would benefit gay and lesbian couples as well as any children&lt;br /&gt;18 they raise, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I believe it would be likely to do so.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Well, you believe it would be almost certain to do so,&lt;br /&gt;21 correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I do believe it is almost certainly true that gay and&lt;br /&gt;23 lesbian couples and their children would benefit by having&lt;br /&gt;24 gay marriage.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, you have said that, "If adopting same-sex marriage"&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2840&lt;br /&gt;1 -- and I'm going to refer here to your book The Future of&lt;br /&gt;2 Marriage. And you have got that at tab 13 of the binder that&lt;br /&gt;3 I handed out, and I'm going to be looking at page 20.&lt;br /&gt;4 You can read along with me, if you would like. Tab&lt;br /&gt;5 13 of the binder, page 20.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And at the top of the page you write:&lt;br /&gt;8 "If adopting same-sex marriage was likely&lt;br /&gt;9 to be part of a larger societal shift leading&lt;br /&gt;10 to better marriages, less divorce and less&lt;br /&gt;11 unwed childbearing or, more modestly, if it&lt;br /&gt;12 seemed likely that adopting same-sex marriage&lt;br /&gt;13 would not significantly undermine efforts to&lt;br /&gt;14 renew our wider marriage culture, I am&lt;br /&gt;15 confident that most marriage advocates would&lt;br /&gt;16 favor its adoption. I know I would. But if&lt;br /&gt;17 adopting same-sex marriage is likely to&lt;br /&gt;18 impede that larger goal, I would be against&lt;br /&gt;19 it."&lt;br /&gt;20 And that's what you believe, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And in saying that if adopting same-sex marriage would&lt;br /&gt;23 impede that goal, you would be against it, what you are&lt;br /&gt;24 saying is that you believe that the rights of gays and&lt;br /&gt;25 lesbians should take second place to the needs of an existing&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2841&lt;br /&gt;1 social institution, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Well, maybe you could point me to the sentence.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Sure. It's actually the very next sentence. You say:&lt;br /&gt;4 "Those who disagree with me can charge&lt;br /&gt;5 that I am proposing a moral metric in which,&lt;br /&gt;6 regardless of the ultimate policy decision on&lt;br /&gt;7 same-sex marriage, the rights of gays and&lt;br /&gt;8 lesbians take second place to the needs of an&lt;br /&gt;9 existing social institution."&lt;br /&gt;10 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And you say that the charge would be accurate, correct?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And is it fair --&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I was trying to say that from the point -- the answer to&lt;br /&gt;16 your question is yes. I just only might point out that I did&lt;br /&gt;17 say that -- I was saying I understood and accepted the&lt;br /&gt;18 validity of the argument of those who disagreed with me.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Yes, I appreciate that, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Is it fair to summarize, to say that your choice&lt;br /&gt;21 would be to choose marriage as a public good over the rights&lt;br /&gt;22 and needs of gay and lesbian adults and those same-sex&lt;br /&gt;23 couples who are raising children?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, again, I would like you -- I'm not trying to be&lt;br /&gt;25 difficult, but I would just like to see the sentence that you&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2842&lt;br /&gt;1 are referring to.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Sure. The very bottom of the page, the last sentence.&lt;br /&gt;3 You write:&lt;br /&gt;4 "To the degree that I must choose, with&lt;br /&gt;5 some anguish I will choose children's&lt;br /&gt;6 collective rights and needs. I will choose&lt;br /&gt;7 marriage as a public good over the rights and&lt;br /&gt;8 needs of gay and lesbian adults and those&lt;br /&gt;9 same-sex couples who are raising children."&lt;br /&gt;10 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Mr. Boies, the whole purpose of my book was to&lt;br /&gt;13 argue --&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. I'm really not asking for the whole purpose of your&lt;br /&gt;15 book, and --&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I would just like to say that the sentences you're --&lt;br /&gt;17 it's an important point.&lt;br /&gt;18 The sentences that you are citing are an argument&lt;br /&gt;19 about what I call goods in conflict. I'm one of those&lt;br /&gt;20 persons who do not believe that this issue is a case of good&lt;br /&gt;21 versus bad. I believe and have gone to great lengths to say&lt;br /&gt;22 that I believe that there are valid arguments on both sides&lt;br /&gt;23 of the issue, and my book is an attempt to explore that.&lt;br /&gt;24 And these sentences you are selecting are examples&lt;br /&gt;25 of me exploring that, what I'm calling goods in conflict.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2843&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And I thought you --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. It just helps to know what I'm trying to argue here.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And I thought you would be agreeable to what I'm&lt;br /&gt;4 pointing out to you. I just --&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I am agreeable. I'm just providing a context so that&lt;br /&gt;6 people can understand, and you can understand, why these&lt;br /&gt;7 sentences are stated as they are.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: All right. Let's have a question and&lt;br /&gt;9 an answer.&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. In fact, in your book, The Future of Marriage, you list&lt;br /&gt;12 approximately 20 possible benefits of allowing gay and&lt;br /&gt;13 lesbian marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes, sir. Those benefits that I listed in the book were&lt;br /&gt;15 a result of a collaborative discussion that I led and they&lt;br /&gt;16 involved advocates of both sides of the position. And we&lt;br /&gt;17 tried to come up with -- over time we tried to come up with a&lt;br /&gt;18 list of the likely or possible benefits of gay marriage, the&lt;br /&gt;19 likely or possible disadvantages. And so I enumerated those&lt;br /&gt;20 in that chapter of my book.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Now, if you turn to page 203 of your book, again&lt;br /&gt;22 behind tab 13, it is the page with the heading "Goods In&lt;br /&gt;23 Conflict," and then the subheading "Positive Consequences."&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, what I'm going to do is I'm going to ask you just&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2844&lt;br /&gt;1 which of these you agree with, if any, because as I&lt;br /&gt;2 understand it, this was sort of a group thought experiment&lt;br /&gt;3 that was going on.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And you put down on a white board a lot of ideas that&lt;br /&gt;6 people had, both for and against gay marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Okay. And you did not necessarily agree with any&lt;br /&gt;9 particular idea; you just wrote it down if it was brought up&lt;br /&gt;10 by somebody, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Well, there was a process, but the substance of what&lt;br /&gt;12 you're saying is correct.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay. So what I want to know -- because you are the&lt;br /&gt;14 witness here, I want to know which, if any, of these positive&lt;br /&gt;15 consequences of gay and lesbian marriage you agree with?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, sir. And I only wish to say that with each of them&lt;br /&gt;17 the issue that we discussed was likely; not definite, but&lt;br /&gt;18 likely.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Likely?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. So --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Because these are all speculative in the sense that they&lt;br /&gt;23 are an attempt to predict something that will happen in the&lt;br /&gt;24 future.&lt;br /&gt;25 It's an important point. And so the issue is&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2845&lt;br /&gt;1 likely --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn. Mr. Blankenhorn, you may have&lt;br /&gt;3 important points to make.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I think I do actually.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. I know you do. I know you do. But this is not a&lt;br /&gt;6 debate.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. No, sir. I'm trying to have you understand --&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. I'm trying to ask you a question.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. -- the nature of what I wrote in the book.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. I'm trying to ask you a question, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. I'm doing my very best to answer your question.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: All right. Let's not interrupt one&lt;br /&gt;13 another.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, could I ask that the&lt;br /&gt;15 witness be instructed to listen to the question, answer my&lt;br /&gt;16 question and not make a statement that is not responsive to&lt;br /&gt;17 the question, even if he believes it's important.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE WITNESS: I don't need such instruction.&lt;br /&gt;19 That's what -- my intention is to do exactly that.&lt;br /&gt;20 THE COURT: Mr. Blankenhorn, one of the&lt;br /&gt;21 instructions that the Court gives to the jury when an expert&lt;br /&gt;22 witness testifies is to consider the witness's background,&lt;br /&gt;23 training and experience; the testimony that the witness&lt;br /&gt;24 gives; the reasons that the witness gives for the opinions&lt;br /&gt;25 that he expresses; and all of the other evidence in the case.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2846&lt;br /&gt;1 And all of that other evidence, of course, includes&lt;br /&gt;2 the demeanor of the witnesses. And the demeanor of the&lt;br /&gt;3 witnesses is sometimes gauged, importantly, by the&lt;br /&gt;4 responsiveness of the witness to the questions that he's&lt;br /&gt;5 asked.&lt;br /&gt;6 So with that in mind, because I'm sure you would&lt;br /&gt;7 not want your demeanor on the stand to be a negative factor&lt;br /&gt;8 in your testimony, I would urge you to pay close attention to&lt;br /&gt;9 Mr. Boies's questions and to answer them directly,&lt;br /&gt;10 succinctly. Then to the extent additional elaboration should&lt;br /&gt;11 be brought out, your very able counsel, I'm sure, Mr. Cooper,&lt;br /&gt;12 will be able to do that.&lt;br /&gt;13 So bear that in mind.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I will.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: All right. Fine.&lt;br /&gt;16 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. So, Mr. Blankenhorn, could you just go down this list of&lt;br /&gt;18 possible positive consequences and tell me which, if any, you&lt;br /&gt;19 personally agree with?&lt;br /&gt;20 And just tell me by number, because these are all&lt;br /&gt;21 numbered, and I think it will go faster if you simply tell me&lt;br /&gt;22 which of the numbers here, if any, you personally agree with.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. You want me to read each one silently to myself and then&lt;br /&gt;24 tell you "One, yes." Is that what you want me to do?&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. What I -- read it silently to yourself and then just&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2847&lt;br /&gt;1 tell me which of these you agree with. Give me the numbers&lt;br /&gt;2 of the items that you agree with.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. For each of the 23?&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Number one, yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 Number two, yes.&lt;br /&gt;8 Number three, yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Number four, yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Number five, yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Number six, yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Number seven, yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Number eight, no.&lt;br /&gt;14 Number nine, no.&lt;br /&gt;15 Number 10, yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 Number 11, yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Number 12, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;18 Number 13, no.&lt;br /&gt;19 Number 14, no.&lt;br /&gt;20 Number 15, yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Number 16, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;22 Number 17, no.&lt;br /&gt;23 Number 18, yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 Number 19, yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Number 20, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2848&lt;br /&gt;1 Number 21, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;2 Number 22, yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Number 23, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;5 Now, I would like to publish this list and go&lt;br /&gt;6 through it, and both identify those that you agree with and&lt;br /&gt;7 then ask you some questions about some of the ones that you&lt;br /&gt;8 said you disagreed with.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Can I publish this up on the board?&lt;br /&gt;10 (Document displayed)&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: Can you make it a little more readable&lt;br /&gt;12 by making some of the ones we are going to deal with first&lt;br /&gt;13 larger?&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. The first point that you agreed with was that:&lt;br /&gt;16 "Same-sex marriage would meet the stated&lt;br /&gt;17 needs and desires of lesbian and gay couples&lt;br /&gt;18 who want to marry. In so doing, it would&lt;br /&gt;19 improve the happiness and well-being of gay&lt;br /&gt;20 and lesbian individuals, couples and family&lt;br /&gt;21 members."&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I said "many," "many gay and lesbian individuals,&lt;br /&gt;23 couples and family members."&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I misread that. Let me just read it to be clear:&lt;br /&gt;25 "Same-sex marriage would meet the stated&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2849&lt;br /&gt;1 needs and desires of lesbian and gay couples&lt;br /&gt;2 who want to marry. In so doing, it would&lt;br /&gt;3 improve the happiness and well-being of many&lt;br /&gt;4 gay and lesbian individuals, couples, and&lt;br /&gt;5 family members."&lt;br /&gt;6 The second positive consequence that you agreed&lt;br /&gt;7 with was:&lt;br /&gt;8 "Gay marriage would extend a wide range&lt;br /&gt;9 of the natural and practical benefits of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage to many lesbian and gay couples and&lt;br /&gt;11 their children."&lt;br /&gt;12 The third positive consequence that you agreed with&lt;br /&gt;13 was:&lt;br /&gt;14 "Extending the right to marry to same-sex&lt;br /&gt;15 couples would probably mean that a higher&lt;br /&gt;16 proportion of gays and lesbians would choose&lt;br /&gt;17 to enter into committed relationships."&lt;br /&gt;18 The fourth positive consequence that you agreed&lt;br /&gt;19 with was that:&lt;br /&gt;20 "Same-sex marriage would likely&lt;br /&gt;21 contribute to more stability and to&lt;br /&gt;22 longer-lasting relationships for committed&lt;br /&gt;23 same-sex couples."&lt;br /&gt;24 The fifth positive consequence that you agreed with&lt;br /&gt;25 was that:&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2850&lt;br /&gt;1 "Same-sex marriage might lead to less&lt;br /&gt;2 sexual promiscuity among lesbians and&lt;br /&gt;3 (perhaps especially) gay men."&lt;br /&gt;4 The sixth positive consequence that you agreed with&lt;br /&gt;5 was that:&lt;br /&gt;6 "Same-sex marriage would signify greater&lt;br /&gt;7 social acceptance of homosexual love and the&lt;br /&gt;8 worth and validity of same-sex intimate&lt;br /&gt;9 relationships."&lt;br /&gt;10 The seventh positive consequence which you agreed&lt;br /&gt;11 with was that:&lt;br /&gt;12 "Gay marriage would be a victory for the&lt;br /&gt;13 worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion. It&lt;br /&gt;14 would likely decrease the number of those in&lt;br /&gt;15 society who tend to be viewed warily as&lt;br /&gt;16 "other" and increase the number who are&lt;br /&gt;17 accepted as part of "us." In that respect,&lt;br /&gt;18 gay marriage would be a victory for, and&lt;br /&gt;19 another key expansion of, the American idea."&lt;br /&gt;20 And I have read those correctly, have I not, sir?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And then items eight and nine you disagreed with,&lt;br /&gt;23 correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And then item 10 you agreed to, and that reads:&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2851&lt;br /&gt;1 "Gay marriage might contribute over time&lt;br /&gt;2 to a decline in anti-gay prejudice as well&lt;br /&gt;3 as, more specifically, a reduction in&lt;br /&gt;4 anti-gay hate crimes."&lt;br /&gt;5 And the 11th positive consequence and, again, one&lt;br /&gt;6 that you agreed with, was that -- number 11 reads:&lt;br /&gt;7 "Because marriage is a wealth-creating&lt;br /&gt;8 institution, extending marriage rights to&lt;br /&gt;9 same-sex couples would probably increase&lt;br /&gt;10 wealth accumulation and lead to higher&lt;br /&gt;11 standards for" --&lt;br /&gt;12 A. "Living standards."&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;14 "...higher living standards for these&lt;br /&gt;15 couples, as well as help reduce welfare costs&lt;br /&gt;16 (by promoting family economic self&lt;br /&gt;17 sufficiency) and decrease economic&lt;br /&gt;18 inequality."&lt;br /&gt;19 And did I read those correctly with your help?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Number 12 you said you didn't know.&lt;br /&gt;22 Numbers 13 and 14 you disagreed with, correct?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Number 15, which you agreed with, reads:&lt;br /&gt;25 "Extending marriage rights to same-sex&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2852&lt;br /&gt;1 couples would probably reduce the proportion&lt;br /&gt;2 of homosexuals who marry persons of the&lt;br /&gt;3 opposite sex and, thus, would likely reduce&lt;br /&gt;4 instances of marital unhappiness and&lt;br /&gt;5 divorce."&lt;br /&gt;6 And did I read that correctly?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And number 16, which you said you didn't know, and&lt;br /&gt;9 number 17, which you disagreed with, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And then number 18, which you agreed with reads:&lt;br /&gt;12 "By increasing the number of married&lt;br /&gt;13 couples who might be interested in adoption&lt;br /&gt;14 and foster care, same-sex marriage might well&lt;br /&gt;15 lead to fewer children growing up in state&lt;br /&gt;16 institutions and more growing up in loving&lt;br /&gt;17 adoptive and foster families."&lt;br /&gt;18 And number 19, which you also agreed with reads:&lt;br /&gt;19 "Adopting same-sex marriage would likely&lt;br /&gt;20 be accompanied by a wide-ranging and&lt;br /&gt;21 potentially valuable national discussion of&lt;br /&gt;22 marriage's benefits, status and future."&lt;br /&gt;23 And did I read those items correctly?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And am I correct that items 20 and 21 you don't know&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2853&lt;br /&gt;1 whether you agree with or not?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And then number 22 is one that you do agree with, which&lt;br /&gt;4 is that:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Gay marriage would probably expand the&lt;br /&gt;6 possibility and likelihood of new scholarly&lt;br /&gt;7 research on a variety of topics related to&lt;br /&gt;8 marriage and parenting."&lt;br /&gt;9 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I'm absolutely certain of that one.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And then number 23, you don't know, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Now, I would like to ask you to go back to number 14,&lt;br /&gt;14 which you said you disagreed with, and I want to ask you&lt;br /&gt;15 about certain parts of that and see whether there is any part&lt;br /&gt;16 of that that you agree with.&lt;br /&gt;17 There is a reference here to "marriage lite&lt;br /&gt;18 schemes," such as civil unions and domestic partnerships; do&lt;br /&gt;19 you see that?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And there is a statement here that:&lt;br /&gt;22 "Those marriage lite schemes can&lt;br /&gt;23 harmfully blur distinctions between marriage&lt;br /&gt;24 and non-marriage."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2854&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Do you believe that that part of the statement is true?&lt;br /&gt;3 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;4 A. The part that you have read so far?&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Yes, just this part.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. No, sir. I do not believe that -- I do not believe that&lt;br /&gt;7 it's true.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Saying, again, that this is what's likely.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Yes, I know. I understand, and that's what I'm saying.&lt;br /&gt;11 My question was whether you believed it was likely&lt;br /&gt;12 that marriage lite schemes that you refer to here, or what is&lt;br /&gt;13 written here as marriage lite schemes, such as civil unions&lt;br /&gt;14 and domestic partnerships, whether it's likely that those can&lt;br /&gt;15 harmfully blur the distinctions between marriage and&lt;br /&gt;16 non-marriage?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Well, now, you have just read one part of it, because I&lt;br /&gt;18 do believe that it is a -- it is a concern of mine that -- it&lt;br /&gt;19 is one concern that needs to be taken into account; that&lt;br /&gt;20 domestic partnership and civil unions, because they are in&lt;br /&gt;21 some respects comparable to marriage, it is a concern that&lt;br /&gt;22 they could blur this distinction. It is a concern.&lt;br /&gt;23 I was basing my thought on the fact that you had&lt;br /&gt;24 read me a much longer portion of it.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Let me see if I understand what you are saying.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2855&lt;br /&gt;1 You are saying that marriage lite schemes, such as&lt;br /&gt;2 civil unions and domestic partnerships, are a concern to you&lt;br /&gt;3 because those schemes might well or could harmfully blur the&lt;br /&gt;4 distinctions between marriage and non-marriage; is that what&lt;br /&gt;5 you are saying?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. Now, I would like to ask you to turn to the&lt;br /&gt;8 document that is in the pocket of the -- beginning pocket of&lt;br /&gt;9 your binder, right at the very beginning. It is Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;10 Exhibit 2332-A.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. I'm sorry. I'm -- I'm having a hard time.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. BOIES: May I approach, your Honor?&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Yes, you may.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Whereupon, document was tendered&lt;br /&gt;15 to the witness.)&lt;br /&gt;16 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. This is a copy of the "Index of Materials," the list of&lt;br /&gt;18 materials that in your expert report you said that you had&lt;br /&gt;19 considered and relied on.&lt;br /&gt;20 Do you recognize it as such?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. It's titled "Index of Materials Considered."&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And did you understand that as part of your expert&lt;br /&gt;23 report, you were supposed to list the materials that you&lt;br /&gt;24 considered and relied on in preparing your expert report; do&lt;br /&gt;25 you understand that?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2856&lt;br /&gt;1 A. No, sir. As I explained yesterday, we had a --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. You don't have to explain it.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. -- we had a back-and-forth about this.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. You don't have to explain it.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. It's just that you asked me the question.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. I understand.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Perhaps if you showed the witness the&lt;br /&gt;8 expert report, it might be of some help.&lt;br /&gt;9 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. The expert report is in the witness binder that you have&lt;br /&gt;11 that Mr. Cooper gave you.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: PX-743, I believe.&lt;br /&gt;13 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And do you see that what we have marked as Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;15 Exhibit 2332-A is a copy of what you attached to your expert&lt;br /&gt;16 report?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, sir. That's -- yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Okay. Now, I would like you to go down this list --&lt;br /&gt;19 this is a list of materials -- and I would like you to tell&lt;br /&gt;20 me which of these materials, it is your testimony, assert&lt;br /&gt;21 that permitting gay marriage will adversely affect&lt;br /&gt;22 heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I will be happy to do my best. I don't think I can give&lt;br /&gt;24 you a precise answer because I don't have the ability now to,&lt;br /&gt;25 you know, reread each of these documents, but I will do my&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2857&lt;br /&gt;1 best to give you a judgment, if that's what you want me to&lt;br /&gt;2 do.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Yes. It's your best testimony and, obviously, people&lt;br /&gt;4 can later go look it up.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Could you say, again, what it is you are asking me if&lt;br /&gt;6 these materials contain?&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Whether the materials contain a statement that -- or an&lt;br /&gt;8 assertion that permitting gay and lesbian marriage will&lt;br /&gt;9 adversely affect heterosexual marriage.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And, again, perhaps the easiest way is for you simply to&lt;br /&gt;12 tell me the numbers that relate to materials that you believe&lt;br /&gt;13 fit what I'm asking.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Well, with the provisos that I can't speak with&lt;br /&gt;16 absolutely confidence about this, and with the proviso that&lt;br /&gt;17 the overwhelming majority of these materials were actually&lt;br /&gt;18 written before the gay marriage debate even came up on the&lt;br /&gt;19 national stage and were cited not about the subject you are&lt;br /&gt;20 asking me about, I will answer your question by saying, 2, 3,&lt;br /&gt;21 10, 13, 24, 27, and that's all.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. All right. Let me go through each of those.&lt;br /&gt;23 Let me begin with certain declarations that you&lt;br /&gt;24 have identified.&lt;br /&gt;25 Number 10 is a declaration of Allan C. Carlson,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2858&lt;br /&gt;1 correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Who is Allan C. Carlson?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Well, he's a writer and researcher and he has written&lt;br /&gt;5 some books on marriage and he -- I don't know. I think the&lt;br /&gt;6 group he heads is a private conservative think tank in&lt;br /&gt;7 Illinois. I think it's called the Howard Center. He is --&lt;br /&gt;8 his doctorate is in history.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. So he is not an anthropologist, or a psychologist, or a&lt;br /&gt;10 sociologist; is that correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. No, sir. He's a historian.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And then the other declaration that you identified was&lt;br /&gt;13 the declaration of Maggie Gallagher, correct; number 24?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Well, that was one of them, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And who is Maggie Gallagher?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. She is one of the leading opponents of gay marriage in&lt;br /&gt;17 the public debate today. She is a writer and, I guess you&lt;br /&gt;18 might say an organizer, writer and organizer, whose principal&lt;br /&gt;19 focus has been marriage and whose principal focus in the past&lt;br /&gt;20 four or five years has been to lead a campaign and to make&lt;br /&gt;21 public arguments in opposition to gay marriage.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Do you consider her a scholar, as you have used those&lt;br /&gt;23 words?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I do, yes. As I am using the term, I believe that she&lt;br /&gt;25 is a serious -- an intellectually serious person, yes.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2859&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And an intellectually serious person is what you have&lt;br /&gt;2 meant when you have referred to scholars in your testimony?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. No. If you want to quarrel over the terms --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. I'm not quarreling. I'm just asking what you meant.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. So what's your question?&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. You have used a number of times in your testimony, both&lt;br /&gt;7 your direct testimony and occasionally your cross, the term&lt;br /&gt;8 "scholar" to refer to people that you have relied on; do you&lt;br /&gt;9 recall that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes. I do not -- I did not mean -- if you think I mean&lt;br /&gt;11 that I believe that the definition of scholar is someone who&lt;br /&gt;12 is intellectually serious, then I misspoke. So we can --&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And when you use the term "scholar," what are you&lt;br /&gt;14 referring to?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Well, let's see. I hadn't thought recently to try to&lt;br /&gt;16 form a kind of dictionary definition, but I guess my&lt;br /&gt;17 understanding of a scholar would be someone who is able and&lt;br /&gt;18 equipped to engage seriously with intellectual competence&lt;br /&gt;19 with one or more bodies of evidence and to make rigorous&lt;br /&gt;20 analyses and arguments about one or more bodies of evidence.&lt;br /&gt;21 And I believe that the ideals of good scholarship&lt;br /&gt;22 are to be -- to have integrity; that is, to try to seek the&lt;br /&gt;23 truth of the matter.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And do you believe that one of the attributes of good&lt;br /&gt;25 scholarship is objectivity?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2860&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Objectivity in the sense of trying to see things whole&lt;br /&gt;2 and trying to understand and engage seriously with opposing&lt;br /&gt;3 points of view and treat those opposing points of view&lt;br /&gt;4 respectfully. In that sense yes, there is an ideal in&lt;br /&gt;5 scholarship that would be -- that you might call those&lt;br /&gt;6 cluster of terms or that -- those aspirations, you might call&lt;br /&gt;7 those objectivity, yes.&lt;br /&gt;8 See, Maggie Gallagher has a dual role. She is a&lt;br /&gt;9 journalist and writer, but she is also an activist and&lt;br /&gt;10 partisan in this public debate. I have tried to make that&lt;br /&gt;11 clear.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Has she published any peer-reviewed articles?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Which ones?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Well, I don't have her C.V. in front of me right now,&lt;br /&gt;16 Mr. Boies. I mean, I happen to know that she has published&lt;br /&gt;17 several articles in peer-reviewed law journals, but I'm not&lt;br /&gt;18 able to recall the specifics of her 20-year publication&lt;br /&gt;19 history right now.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Can you recall any peer-reviewed article by Maggie&lt;br /&gt;21 Gallagher that you have relied on?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. That I have relied on?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, I have read a number of them over the years. I&lt;br /&gt;25 mean, if that's what you mean, I have read them. And they&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2861&lt;br /&gt;1 have helped, along with thousands of other articles and&lt;br /&gt;2 books, to shape my over all views on things.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. What was the most recent peer-reviewed article by Maggie&lt;br /&gt;4 Gallagher that you have relied on; that you think is reliable&lt;br /&gt;5 as objective scholarship with integrity?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. You are putting words in my mouth.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Well, let me not put words in your mouth. Let me simply&lt;br /&gt;8 ask a question.&lt;br /&gt;9 Has Maggie Gallagher written any peer-reviewed&lt;br /&gt;10 article that you believe is characterized by the ideals of&lt;br /&gt;11 integrity and objectivity that you have described that you&lt;br /&gt;12 have relied on?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. That I have relied on for my testimony here today?&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Let's answer that question first. That wasn't really my&lt;br /&gt;15 question, but let's put that question and get an answer to&lt;br /&gt;16 that.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. There are no such articles that I have specifically&lt;br /&gt;18 relied on for my testimony here today, or my preparation for&lt;br /&gt;19 my testimony here today.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Okay. Another one of the items that you identified --&lt;br /&gt;21 and by my count you identified a total of six items.&lt;br /&gt;22 Another one of the items that you identified was&lt;br /&gt;23 Norval Glenn, "The Struggle For Same-Sex Marriage" and that&lt;br /&gt;24 was one of the articles that Mr. Cooper raised with you, am I&lt;br /&gt;25 correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2862&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And would you turn to that in Mr. Cooper's book?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Can someone tell me the tab?&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. I believe that it is tab 18.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay. Now, you said that Mr. Glenn asserted that&lt;br /&gt;7 permitting gay and lesbian marriage would adversely affect&lt;br /&gt;8 heterosexual marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Well, I believe I was answering a question of yours, and&lt;br /&gt;10 I believe the way you asked me was to -- based on reviewing&lt;br /&gt;11 this list called "Index of Materials Considered," if I could&lt;br /&gt;12 identify for you any documents in that list that I thought&lt;br /&gt;13 the view of the author was that adopting same-sex marriage&lt;br /&gt;14 would weaken the institution of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Okay. I'm glad we clarified that.&lt;br /&gt;16 Now, I want to go back to the list. And the six&lt;br /&gt;17 items that you have identified are items which you say -- and&lt;br /&gt;18 I want to get your words exactly.&lt;br /&gt;19 You thought this was materials where the view of&lt;br /&gt;20 the author was that adopting same-sex marriage would weaken&lt;br /&gt;21 the institution of marriage. That's what you answered,&lt;br /&gt;22 right?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. That's what I just said, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Now, I want to ask a somewhat different question with&lt;br /&gt;25 respect to these items that you have identified; and that is,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2863&lt;br /&gt;1 which of these six did this material that's here, that's&lt;br /&gt;2 listed here, contain an assertion that permitting gay and&lt;br /&gt;3 lesbian marriage would harm heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;4 Do you understand the difference between the two?&lt;br /&gt;5 If not, I will explain it.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I'm afraid I don't.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. You were doing two things. One, you were giving&lt;br /&gt;8 me what you thought the author believed?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And I'm asking you not what the author believes in your&lt;br /&gt;11 view, but what the author said.&lt;br /&gt;12 Second --&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Said not in some book or article that exists in the&lt;br /&gt;14 world, but says specifically in the words that you have&lt;br /&gt;15 stipulated in this narrow list of materials cited?&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And that's the --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. It's a very narrow question, but I'm happy to try to do&lt;br /&gt;20 my best to answer it.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Yes. And so what I'm asking you is which, if any of&lt;br /&gt;22 these materials themselves, not some other material --&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Written material, a book, peer-reviewed article, so&lt;br /&gt;24 forth; only these materials?&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Only these materials that you have listed. Which of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2864&lt;br /&gt;1 these materials contain assertions that permitting gay and&lt;br /&gt;2 lesbian marriage will harm heterosexual marriage or the&lt;br /&gt;3 institution of heterosexual marriage, if any?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Does it have to say it in that exact form of words that&lt;br /&gt;5 you have offered?&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. No. In words or in substance, so that a reasonable&lt;br /&gt;7 reader could read it and say this writer in this publication&lt;br /&gt;8 is asserting that gay and lesbian marriage will weaken&lt;br /&gt;9 heterosexual marriage.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Be likely to weaken heterosexual marriage.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. I beg your pardon.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. The issue is always likely, Mr. Boies. It's not --&lt;br /&gt;13 there is no such thing as certainty about predicting a future&lt;br /&gt;14 event. The concept is always what is likely in their&lt;br /&gt;15 judgment to occur.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. I accept that, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;18 Well, I don't really -- with the proviso that I&lt;br /&gt;19 can't speak with confidence about this unless I were to&lt;br /&gt;20 reread each of these documents word for word right now, but&lt;br /&gt;21 my best effort to answer your question right now would be&lt;br /&gt;22 that the list I have given you would be the same list.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. So that each of the six that you have identified, you&lt;br /&gt;24 believe these materials themselves assert in words or in&lt;br /&gt;25 substance that permitting gay and lesbian marriage will harm&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2865&lt;br /&gt;1 heterosexual marriage, is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I believe that a reason- -- as you put it, a reasonable&lt;br /&gt;3 reader, reading these materials, would conclude that this&lt;br /&gt;4 author has stated or suggested that adopting gay marriage&lt;br /&gt;5 would be likely to weaken marriage as a social institution.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Now, in that answer you said "stated or suggested." Do&lt;br /&gt;7 you use those terms interchangeably, synonymously or do you&lt;br /&gt;8 mean something different by them?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I mean something different by them.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. What do you mean?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Would it be okay if I gave you an example, or would you&lt;br /&gt;12 rather me state it abstractly?&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. I would rather you state it in concept.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. "Stated" would be an unequivocal assertion that is&lt;br /&gt;15 similar to the wording that you have offered in your -- you&lt;br /&gt;16 know, an unmistakable, no possible way to doubt the declared&lt;br /&gt;17 intent of the sentence or the paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;18 A "suggestion" would be a way of making an&lt;br /&gt;19 argument, stating it so that a reasonable reader would&lt;br /&gt;20 understand clearly based on the written words that the author&lt;br /&gt;21 has a serious concern or a serious worry or is stating his or&lt;br /&gt;22 her belief that it would be likely that adopting gay marriage&lt;br /&gt;23 would weaken marriage as a social institution.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Now, with respect to the six items that you have&lt;br /&gt;25 identified, let me ask the question separately.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2866&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I was afraid that might be where we were going.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I'm getting predictable.&lt;br /&gt;3 Which of these in your testimony does the author,&lt;br /&gt;4 in this material, state -- using "state" the way you have&lt;br /&gt;5 described it -- that permitting gay and lesbian marriage&lt;br /&gt;6 would harm heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Well, I think you would probably have to take Cherlin&lt;br /&gt;8 off the list, number 13, because while he argues that gay&lt;br /&gt;9 marriage is contributing to the deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage, that's his statement. He does not specifically in&lt;br /&gt;11 words that you're calling for him to do make the statement&lt;br /&gt;12 that you are calling for him to make. So I think we would&lt;br /&gt;13 probably have to take him off that very narrow list.&lt;br /&gt;14 So let's keep going.&lt;br /&gt;15 Well, you might have to take Norval Glenn, number&lt;br /&gt;16 27, off the list, but although because he does say that&lt;br /&gt;17 adopting gay marriage would be likely to result in the&lt;br /&gt;18 deinstitutionalization of marriage, he does not have the form&lt;br /&gt;19 of words that are in the unequivocal statement that you are&lt;br /&gt;20 asking for. So let's take him off the list.&lt;br /&gt;21 On number three, Agacinski. I have read a lot of&lt;br /&gt;22 her work and I know that she is an opponent of same-sex&lt;br /&gt;23 marriage, and I know in great detail the reasons why she is&lt;br /&gt;24 an opponent, and I know that she believes that it would be a&lt;br /&gt;25 result of the deinstitutionalization of marriage. And it's&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2867&lt;br /&gt;1 been an important body of work for me, her work as a&lt;br /&gt;2 philosopher and as a scholar, but I cannot speak with&lt;br /&gt;3 certainty about the exact form of words in this one book&lt;br /&gt;4 listed here called Parity of Sexes, so let's take her off the&lt;br /&gt;5 list as well.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And you do understand that it's not the exact form of&lt;br /&gt;7 words. It is the unmistakable -- what you referred to as an&lt;br /&gt;8 unmistakable --&lt;br /&gt;9 A. It is an extremely narrow and rigid category that you&lt;br /&gt;10 are erecting here and which is your perfect right to do. So&lt;br /&gt;11 let's take her off the list.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. I just want to be sure that we are taking her off the&lt;br /&gt;13 list because you can't say --&lt;br /&gt;14 A. An opponent of same-sex marriage, but let's take her off&lt;br /&gt;15 the list.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. I want to be clear that the reason we are taking her off&lt;br /&gt;17 the list is because you cannot say that in this particular&lt;br /&gt;18 material that's cited here, that she unmistakably&lt;br /&gt;19 communicates that permitting gay and lesbian marriage would&lt;br /&gt;20 harm heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. My answer is that I know with absolutely certainty that&lt;br /&gt;22 she opposes gay marriage for the reason that would contribute&lt;br /&gt;23 to the deinstitutionalization of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;24 My concluding part of my answer is that I do not&lt;br /&gt;25 know with absolutely certainty that those sentences appear in&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2868&lt;br /&gt;1 the text called Parity of the Sexes, and so for that reason I&lt;br /&gt;2 think we should remove her from the list.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And you do understand, sir, that all I am doing is&lt;br /&gt;4 asking you about the materials you listed; you understand&lt;br /&gt;5 that, don't you?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Of course I do.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. Now, is there anybody else you would take off the&lt;br /&gt;8 list?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I don't think so.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Okay. Now, let me follow up something that you said&lt;br /&gt;11 about Norval Glenn, just because we have got his article in&lt;br /&gt;12 front of us, and that's Defendant's Exhibit 60.&lt;br /&gt;13 You said he did state that permitting gay and&lt;br /&gt;14 lesbian marriage was likely to result in the&lt;br /&gt;15 deinstitutionalization of marriage. Did I understand you&lt;br /&gt;16 correctly?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Well, if where you're going with this is to ask me to&lt;br /&gt;18 show you in his article the word "deinstitutionalization," to&lt;br /&gt;19 the best of my knowledge, the word -- I don't know whether&lt;br /&gt;20 the word is there or not. I don't think it is.&lt;br /&gt;21 But my testimony to you is that in substance that&lt;br /&gt;22 is what he is saying.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Well, let me ask you to look at some of what he actually&lt;br /&gt;24 said and see whether you define it as being in substance what&lt;br /&gt;25 you say.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2869&lt;br /&gt;1 And first let me just ask you a general point. As&lt;br /&gt;2 you understand what Mr. Glenn is doing in this article, is he&lt;br /&gt;3 trying to decide or trying to assert whether gay marriage is&lt;br /&gt;4 or is not a good idea, or is he trying to talk about his&lt;br /&gt;5 concerns about the debate about same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. My memory of the article is that it's the latter.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. So what he is really concerned about here is he&lt;br /&gt;8 is concerned that the debate about same-sex marriage is&lt;br /&gt;9 harming or could potentially harm the institution of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage, is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. As you have said and as I have agreed, the -- I have not&lt;br /&gt;12 read this article in several years. The reason it's cited in&lt;br /&gt;13 the List of Materials Considered is because I excerpted a&lt;br /&gt;14 specific paragraph from it in my report.&lt;br /&gt;15 But my memory of the article is as you have stated,&lt;br /&gt;16 is that it is more a discussion -- this is in keeping with a&lt;br /&gt;17 lot of his scholarship. This is in more of a discussion of&lt;br /&gt;18 an analysis of the debate, rather than an advocacy or a&lt;br /&gt;19 polemical argument in favor of one side or the other.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And, for example, one of the things he believes is that&lt;br /&gt;21 legalizing same-sex marriage would have a small effect, at&lt;br /&gt;22 most, on the percentage of fatherless children, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I don't recall where he says that. Could you point that&lt;br /&gt;24 paragraph out?&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Sure. If you turn to page 28? And the second column, I&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2870&lt;br /&gt;1 think it seventh line down, do you see where he says,&lt;br /&gt;2 Legitimate -- legitimate --&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I see where you are. I would like to read the sentence,&lt;br /&gt;4 if I may.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Making it legal.&lt;br /&gt;6 "Making legal same-sex marriage would&lt;br /&gt;7 have a small effect, at most, on the&lt;br /&gt;8 percentage of fatherless children."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I'm just reading --&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. I understand, but do you see what I just read?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I do see it, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Take at much time as you want to review the context and&lt;br /&gt;14 when you have finished, let me know.&lt;br /&gt;15 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I now understand that in this paragraph --&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Sir, sir, I'm not asking you -- when I say please let me&lt;br /&gt;18 know, I'm not saying please let me know what you think the&lt;br /&gt;19 context is. I'm just saying please let me know when you&lt;br /&gt;20 finish reviewing the context because I have some questions.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I have finished.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Now, do you agree that legalizing same-sex marriage&lt;br /&gt;23 would have a small effect, at most, on the percentage of&lt;br /&gt;24 fatherless children? Do you agree with that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. No, sir, I do not.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2871&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Did you know prior to the time that I showed you this,&lt;br /&gt;2 that that was an assertion that Professor Glenn made?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Of course I did, because I read the article.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Wouldn't it help to know what he is trying to say here?&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. What I'm trying to do is focus on the words that --&lt;br /&gt;7 A. So am I. His words.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Not your interpretation or not what you think is&lt;br /&gt;9 important.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Well, could we just read the paragraph?&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. You will have an opportunity to read the whole&lt;br /&gt;12 paragraph --&lt;br /&gt;13 A. So we don't want to know what he is actually saying.&lt;br /&gt;14 Okay.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Well, one of the things he said immediately after that,&lt;br /&gt;16 to complete the sentence, the entire sentence says:&lt;br /&gt;17 "Legitimating of same-sex marriage would&lt;br /&gt;18 have a small effect, at most, on the&lt;br /&gt;19 percentage of fatherless children and there&lt;br /&gt;20 is no precedent for prohibiting a family&lt;br /&gt;21 arrangement because it creates less than&lt;br /&gt;22 ideal conditions for children."&lt;br /&gt;23 A. It's not the point I was trying to make. I won't make&lt;br /&gt;24 it. It's okay.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. That's the complete sentence, correct? That is the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2872&lt;br /&gt;1 complete sentence?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, sir, that is the complete sentence.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Okay. Now, do you agree that there is no precedent for&lt;br /&gt;4 prohibiting a family arrangement because it creates less than&lt;br /&gt;5 ideal conditions for children?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. By "prohibiting," do you mean making it illegal? Do I&lt;br /&gt;7 believe that there is a family form that has been made&lt;br /&gt;8 illegal because it is less than ideal for children?&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. When Professor Glenn writes:&lt;br /&gt;10 "Legalizing same-sex marriage would have&lt;br /&gt;11 a small effect, at most, on the percentage of&lt;br /&gt;12 fatherless children and there is no precedent&lt;br /&gt;13 for prohibiting a family arrangement because&lt;br /&gt;14 it creates less than ideal conditions for&lt;br /&gt;15 children."&lt;br /&gt;16 Do you agree that with, with what he says here;&lt;br /&gt;17 there is no precedent for prohibiting a family arrangement&lt;br /&gt;18 because it creates less than ideal conditions for children?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Well, when I think about prohibition of the family form&lt;br /&gt;20 of polygamy, I believe that one of the important reasons why&lt;br /&gt;21 we have historically -- if you go back to the records, I&lt;br /&gt;22 believe -- I'm not an expert in this area. This is not&lt;br /&gt;23 something I have studied in detail. I don't know how&lt;br /&gt;24 relevant it is to our conversation, but it is certainly a&lt;br /&gt;25 family form that is present in the world, in societies, and&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2873&lt;br /&gt;1 it is prohibited here in the United States.&lt;br /&gt;2 And I believe, based on my imperfect study, that&lt;br /&gt;3 one of the reasons that it is prohibited is that it is&lt;br /&gt;4 considered less than ideal for children. And I believe the&lt;br /&gt;5 historical record, the discussion of that, I'm fairly&lt;br /&gt;6 confident would confirm that.&lt;br /&gt;7 I think there are probably other examples of family&lt;br /&gt;8 forms as well, but I would have to give that some thought.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Speaking of polygamy, since you raised it, and I&lt;br /&gt;10 understand that you say you're not an expert on it.&lt;br /&gt;11 But are you aware of what reasons were stated for&lt;br /&gt;12 prohibiting polygamy in the United States?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Well, I believe I just -- in answer to your previous&lt;br /&gt;14 question, I just stated that it is not a field of expertise&lt;br /&gt;15 of mine.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Are you aware of any of the reasons that were stated for&lt;br /&gt;17 prohibiting polygamy in the United States?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. In the sense of having studied it and believing myself&lt;br /&gt;19 to be competent to speak with expert knowledge on this&lt;br /&gt;20 subject, the answer is no.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Incidentally, you have testified about your three&lt;br /&gt;22 rules of the game for marriage?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I don't think I used those terms today or yesterday.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Well, you certainly said that that was the basis of a&lt;br /&gt;25 lot of your views, have you not, sir?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2874&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Well, I think I would rather tell you in my words what&lt;br /&gt;2 my views are than have you try to put them in my mouth.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Well, sir, we are going to actually go to your words in&lt;br /&gt;4 your deposition, but have you described the rules of the game&lt;br /&gt;5 for marriage?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. My understanding is that the phrase "rules of the game,"&lt;br /&gt;7 I think I might have used it in my book and my report.&lt;br /&gt;8 I'm not trying to make a quarrel over this, but I&lt;br /&gt;9 think it was actually quoting -- I think I put it in quotes&lt;br /&gt;10 and I think it was from Professor North. I think I was&lt;br /&gt;11 citing an article from Professor North.&lt;br /&gt;12 I'm not confident of that, but I think it's true.&lt;br /&gt;13 I mean, if it's important to you to pin down this wording, I&lt;br /&gt;14 would be happy to take a moment and try to make sure -- try&lt;br /&gt;15 to give you complete clarity on that question.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Well, I would like -- I would like to get --&lt;br /&gt;17 A. See, I think the economist --&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. We will get to your testimony. That is, first --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. You make it sound like kind of a jocular thing, and I&lt;br /&gt;20 think I was quoting -- what I meant was --&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. I wasn't meaning to say jocular, sir. I really wasn't.&lt;br /&gt;22 I was just trying to use the --&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I'm going for clarity here.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. All right. You have said that the main rules of the&lt;br /&gt;25 game when it comes to marriage are three, correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2875&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Let's try to find -- I just want to pin this down. If&lt;br /&gt;2 you give me a moment, I would like to see if I'm right about&lt;br /&gt;3 how I used the term.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: There is a question pending,&lt;br /&gt;5 Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE WITNESS: I'm trying to answer the question&lt;br /&gt;7 about did I use the term "rules of the game."&lt;br /&gt;8 A. That's the question I'm -- and I will stop my inquiry if&lt;br /&gt;9 you wish me to. Do you wish me to?&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. I wish you to answer the question.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. You've asked me if I have used this term, rules of the&lt;br /&gt;13 game, and I'm trying to answer it. And I'll stop my inquiry&lt;br /&gt;14 if you wish me to.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Sir, the question was: You have said that the main&lt;br /&gt;16 rules of the game when it comes to marriage are three,&lt;br /&gt;17 correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, I was correct. The -- the phrase "rules of the&lt;br /&gt;20 game" comes from a Nobel Prize winning economist, who wrote a&lt;br /&gt;21 paper that actually won him a Nobel Prize about the role of&lt;br /&gt;22 institutions in society. That's the -- that's where that&lt;br /&gt;23 phrase comes from, and that's why I put it in quotes, and&lt;br /&gt;24 that's why it's footnoted.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Sir, let me ask you the question. I'm not asking you&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2876&lt;br /&gt;1 where it came from. I will. I'm not asking you whether you&lt;br /&gt;2 put it in quotes or not.&lt;br /&gt;3 What I'm asking you is whether it is your view --&lt;br /&gt;4 whether it is your view that the main rules of the game when&lt;br /&gt;5 it comes to marriage are three. Is that your view,&lt;br /&gt;6 regardless of how you have come to it?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I believe marriage has three fundamental foundational&lt;br /&gt;8 structures, and there has been times in my writings that I&lt;br /&gt;9 have referred to them as rules.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And when you refer to your writings where you have&lt;br /&gt;11 referred to them as rules, would you include the report that&lt;br /&gt;12 you submitted in this litigation?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay. And you have said that your source of these three&lt;br /&gt;15 rules are principally the body of scholarship on the&lt;br /&gt;16 anthropology of human marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. It's what I believe. I don't -- I will just -- would it&lt;br /&gt;18 be okay to say that is what I believe? You said I have&lt;br /&gt;19 stated it. I don't recall being asked that question by you&lt;br /&gt;20 so far, but it is what I believe.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. And the scholars that you rely on for your belief&lt;br /&gt;22 are who?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Would you like a comprehensive list?&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I would like the most important scholars that you rely&lt;br /&gt;25 on, or the scholars that you rely on the most?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2877&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Okay. Well, if you give me a moment to compose my&lt;br /&gt;2 thoughts on that, I will give you a brief list of principal&lt;br /&gt;3 scholars. I'm going to take a moment to just make a note to&lt;br /&gt;4 myself here as I try to collect my thoughts on that question.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Would it be against the -- would it be against procedure&lt;br /&gt;7 for me to consult a copy of my book to see the index?&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Let me ask you to do it this way. Putting on the record&lt;br /&gt;9 that you haven't consulted your book or your index, and&lt;br /&gt;10 putting on the record that you don't have a photographic&lt;br /&gt;11 memory and you don't remember everything that's in there --&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I think there would probably be 50 or 60 names on the&lt;br /&gt;13 list.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. What I'm asking you is, as you sit here now as a&lt;br /&gt;15 testifying expert, what are the scholars that you think most&lt;br /&gt;16 important in your mind?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Okay. Well, that's a different question. I would say&lt;br /&gt;18 that the --&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. The most important scholars. Just to be clear, that you&lt;br /&gt;20 rely on for your --&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I understand.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. (Continuing) -- for your three rules?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I hear you.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. The scholars that have influenced me most deeply on this&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2878&lt;br /&gt;1 have been Bronislaw Malinowski and Meyer Fortes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Okay. Now, the three rules, why don't you state what&lt;br /&gt;3 the three rules are?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Well, may I just say -- I will, but may I say, you call&lt;br /&gt;5 them rules and you've quoted this Nobel Prize winning&lt;br /&gt;6 economist --&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. No, no, no, no, no. I did not quote the Nobel Prize&lt;br /&gt;8 winning economist, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. That's where the phrase "rules of the game" that you&lt;br /&gt;10 attributed to me came from. You said -- you have referred to&lt;br /&gt;11 rules of the game, and I'm trying to point out that that&lt;br /&gt;12 phrase comes from a Nobel Prize winning economist --&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Sir --&lt;br /&gt;14 A. -- who's studying the role of institutions.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Sir. Sir, I asked you whether it was your view, your&lt;br /&gt;16 view, that the main rules of the game when it came to&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage were three; do you recall me asking you that&lt;br /&gt;18 question?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. We have had a pretty extended colloquy, so I certainly&lt;br /&gt;20 recall the question.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. And you answered that that was your view.&lt;br /&gt;22 And I specifically said I'm not asking about what&lt;br /&gt;23 any economist is saying, whether he won the Nobel Prize or&lt;br /&gt;24 not. I'm not asking what anybody else is saying. I'm just&lt;br /&gt;25 asking for your views.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2879&lt;br /&gt;1 And your view is that when it comes to marriage,&lt;br /&gt;2 there are three main rules of the game.&lt;br /&gt;3 And let me say I'm not suggesting that that's --&lt;br /&gt;4 you said before that rules of the game was taking it too&lt;br /&gt;5 lightly or something like that?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir. That was exactly my suggestion.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. I don't mean it in that sense, okay?&lt;br /&gt;8 Rules of the game can be a serious principle, okay.&lt;br /&gt;9 I will accept that. I don't want to -- I don't want you to&lt;br /&gt;10 get --&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Then I will not belabor it one more moment.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Okay, okay. And we could even use a different&lt;br /&gt;13 phraseology, if that makes you more comfortable?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Absolutely understood. We can proceed. That's&lt;br /&gt;15 absolutely the only point I was trying to make.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And I accept that point, okay.&lt;br /&gt;17 Now, what are the three main rules that you believe&lt;br /&gt;18 define marriage?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Well, the first is what you might call the rule of&lt;br /&gt;20 opposites. That was the man -- what is the customary&lt;br /&gt;21 man/woman basis of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And second?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Two, that is, marriage is two people.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay. And the third?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. It's a sexual relationship.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2880&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you about those three rules that&lt;br /&gt;2 you used to define marriage.&lt;br /&gt;3 First, with respect to the rule of opposite --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. By the way, I want to just clarify. I'm not saying that&lt;br /&gt;5 those three rules constitute a definition of marriage. What&lt;br /&gt;6 I'm referring -- that was the term you just used in your&lt;br /&gt;7 question or your statement.&lt;br /&gt;8 What I'm saying is that those are the three&lt;br /&gt;9 essential foundations of the marital institution or the three&lt;br /&gt;10 essential structures of the marital institution, and that's&lt;br /&gt;11 where we get into this concept of rules. So that's what I'm&lt;br /&gt;12 trying to say.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay. The three essential structures of the institution&lt;br /&gt;14 of marriage, is that an acceptable terminology?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Okay. Now, the first of these three essential&lt;br /&gt;17 structures of the institution of marriage is the rule of&lt;br /&gt;18 opposites, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, are you aware of marriages in other societies that&lt;br /&gt;21 have not been limited to people of the opposite sex?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Well, I'm certainly aware that assertions have been made&lt;br /&gt;23 in the popular and occasionally in the scholarly literature&lt;br /&gt;24 that such cases exist. And I have not in-depth studied every&lt;br /&gt;25 single example of such an assertion, but I have troubled&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2881&lt;br /&gt;1 myself to try to familiarize myself to the best of my ability&lt;br /&gt;2 with quite a number of such assertions, and I have views&lt;br /&gt;3 about them, both collectively and individually, and I will&lt;br /&gt;4 share them with you, if you wish.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Let me just begin first by asking you whether, in your&lt;br /&gt;6 view, there are any examples in history of marriages that do&lt;br /&gt;7 not comply with your first essential structure of the&lt;br /&gt;8 institution of marriage; that is, the rule of opposites?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Well, of course, we would have to recognize that in&lt;br /&gt;10 Massachusetts now there are such marriages.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Massachusetts and Iowa and Spain and Sweden and the&lt;br /&gt;12 Netherlands and Canada.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I'm aware. I'm aware. I'm just trying to be clear. So&lt;br /&gt;14 that I'm not -- sure, I understand that in the localities&lt;br /&gt;15 that have in recent months and years adopted same-sex&lt;br /&gt;16 marriage and that's the controversy and the set of&lt;br /&gt;17 disagreements that bring us here today. I'm perfectly aware&lt;br /&gt;18 of the context.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Let me ask you a more pointed question.&lt;br /&gt;20 Are you aware of any instances of marriage in any&lt;br /&gt;21 society prior to the last 50 years that was inconsistent with&lt;br /&gt;22 your first essential structure of the institution of&lt;br /&gt;23 marriage; that is, the rule of opposites?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. There are two or three or four what I would call hard&lt;br /&gt;25 cases in the literature. And as I said, we could discuss&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2882&lt;br /&gt;1 them, if you wish.&lt;br /&gt;2 I would say that as a -- if you will allow me to&lt;br /&gt;3 make the proviso that I'm aware that there are probably two&lt;br /&gt;4 or three hard cases that require very specific understandings&lt;br /&gt;5 of the context, I will say that -- generally speaking of&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage as a global phenomenon, I would say that there are&lt;br /&gt;7 either no or almost no exceptions to this principle that&lt;br /&gt;8 marriage is between a man and a woman.&lt;br /&gt;9 So my answer, just to be very precise, is that I&lt;br /&gt;10 know that the scholars have some debates, about two or three&lt;br /&gt;11 small instances in the field of anthropology.&lt;br /&gt;12 So my answer to you, to be on the safe side for&lt;br /&gt;13 me -- for me to be on the safe side, is to say that there are&lt;br /&gt;14 no or almost no exceptions to this structural feature of&lt;br /&gt;15 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Now, you say in that answer "no or almost no." And as&lt;br /&gt;17 you --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I'm trying to account for the two or three hard cases.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And as you probably expect, that's what I'm going to ask&lt;br /&gt;20 you about.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I thought you might.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Now, my question is not whether there is a debate, but&lt;br /&gt;23 whether you, as an expert, have an opinion as to whether or&lt;br /&gt;24 not in societies, prior to the last 50 years, there have been&lt;br /&gt;25 marriages that are inconsistent with your rule of opposites?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2883&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I mean, I say that that form of the question is quite a&lt;br /&gt;2 different question because the issue here is -- that the&lt;br /&gt;3 scholars have concerned themselves with is, are there&lt;br /&gt;4 examples of marriage in societies that in some ways resemble,&lt;br /&gt;5 are precursors, are -- prefigure the concept of same-sex&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage? That's is a very different question. Those are&lt;br /&gt;7 two very different questions.&lt;br /&gt;8 So I wish you would clarify which of them you wish&lt;br /&gt;9 me to answer.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. The question I want you to answer is whether in your&lt;br /&gt;11 view there are any instances in societies, prior to the last&lt;br /&gt;12 50 years, of marriages that are inconsistent with your rule&lt;br /&gt;13 of opposites?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Okay. So it's the former. I will not seek to answer&lt;br /&gt;15 the question, is there any marriages that could be considered&lt;br /&gt;16 same-sex marriages.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It's not -- it's actually not a laughing matter to me,&lt;br /&gt;19 Mr. Boies, because I'll tell you, this is a very important&lt;br /&gt;20 topic and your -- it's two different questions. And you can&lt;br /&gt;21 take your pick, I will answer either one.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: Mr. Blankenhorn, Mr. Boies is not&lt;br /&gt;23 laughing at you. He's amused at the back-and-forth, as I&lt;br /&gt;24 think many of us who are observing this are.&lt;br /&gt;25 Try again, Mr. Boies.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2884&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. BOIES&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I had tried to take my pick, Mr. Blankenhorn. That's&lt;br /&gt;3 what I was trying to do when I asked you the question.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Okay. Let's go.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. My question is whether in your view in societies, prior&lt;br /&gt;6 to the last 50 years, there are marriages that have been&lt;br /&gt;7 inconsistent with your rule of opposites?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Okay. If you will just give me maybe 10 seconds to&lt;br /&gt;9 compose my thoughts on this.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;11 A. My answer is that I can think of one instance of -- in a&lt;br /&gt;12 human group that has been studied where some scholars believe&lt;br /&gt;13 and others disagree, but it is a hard case and there are&lt;br /&gt;14 arguments on both sides; but there has been one case where&lt;br /&gt;15 there is some dispute or some scholarly argumentation over&lt;br /&gt;16 whether or not there is an exception to this rule.&lt;br /&gt;17 So I think there's been one that I think -- I'm not&lt;br /&gt;18 saying that no other person has asserted something about some&lt;br /&gt;19 other phenomenon, but there is one that I think is a&lt;br /&gt;20 particularly significant one to me personally, and I have --&lt;br /&gt;21 so I would say my view is that I know of one instance in a&lt;br /&gt;22 society in which there may have been -- according to some&lt;br /&gt;23 scholars, there may have been an exception to this rule.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And what is that one instance?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. There is a society in Africa -- it no longer happens&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2885&lt;br /&gt;1 this way, but there was a period of time when the men of the&lt;br /&gt;2 group lived in -- mostly in military barracks. They were a&lt;br /&gt;3 warrior group and they had an institution whereby adult men&lt;br /&gt;4 would have a sexual relationship with a young boy. And this&lt;br /&gt;5 was, this -- the anthropologists would sometimes translate&lt;br /&gt;6 the word -- they would sometimes translate the word as&lt;br /&gt;7 marrying. The man would give gifts to the boy's parents and&lt;br /&gt;8 they would -- they had a sexual relationship and the boy was&lt;br /&gt;9 to address the man with a great term of respect and to serve&lt;br /&gt;10 him his meals and to be kind of a servant for him, as well as&lt;br /&gt;11 a sexual partner.&lt;br /&gt;12 And then when the boy would outgrow that initiatory&lt;br /&gt;13 period, that initiatory -- was no longer a part of that&lt;br /&gt;14 homosexual relationship, he would often go on to marry, to&lt;br /&gt;15 marry a woman with a conventional marriage ceremony, but&lt;br /&gt;16 there was a part of this experience that was a ritualized --&lt;br /&gt;17 it was surrounded by custom. It was recognized in law. And&lt;br /&gt;18 there was a period of time in a highly kind of a warrior&lt;br /&gt;19 society the males were -- as I say, they lived in kind of&lt;br /&gt;20 military barracks and they would have a marriage-like&lt;br /&gt;21 relationship with a -- with a male child. And this was not&lt;br /&gt;22 viewed as deviant or -- wrong or shameful in any way and it&lt;br /&gt;23 was an accepted part. The kinship groups accepted this and&lt;br /&gt;24 thought it was just a normal part of life.&lt;br /&gt;25 And so this -- Evans-Pritchard, the anthropologist&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2886&lt;br /&gt;1 who wrote of this, he -- in translation, of course, he called&lt;br /&gt;2 it "man-boy marriage." And so he used the term "marriage" in&lt;br /&gt;3 his scholarship. And he said, "I use it advisedly," he said.&lt;br /&gt;4 "I use it advisedly." This was a ceremonial thing and so&lt;br /&gt;5 forth.&lt;br /&gt;6 And Gilbert Herdt, a very prominent anthropologist,&lt;br /&gt;7 has written a book called Ritualized Homosexuality in Human&lt;br /&gt;8 Societies, and he talks of this.&lt;br /&gt;9 And there are, perhaps, some other examples where&lt;br /&gt;10 you have initiation periods of time in the life of young boys&lt;br /&gt;11 where they have a homosexual relationship with an adult man&lt;br /&gt;12 and it's a phase of life, but sometimes this is -- this has a&lt;br /&gt;13 marriage-like feeling to it in terms of language, custom and&lt;br /&gt;14 law. It tends to be a transitory period of life and usually&lt;br /&gt;15 the man goes on then at a later point to marry a woman.&lt;br /&gt;16 But this is an example that -- the principal&lt;br /&gt;17 example that I think constitutes a hard case if we are&lt;br /&gt;18 looking for -- if we scour all of human history and all of --&lt;br /&gt;19 across all time, we could -- if we are searching out for an&lt;br /&gt;20 exception, I think that's probably the most robust&lt;br /&gt;21 ethnographic evidence, would be this one.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And you said this occurred in Africa?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Are you aware of that occurring in other cultures? Just&lt;br /&gt;25 to pick one at random, ancient Greece?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2887&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That was not marriage. That was a different thing.&lt;br /&gt;2 What I'm talking about here is something that&lt;br /&gt;3 scholars actually have -- they sometimes -- it's a subject of&lt;br /&gt;4 debate, but they sometimes think of this as a marriage-like&lt;br /&gt;5 relationship.&lt;br /&gt;6 There are other -- there are, to answer your&lt;br /&gt;7 question, the prominent anthropologist Raymond Kelly has&lt;br /&gt;8 examined a society, a very small society, that lives in Papua&lt;br /&gt;9 New Guinea. They have a similar arrangement, whereby the&lt;br /&gt;10 boys of the group for a period of time during their boyhood&lt;br /&gt;11 have sexual relations with males. And they believe that --&lt;br /&gt;12 they believe this -- these people believe that sexual&lt;br /&gt;13 activity with -- a boy having sexual activity with a man&lt;br /&gt;14 contributes to his vitality, his virility, his manliness.&lt;br /&gt;15 They consider it an important part of the development of his&lt;br /&gt;16 potential as a member of the tribe.&lt;br /&gt;17 And this is an example that Raymond Kelly -- these&lt;br /&gt;18 people -- this tribe is the Etoro people. And he has written&lt;br /&gt;19 a masterful book called Etoro Social Structure that examines&lt;br /&gt;20 this in considerable detail, although Kelly makes it clear&lt;br /&gt;21 that this is not marriage. He does not say that this is a&lt;br /&gt;22 marriage relationship. He understands it as part of Etoro's&lt;br /&gt;23 social structure that has some kind of a mimicking quality&lt;br /&gt;24 for a period of time, but he views it as essentially an&lt;br /&gt;25 initiation right for the boys of the tribe that is of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2888&lt;br /&gt;1 somewhat short duration, usually two or three years. And he&lt;br /&gt;2 is, I think, actually the finest scholar that is working in&lt;br /&gt;3 this field.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, what I want to focus on is marriage. In, as you&lt;br /&gt;5 say, scouring all of human history to find examples, did you&lt;br /&gt;6 happen to come across Professor Young, who was an expert for&lt;br /&gt;7 the defense in this case?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Are you asking me if I know her?&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I do know her.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And did you read her testimony in this case?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. No, sir, I did not.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Have you ever talked to her about examples of marriage&lt;br /&gt;14 in prior societies that were inconsistent with your rule of&lt;br /&gt;15 opposites?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. You do believe that she is an expert in the field, do&lt;br /&gt;18 you not?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. The truth is that I know her personally, but I have -- I&lt;br /&gt;20 am not familiar with her writings. And I would accept her&lt;br /&gt;21 expert status based on her -- the very things that you&lt;br /&gt;22 pointed out that I didn't have yesterday. She is affiliated&lt;br /&gt;23 with a university. She teaches courses and so forth. So&lt;br /&gt;24 that's really all I know about her status as an expert.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, let me go on to your second rule, your second&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2889&lt;br /&gt;1 essential structure of the institution of marriage, which was&lt;br /&gt;2 the rule of two people.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, you are obviously aware of a lot of examples of&lt;br /&gt;5 marriages that are inconsistent with that rule, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. You are not? What percentage of marriages over the last&lt;br /&gt;8 300 years have been limited to two people in your judgment?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. The way that I and many other scholars have looked at&lt;br /&gt;10 this, the answer would be that almost every single marriage&lt;br /&gt;11 has been limited to two people.&lt;br /&gt;12 If I may just cut to the chase, I believe that&lt;br /&gt;13 perhaps...&lt;br /&gt;14 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I'm sorry. I thought you wanted me to pause for a&lt;br /&gt;16 moment.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. No.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. If you wish, Mr. Boies, I can just cut to the chase and&lt;br /&gt;19 perhaps you are talking about the polygamy and polyandry.&lt;br /&gt;20 Was that -- do you wish me to speak to the question of&lt;br /&gt;21 whether that violates the rule of two?&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. First of all, you recognize that over the last 300 years&lt;br /&gt;23 there have been more polygamous marriages than there have&lt;br /&gt;24 been marriages that have been limited to two people; would&lt;br /&gt;25 you agree with that?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2890&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I don't know, but -- my strong suspicion would be that&lt;br /&gt;2 that is erroneous, but I do not know.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. How many -- how many societies --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. In fact, I would be extremely surprised if that were a&lt;br /&gt;5 true statement.&lt;br /&gt;6 If I may --&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Let me ask you some questions about that.&lt;br /&gt;8 What societies are you aware of that prior to the&lt;br /&gt;9 last hundred years had polygamy as a regular course?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. The best scholarly estimate I have seen on that is&lt;br /&gt;11 83 percent.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Eighty-three percent of the countries?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Eighty-three percent of societies.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Eighty-three percent of societies had polygamy as a&lt;br /&gt;15 regular course?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. My question is --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I'm trying to be precise here.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. My question is: Prior to the last hundred years --&lt;br /&gt;20 A. If you wish, we could just say in human history, because&lt;br /&gt;21 the scholarship I'm citing that says 83 percent, he's just&lt;br /&gt;22 trying to --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Eighty-three percent of what? What is the numerator?&lt;br /&gt;24 What's the --&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Societies, societies. Eighty-three percent of societies&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2891&lt;br /&gt;1 permit polygamy.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Okay. Eighty-three percent of societies permit&lt;br /&gt;3 polygamy?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. That's a very different issue than how many marriages&lt;br /&gt;5 are polygamous.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. I do understand that. Because in a society that permits&lt;br /&gt;7 polygamy, you may still have marriages that only involve two&lt;br /&gt;8 people, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. You may still have the overwhelming majority of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriages -- and, in fact, that is the case -- that involve&lt;br /&gt;11 two people.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. That's what I'm asking you, okay? And let's take the&lt;br /&gt;13 most populous places, India and China.&lt;br /&gt;14 Is it your judgment that the majority of marriages&lt;br /&gt;15 in those two places prior to the last hundred years have been&lt;br /&gt;16 limited to just two people as opposed to polygamous&lt;br /&gt;17 marriages?&lt;br /&gt;18 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Do you understand the question?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Completely. And I'm struggling to help you understand&lt;br /&gt;21 my answer which is -- my answer to your question is yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 I think I could just save us some time if I would&lt;br /&gt;23 be allowed to say another sentence or two.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Go ahead. But try to keep it brief.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I will. I promise you.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2892&lt;br /&gt;1 Even in instances of a man engaging in polygamous&lt;br /&gt;2 marriage, each marriage is separate. He -- one man marries&lt;br /&gt;3 one woman. That's the way it works.&lt;br /&gt;4 The scholars then have pointed out that in certain&lt;br /&gt;5 societies, many societies, men of wealth and power then go on&lt;br /&gt;6 to marry additional women. They do not marry as a group. It&lt;br /&gt;7 is not a group marriage. It permits certain men that have&lt;br /&gt;8 access to power to marry more than one woman. Each marriage&lt;br /&gt;9 is a separate marriage of one man and one woman.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Let me be sure I understand what you are saying.&lt;br /&gt;11 First, just as a background question, are you aware&lt;br /&gt;12 of instances in which a man has actually married multiple&lt;br /&gt;13 women at the same time?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Well, that would be -- the term that would be used is&lt;br /&gt;15 poly- -- I mean, sorry, polyamory, a group.&lt;br /&gt;16 To the best of my knowledge, that is -- I know it&lt;br /&gt;17 is virtually non-present in human experience and, to the best&lt;br /&gt;18 of my knowledge -- I could be mistaken on this because&lt;br /&gt;19 history is long and there have been many people who have&lt;br /&gt;20 lived on this earth, but I do not think there are examples of&lt;br /&gt;21 group marriages in the human experience.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And by group marriages -- I just want to be clear -- I'm&lt;br /&gt;23 saying where a man marries multiple women at the same time.&lt;br /&gt;24 You are not aware of any instances like that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. At the same moment? They all stand together, one man&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2893&lt;br /&gt;1 and a bunch of women and they say, "You are all married now"?&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Two or more women.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I am -- since you are asking me, perhaps you found an&lt;br /&gt;4 example. I am certainly not aware of one.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Okay. Now, let me turn to what you are aware of, and&lt;br /&gt;6 that is where a man marries more than one woman at different&lt;br /&gt;7 points in time, so-called polygamy, or some situations you&lt;br /&gt;8 are also aware of where a woman may marry more than one man,&lt;br /&gt;9 correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Well, what that is called is --&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. I'm not asking what it's called.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. -- polyandry.&lt;br /&gt;13 There's is an important clarification here because&lt;br /&gt;14 in almost all known examples of polyandry, it's the woman who&lt;br /&gt;15 marries sequentially two brothers, two people who are&lt;br /&gt;16 brothers to one another. And there are cases where, because&lt;br /&gt;17 the sex ratio is so skewed, that as a survival adaptation for&lt;br /&gt;18 these very rare subgroups, it is permitted for a woman to&lt;br /&gt;19 marry two males who are brothers to one another sequentially.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Is it your testimony that the only instances that you&lt;br /&gt;21 are aware of women marrying more than one man sequentially,&lt;br /&gt;22 so that after marrying the second one she was married to two&lt;br /&gt;23 people --&lt;br /&gt;24 A. The brothers.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. -- is where they were brothers? Is that your testimony?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2894&lt;br /&gt;1 A. It's my testimony that --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I'm just asking whether that's your testimony, sir.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I'm trying to answer your question. This is a&lt;br /&gt;4 subject --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. This is a "yes" or "no" question.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. If you are going to -- we are back to where we were&lt;br /&gt;7 yesterday. If you are going to make me choose between those&lt;br /&gt;8 two words, then I'm going to just say --&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Between what two words?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. It's not a "yes" or "no" question. I'm answering the --&lt;br /&gt;11 in the time we are arguing about this, I could have given you&lt;br /&gt;12 my answer. My answer is that --&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Which question are you answering?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. The best scholarship --&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Wait a minute. What question are you answering right&lt;br /&gt;16 now?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. It seemed to me that you said, Is it your testimony that&lt;br /&gt;18 there are no examples of polyandrous marriages, other than&lt;br /&gt;19 the woman marrying the two brothers. And I was seeking to&lt;br /&gt;20 answer that question succinctly.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Now, that question is actually the question I was asking&lt;br /&gt;22 you.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Now, can you answer that question "yes" or "no"? If you&lt;br /&gt;25 can't, I'm going to move on because it's not that important.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2895&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Okay. Then let's move on because it does not permit a&lt;br /&gt;2 "yes" or "no" answer.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. But I want -- but I want to know whether you are&lt;br /&gt;4 prepared to answer "yes" or "no"?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I would give a lot if I could have 15 seconds to answer&lt;br /&gt;6 the question.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Go.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. The best scholarship available shows that almost all&lt;br /&gt;9 examples of polyandrous marriages involve a woman marrying&lt;br /&gt;10 the two brothers. There are very rare exceptions to that,&lt;br /&gt;11 that have been documented by the ethnographic literature.&lt;br /&gt;12 In addition, polyandry as a human phenomenon is&lt;br /&gt;13 extraordinarily rare in the human record. How did I do?&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. That was good.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. That was okay?&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. That was okay.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Good.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Now -- and the reason I didn't want to spend much time&lt;br /&gt;19 on it is because I agree that's unusual.&lt;br /&gt;20 Polygamy, however, as you say, was present in&lt;br /&gt;21 83 percent of the societies. And in those cases --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. A very minority -- as a minority family form.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. I'm going to ask you about that. And I might as well do&lt;br /&gt;24 that now.&lt;br /&gt;25 What percentages of marriages prior to the last&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2896&lt;br /&gt;1 hundred years, were polygamous? That is, what percentage of&lt;br /&gt;2 the people were in polygamous marriages as opposed to&lt;br /&gt;3 marriages between just two people?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. You know, I'm a little embarrassed to tell you, I don't&lt;br /&gt;5 know.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. But approximately?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I honestly don't know. I know that my -- well, I'll&lt;br /&gt;8 stop there. I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Okay. Now, I want to pursue whether polygamous&lt;br /&gt;10 marriages are consistent with your so-called rule of two.&lt;br /&gt;11 As I understand it --&lt;br /&gt;12 A. We are now down to so-called?&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Well, your rule of two. It just seems to me that --&lt;br /&gt;14 well, never mind. I'll put it in the form of a question.&lt;br /&gt;15 If you have a man who has five wives at the same&lt;br /&gt;16 time --&lt;br /&gt;17 A. He doesn't marry them at the same time.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. But he has them at the same time.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. After he has married the fifth, he has five.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Right.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. After he has married one, he has one.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. After he's married two --&lt;br /&gt;23 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;24 A. .... has two. That's how it works.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And after he has married his fifth wife, assuming they&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2897&lt;br /&gt;1 all continue to live and there has been no divorce, he has&lt;br /&gt;2 five wives, right?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, it's your testimony that that man with five wives&lt;br /&gt;5 is consistent -- that marriage is consistent with what you&lt;br /&gt;6 say is your rule of two; is that correct? That is a yes or&lt;br /&gt;7 no answer.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Based on the findings of the anthropologists who've&lt;br /&gt;9 actually studied this, yes, the answer to your question is&lt;br /&gt;10 yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And when you say based on the scholars that have studied&lt;br /&gt;12 this, that's because you're simply repeating the things that&lt;br /&gt;13 these scholars say?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. You're just a transmitter of the findings of these&lt;br /&gt;16 scholars, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Well, you're putting words in my mouth now.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Well, let's look at your words in your deposition, page&lt;br /&gt;21 300. Do you have your deposition up there?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I don't believe I do.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. It's in the first book, the first book Mr. Cooper gave.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: I beg your pardon.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: It's in the plaintiffs' binder.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2898&lt;br /&gt;1 THE WITNESS: I might be able to save us time by&lt;br /&gt;2 saying that the substance of your comment is correct. I was&lt;br /&gt;3 simply trying to report the view of some scholars.&lt;br /&gt;4 It's the transmitter thing. I just was trying to&lt;br /&gt;5 suggest that I was basing my arguments on -- on scholarship.&lt;br /&gt;6 I'm not even saying there aren't scholars that have a&lt;br /&gt;7 different point of view. I'm saying there are scholars,&lt;br /&gt;8 respected scholars, who have made this argument based on&lt;br /&gt;9 ethnographic research. And I've read them. And that's the&lt;br /&gt;10 basis for my assertion. That's all.&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. I understand. I'm really just addressing whether I was&lt;br /&gt;13 putting words in your mouth. And if you look at page 300,&lt;br /&gt;14 lines 7 through 12. And you can read any other portion of&lt;br /&gt;15 this that you want. But you have said that you are basing&lt;br /&gt;16 your analysis on the work of highly-regarded scholars. And&lt;br /&gt;17 then you say --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Oh, a gotcha moment. I used the word "I'm a transmitter&lt;br /&gt;19 of findings of eminent scholars." Gotcha. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. That's not a gotcha. I'm just trying to --&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I said "transmitter" seven months ago in a deposition.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And what you meant there was that what you were doing&lt;br /&gt;23 was, you weren't making these conclusions on your own. You&lt;br /&gt;24 were simply repeating what these scholars had said. Is that&lt;br /&gt;25 correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2899&lt;br /&gt;1 A. If I may say it in my own words?&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Well --&lt;br /&gt;3 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I was basing --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Let me look at your own words on page 300, at lines 7 to&lt;br /&gt;6 12:&lt;br /&gt;7 "I'm simply repeating things that they&lt;br /&gt;8 say. I can assure you, I'm not making any of&lt;br /&gt;9 this up on my own. These are not my own&lt;br /&gt;10 conclusions. I'm -- I'm a transmitter here&lt;br /&gt;11 of findings of these eminent scholars."&lt;br /&gt;12 Did you give that testimony at your deposition?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. That's what I said at the deposition.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay. Now, I want to be sure that I've got an answer to&lt;br /&gt;15 my question. And if you did answer it, I apologize, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 But is it your judgment that a man who is married&lt;br /&gt;17 at the same time, that is, he has married multiple wives&lt;br /&gt;18 along the way --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Sequentially.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Sequentially -- and he is now married to five women --&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Each with a separate ceremony and a separate "I do."&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Yes. Is it your view that that man who has married one&lt;br /&gt;23 wife, and then another wife, and then another wife, and then&lt;br /&gt;24 another wife, and then another wife, and now has five wives,&lt;br /&gt;25 and they are all his wives at the same time, that that&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2900&lt;br /&gt;1 marriage is consistent with your rule of two?&lt;br /&gt;2 And that is a yes or no question.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I concur with Bronislaw Malinowski, and others, who say&lt;br /&gt;4 that that is consistent with the two rule of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Okay. Now, let me go on to your third essential&lt;br /&gt;6 structure of the institution of marriage. And that is sex.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. That's a good subject.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. It is. And I don't want to fall into the trap of making&lt;br /&gt;9 sex boring.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Maybe together we can do that.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;13 No insinuation.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. My question was going to be, and is now, whether you are&lt;br /&gt;16 aware of instances in which marriage -- marriages are in --&lt;br /&gt;17 they are inconsistent with your rule of sex?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I'm sorry. You were saying the couple is married and&lt;br /&gt;19 they do not have sexual intercourse, am I aware of such&lt;br /&gt;20 marriages?&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. That actually wasn't my question, but why don't you&lt;br /&gt;22 answer that question. That's really easy, right? The answer&lt;br /&gt;23 to that is yes, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I -- I was going to answer no. But maybe I'm&lt;br /&gt;25 misunderstanding the nature of your question.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2901&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. All right. You --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. The presumption, the presumption of sex is one of the&lt;br /&gt;3 foundational elements of marriage. And failure to consummate&lt;br /&gt;4 the marriage through sexual intercourse, in the overwhelming&lt;br /&gt;5 majority in societies, in both law and custom, is grounds for&lt;br /&gt;6 divorce.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Let me -- let me --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. That's why we have terms like the "marriage bed,"&lt;br /&gt;9 "culminating the marriage." That's what happens. The couple&lt;br /&gt;10 gets married and then they have sexual intercourse.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. So it's your testimony that you're not aware of any&lt;br /&gt;12 married couples who don't have sex?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Well, here we go. Going to make it boring again.&lt;br /&gt;14 There are some married couples in the world today&lt;br /&gt;15 who have never had sexual intercourse? Oh, my gosh, well, I&lt;br /&gt;16 suppose, just thinking hypothetically, I'm trying to think.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. If you're not aware of them, I'm not asking you to&lt;br /&gt;18 hypothesize.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. There could be an example, say, of an incarcerated man&lt;br /&gt;20 who marries while he's incarceration. It could be true that&lt;br /&gt;21 the system he's in is one of the minority of systems that&lt;br /&gt;22 does not produce -- allow for conjugal visits, and he will&lt;br /&gt;23 not be able to consummate the sexual relationship with his&lt;br /&gt;24 wife until he is released from prison.&lt;br /&gt;25 And during the time that he is in prison and&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2902&lt;br /&gt;1 married, and unable to have a conjugal visit, I guess it's&lt;br /&gt;2 possible or likely that that man will not have had sexual&lt;br /&gt;3 intercourse with his wife, by virtue of incarceration. And&lt;br /&gt;4 he will have to wait until after he is released or he will&lt;br /&gt;5 have to wait until the period of a conjugal visit. That&lt;br /&gt;6 would be an example.&lt;br /&gt;7 Or you might have examples of a husband and wife&lt;br /&gt;8 who simply don't like sex; they don't want to have sex; it's&lt;br /&gt;9 not of interest to them, or they don't hold it as a valuable&lt;br /&gt;10 component of anything in life. And so they may wish to get&lt;br /&gt;11 married for other reasons having nothing to do with sex. And&lt;br /&gt;12 so they may just be one of these couples -- I've never met&lt;br /&gt;13 one. I'm not aware of it being, at all, a pattern in humans.&lt;br /&gt;14 In fact, I believe the pattern is entirely in the opposite&lt;br /&gt;15 direction. But, hypothetically, could there be such a case?&lt;br /&gt;16 I suppose there could.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Well, sir, you know perfectly well that these are not&lt;br /&gt;18 sort of just hypothetical cases. Correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. You don't? You don't? Like this example of the&lt;br /&gt;21 incarcerated prisoner, you know perfectly well that that's a&lt;br /&gt;22 real example from a real court case; don't you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. No, sir, I do not.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. You don't?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Why would you try to put words in my mouth of that&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2903&lt;br /&gt;1 nature?&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Well, because it is my understanding that you have&lt;br /&gt;3 previously recognized that -- this very specific example of&lt;br /&gt;4 where the United States Supreme Court held that you could not&lt;br /&gt;5 deprive somebody of the right to marry merely because they&lt;br /&gt;6 were incarcerated and could not have sex.&lt;br /&gt;7 And I thought that you had talked about that. And&lt;br /&gt;8 if you tell me that that's not so, and I can't find --&lt;br /&gt;9 A. To the best of my ability -- I mean, to the best of my&lt;br /&gt;10 recollection, I'm telling you that that is not so.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. So you are not aware of that case, at all?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. No, sir. Not -- no.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I'm not saying that in the course of a lifetime somebody&lt;br /&gt;15 has never said anything to me about it. I just have no&lt;br /&gt;16 recollection of it.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Okay. So other -- and I don't want you to hypothesize.&lt;br /&gt;18 Other than hypothetical examples --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I have talked about issues of -- I have thought about&lt;br /&gt;20 and in conversation with others talked about the issue of&lt;br /&gt;21 prisoners who marry. I have talked about that.&lt;br /&gt;22 But I am not aware -- I'm not a student of -- I&lt;br /&gt;23 don't know what year the court case -- I'm not even aware --&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. -- this thing that you're talking about.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2904&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. All right. Let me approach it this way.&lt;br /&gt;2 I'm not asking you to hypothesize. I'm just asking&lt;br /&gt;3 you whether you are aware of any examples of marriages that&lt;br /&gt;4 are inconsistent with your rule of sex. If you are not aware&lt;br /&gt;5 of them, I don't want you to hypothesize or try to think up&lt;br /&gt;6 what might exist.&lt;br /&gt;7 Just, are you aware of any examples or not?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Okay. Let me --&lt;br /&gt;10 A. May I clarify? You're asking me am I aware of an&lt;br /&gt;11 individual marriage case, an individual married couple that&lt;br /&gt;12 has not consummated their marriage through sexual&lt;br /&gt;13 intercourse? Is that -- is that your question?&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. No. My -- my question was whether you were aware of any&lt;br /&gt;15 examples of marriages that were inconsistent with your rule&lt;br /&gt;16 of sex?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Rule of sex --&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Now -- now --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I was just asking if you were asking me of an individual&lt;br /&gt;20 couple, did I know of an individual couple who had not&lt;br /&gt;21 consummated their marriage through sexual intercourse.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Let me approach it this way, okay.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I'm not aware of such a couple.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Let me approach it this way, because this has gone on&lt;br /&gt;25 long enough where I have found the deposition that I thought&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2905&lt;br /&gt;1 existed.&lt;br /&gt;2 Would you turn to page 258 of your deposition. And&lt;br /&gt;3 beginning at line 13:&lt;br /&gt;4 "But in any society, if a man and woman&lt;br /&gt;5 want to marry and not have sex at all, and&lt;br /&gt;6 neither one seek divorce, they're free to do&lt;br /&gt;7 that, right?&lt;br /&gt;8 "ANSWER: Well, you know, the law on&lt;br /&gt;9 this has changed in recent decades. And now,&lt;br /&gt;10 in recent years, there has been a growing&lt;br /&gt;11 permission on the part of courts to accept&lt;br /&gt;12 married couples who cannot have sexual&lt;br /&gt;13 intercourse. For example, when one spouse is&lt;br /&gt;14 in prison."&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you see that, sir?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. That's exactly what I told you in my answer.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. This doesn't say it's hypothetical, does it, sir?&lt;br /&gt;18 You're not talking hypothetical --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I did not use -- I don't think I used the word&lt;br /&gt;20 "hypothetical" in my answer. I said in cases where a&lt;br /&gt;21 prisoner is unable to consummate his marriage, he would have&lt;br /&gt;22 to depend upon getting out of prison to do so, or conjugal&lt;br /&gt;23 visits. I think that's what I said.&lt;br /&gt;24 And you said, oh, no, there's a specific court&lt;br /&gt;25 case. And I said, I'm not aware of a specific court case.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2906&lt;br /&gt;1 Which I'm not.&lt;br /&gt;2 I do know that the courts allow, I believe, as a&lt;br /&gt;3 matter of being a generally-informed person, that courts&lt;br /&gt;4 allow -- many courts -- I don't know. Every court? I don't&lt;br /&gt;5 know. Many courts allow prisoners to marry.&lt;br /&gt;6 And it's a topic of interest to me as a person&lt;br /&gt;7 interested in marriage. And I have the level of knowledge as&lt;br /&gt;8 adumbrated in this definition. Which is not a deep one, but&lt;br /&gt;9 I know that prisoners are allowed to marry. And I know that&lt;br /&gt;10 in order to consummate the marriage, they would have to wait&lt;br /&gt;11 until they get out of prison, or if they are in a system that&lt;br /&gt;12 allows conjugal visits.&lt;br /&gt;13 That's all I know. I'm not aware of specific court&lt;br /&gt;14 cases that have or haven't done this. I know it's been a&lt;br /&gt;15 tendency on the part of the courts, or at least some courts,&lt;br /&gt;16 to -- to allow prisoners to marry.&lt;br /&gt;17 It's not my area of expertise. I just -- that's my&lt;br /&gt;18 level of knowledge.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. But it is clear, is it not, that the growing permission&lt;br /&gt;20 on the part of courts to accept married couples who cannot&lt;br /&gt;21 have sexual intercourse, for example, when one spouse is in&lt;br /&gt;22 prison, is something that exists today. It's not a&lt;br /&gt;23 hypothetical situation, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I don't think I ever said it's a hypothetical.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. I'm not asking whether you ever said it or not. I think&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2907&lt;br /&gt;1 the record will show whatever it shows.&lt;br /&gt;2 All I'm asking you now is --&lt;br /&gt;3 A. If you're asking me if there are prisoners who can&lt;br /&gt;4 marry, the answer, to my best knowledge, is yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Even when they cannot have sexual intercourse, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Until they get out of prison.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Well, if they are in for life, they never get out of&lt;br /&gt;8 prison, right?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Well, if they're in life and -- they're in prison for&lt;br /&gt;10 life, and they're in a system that does not allow any&lt;br /&gt;11 conjugal visits, I would have to consult experts to find out&lt;br /&gt;12 if there is a human being in the country who is in such a&lt;br /&gt;13 situation. He's in prison for life, he's married, and he is&lt;br /&gt;14 not in a system in which any conjugal visitation is allowed.&lt;br /&gt;15 And if there -- I don't know whether there is such&lt;br /&gt;16 a person. But if there were, then it would be true that that&lt;br /&gt;17 person would be a married person who cannot consummate his&lt;br /&gt;18 marriage through sexual intercourse. That's my answer to&lt;br /&gt;19 your question.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And at your deposition on November 3, 2009, you say:&lt;br /&gt;21 "The law on this has changed in recent&lt;br /&gt;22 decades. And now, in recent years, there has&lt;br /&gt;23 been a growing permission on the part of&lt;br /&gt;24 courts to accept married couples who cannot&lt;br /&gt;25 have sexual intercourse. For example, when&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2908&lt;br /&gt;1 one spouse is in prison."&lt;br /&gt;2 Correct, that's what you said on November 3, 2009,&lt;br /&gt;3 correct? That is a --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes. Yes. I'm not looking at a transcript now. But,&lt;br /&gt;5 yes, that's what I said.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And it is your testimony that you have never looked at&lt;br /&gt;7 any court cases that address whether or not prisoners can&lt;br /&gt;8 marry, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. To the very best of my recollection and memory, I have&lt;br /&gt;10 never consulted, by reading anything, a court document that&lt;br /&gt;11 is related to the topic that we are discussing. I'm not&lt;br /&gt;12 saying I never have. I have been reading things for a long&lt;br /&gt;13 time. But, to the best of my knowledge, I have never read a&lt;br /&gt;14 court document that is specifically focused on this topic.&lt;br /&gt;15 And if I ever have, then I have forgotten it. But I don't&lt;br /&gt;16 really, honestly, don't think I have.&lt;br /&gt;17 I have had conversations with people who are&lt;br /&gt;18 lawyers about the -- I don't even know at which level this&lt;br /&gt;19 thing gets decided. But I know that there's a tendency to&lt;br /&gt;20 allow more freedom, I believe -- I believe that there is a&lt;br /&gt;21 tendency to allow prisoners more freedom than was heretofore&lt;br /&gt;22 the case to marry. And that's about as far as I was trying&lt;br /&gt;23 to go in my deposition statement.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. What I'm focusing on now, sir, is, in your study of&lt;br /&gt;25 marriage, have you come across cases from the United States&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2909&lt;br /&gt;1 Supreme Court that talk about marriage as a fundamental right&lt;br /&gt;2 of all people?&lt;br /&gt;3 Have you come across any cases that discuss that?&lt;br /&gt;4 That is a yes or no question.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. By "come across" do you mean have I read -- read&lt;br /&gt;6 something that the courts have written?&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Let's start with that. Have you read any Supreme Court&lt;br /&gt;8 opinions that discuss marriage as a fundamental right? Just&lt;br /&gt;9 yes or no.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Well, I --&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Or "I don't remember."&lt;br /&gt;12 A. To the best of my knowledge, the answer is no.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay. Now, has any person summarized for you the&lt;br /&gt;14 holdings of the United States Supreme Court in cases that&lt;br /&gt;15 discuss the fundamental right to marry?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I believe the answer to that is yes, because if someone,&lt;br /&gt;17 you or someone were to ask me is it my understanding that the&lt;br /&gt;18 Supreme Court has stated -- at some point in time, at any&lt;br /&gt;19 point in time, has used the term "fundamental right to marry"&lt;br /&gt;20 and has articulated a fundamental right to marry, my answer&lt;br /&gt;21 would be that I believe -- I believe that the Supreme Court&lt;br /&gt;22 has stated such a right.&lt;br /&gt;23 And it would be my -- I would not be surprised to&lt;br /&gt;24 learn that were true. I would be happy to learn that it's&lt;br /&gt;25 true. But I'm not basing it on sure knowledge of having read&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2910&lt;br /&gt;1 any document.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I'm not asking you whether you would be surprised by it.&lt;br /&gt;3 I'm just trying to ask you whether you are aware of it and&lt;br /&gt;4 whether you considered that in your work. That's all I was&lt;br /&gt;5 trying to get at.&lt;br /&gt;6 And having talked about it this far, does it&lt;br /&gt;7 refresh your recollection that somebody has talked to you&lt;br /&gt;8 about the United States Supreme Court holding that prisoners&lt;br /&gt;9 had a fundamental right to marry, even if they were not able&lt;br /&gt;10 to have sex?&lt;br /&gt;11 Does that refresh your recollection that you have&lt;br /&gt;12 either been told that or read that?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. No, sir. I --&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. -- to the best of my knowledge, have never been told&lt;br /&gt;16 that or ever read that.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. To the best of my recollection.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. Let me turn to another subject.&lt;br /&gt;20 And let me ask you to look at tab 8.&lt;br /&gt;21 (Mr. Cooper confers with Mr. Boies.)&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. BOIES: Absolutely. Absolutely.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE COURT: All right. Can we resume at five&lt;br /&gt;24 minutes of the hour?&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. BOIES: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2911&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;2 (Recess taken from 10:40 to 10:58 a.m.)&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: Mr. Boies, you may continue.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. BOIES: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Would you turn to tab 8 in the binder that we gave you&lt;br /&gt;7 this morning.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2879. And it's titled, "The&lt;br /&gt;10 Marriage Movement. A Statement of principles." And you're&lt;br /&gt;11 familiar with this, are you not, sir?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And this was put out by the Institute for American&lt;br /&gt;14 Values; is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. It was put out by three organizations; one of which was&lt;br /&gt;16 the Institute for American Values.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And did you review this before it was put out?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And did you agree with it?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Well, if -- if I had -- if it had been my own writing, I&lt;br /&gt;21 would have -- the words would not have been the same. But I&lt;br /&gt;22 supported -- I supported the overall thrust of the document,&lt;br /&gt;23 and felt that it was a valuable contribution to the public&lt;br /&gt;24 discussion.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And one of the things the document talks about is how&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2912&lt;br /&gt;1 marriage is in crisis; is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I don't recall if it used the words "crisis," but it&lt;br /&gt;3 wouldn't surprise me to find that it did.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. If you turn to page 5.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;6 Exhibit 2879.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. COOPER: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Very well. 2879 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;9 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2879 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;10 THE WITNESS: Yes, okay, it does use the word&lt;br /&gt;11 "crisis."&lt;br /&gt;12 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And it discusses why marriage has weakened, correct,&lt;br /&gt;14 sir?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes, sir. I mean, I'm assuming it does. I -- I believe&lt;br /&gt;16 it -- my recollection is that it does.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Yes. And your recollection is correct.&lt;br /&gt;18 And the reasons that are given why marriage is&lt;br /&gt;19 weakened have nothing to do with homosexuality or same-sex&lt;br /&gt;20 marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. The reasons given in this document?&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. From the year 2000?&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. To the best of my recollection, we did not include&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2913&lt;br /&gt;1 anything about homosexuality or the then not very&lt;br /&gt;2 significant -- not very -- you know, very nascent gay&lt;br /&gt;3 marriage legal cases. I'm not confident of this but, to the&lt;br /&gt;4 best of my knowledge, this document does not make any&lt;br /&gt;5 extensive or perhaps even no references to those topics.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. That's based on my memory.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you to turn to page 8. And&lt;br /&gt;9 there's a heading that says, "What is Marriage? Six&lt;br /&gt;10 Dimensions." And it says, "Marriage Has At Least Six&lt;br /&gt;11 Important Dimensions."&lt;br /&gt;12 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And do you agree with that?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Marriage has at least six important dimensions?&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Oh, my goodness. I think I would have to take a moment&lt;br /&gt;18 to review what this group of scholars wrote.&lt;br /&gt;19 I was a signatory of this document, and so I read&lt;br /&gt;20 it and thought it was a valuable and positive contribution.&lt;br /&gt;21 But if you want me to -- I'm not quite sure if you -- if you&lt;br /&gt;22 want me to, on a word-by-word basis, say I agree with every&lt;br /&gt;23 single sentence in the following few paragraphs, I'm afraid&lt;br /&gt;24 you're going to have to give me a moment to read them and&lt;br /&gt;25 refresh my memory of what the actual wording of each one of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2914&lt;br /&gt;1 them is.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. My present question -- if you have to read it, read it.&lt;br /&gt;3 But my present question was simply whether you, as a&lt;br /&gt;4 signatory to this document, agree that marriage has at least&lt;br /&gt;5 six important dimensions?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. What I will say is that I agree that this is a -- for&lt;br /&gt;7 the purposes of this document, for what this document was&lt;br /&gt;8 trying to do, I believe that this is a useful way of&lt;br /&gt;9 describing marriage's dimensions.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. The first of these six important dimensions is that&lt;br /&gt;11 "Marriage is a legal contract." Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And taking the current subject of gay and heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage, whether you have a heterosexual couple or a gay or&lt;br /&gt;15 lesbian couple, the dimension of marriage as a legal contract&lt;br /&gt;16 would be the same, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And the second dimension --&lt;br /&gt;19 A. You're saying that gay -- you're saying that same-sex&lt;br /&gt;20 marriage would be a legal contract like opposite-sex&lt;br /&gt;21 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And the second important dimension that's listed here&lt;br /&gt;25 is, "Marriage is a financial partnership." Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2915&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That would be the same, as well.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And that would be the same for heterosexual couples and&lt;br /&gt;3 homosexual couples, correct?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And the next important dimension of marriage that's&lt;br /&gt;6 listed here is, "Marriage is a sacred promise." And that,&lt;br /&gt;7 again, would be the same for gay and lesbian couples as for&lt;br /&gt;8 heterosexual couples, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. As would be the same in "sexual union" and "personal&lt;br /&gt;10 bond."&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Which are the next two?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. "Marriage is a sexual union" was the fourth important&lt;br /&gt;14 dimension. And "Marriage is a personal bond" was the fifth&lt;br /&gt;15 important dimension. Correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And the sixth important dimension is, "Marriage is a&lt;br /&gt;18 family-making bond," correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And, obviously, a heterosexual marriage can -- and by&lt;br /&gt;21 "family-making bond," let me just ask, does this mean it's a&lt;br /&gt;22 family-making bond even when there are only two people, or&lt;br /&gt;23 does it mean that this is a way of establishing children?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I just -- I -- I'm afraid -- I'm sorry. Could you&lt;br /&gt;25 repeat the question.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2916&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Sure. Let me break it up this way. The sixth important&lt;br /&gt;2 dimension is, "Marriage is a family-making bond."&lt;br /&gt;3 Now, when two people are married, they become a&lt;br /&gt;4 family, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And that is true for gay and lesbian couples on the one&lt;br /&gt;7 hand, and --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Opposite.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. -- heterosexual couples on the other, right?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And both gay and lesbian couples on the one hand and&lt;br /&gt;12 opposite sex couples on the other can raise children within&lt;br /&gt;13 that family bond, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Can both opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples raise&lt;br /&gt;15 children? Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Okay. And in that connection, let me ask you --&lt;br /&gt;17 A. The important word there is the verb "raise."&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. In that connection, let me ask you to turn to tab 9.&lt;br /&gt;21 This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2898. It is an article in the&lt;br /&gt;22 Social Science Quarterly by Laura Langbein and Mark Yost,&lt;br /&gt;23 entitled "Same-Sex Marriage and Negative Externalities."&lt;br /&gt;24 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I am looking at this article for the first time, I&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2917&lt;br /&gt;1 believe, yes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. So you have not seen this before?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. To the best of my knowledge, I have not.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Do you know either of these authors?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. So you're not familiar with either of these two authors&lt;br /&gt;7 or their work?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I can't say that I've never read anything by them. But&lt;br /&gt;9 sitting here right now, they are not -- those names are not&lt;br /&gt;10 familiar to me.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, we would ask you take&lt;br /&gt;12 judicial notice of Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2898.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, we have no objection to&lt;br /&gt;15 the request made by Mr. Boies. I would note, this is a&lt;br /&gt;16 document we haven't seen until, I think, this morning. But&lt;br /&gt;17 we have no objection to you taking judicial notice of it.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Fine.&lt;br /&gt;19 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, on the first page there is a summary, and there are&lt;br /&gt;21 headings: "Objectives," "Methods," "Results," and&lt;br /&gt;22 "Conclusions."&lt;br /&gt;23 Do you see those headings?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, after "Conclusions" the article states as the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2918&lt;br /&gt;1 conclusions:&lt;br /&gt;2 "The argument that same-sex marriage&lt;br /&gt;3 poses a negative externality on society&lt;br /&gt;4 cannot be rationally held. Although many&lt;br /&gt;5 might believe that this conclusion is so&lt;br /&gt;6 obvious that it does not warrant testing,&lt;br /&gt;7 many politicians use this argument as a&lt;br /&gt;8 fact-based rationale to legitimatize bans on&lt;br /&gt;9 same-sex marriage."&lt;br /&gt;10 Now, you have said that you don't recall having&lt;br /&gt;11 seen this article before. But are you aware of scholars who&lt;br /&gt;12 have asserted, in peer-reviewed articles, that the argument&lt;br /&gt;13 that same-sex marriage poses a negative externality on&lt;br /&gt;14 society cannot be rationally held?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes. And I'm also aware of many arguing that it's so&lt;br /&gt;16 obvious that it need not warrant -- it need not be tested.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. So you're aware of --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. In other words, it's a self-evident beginning&lt;br /&gt;19 proposition for them. They think that it's so self-evident&lt;br /&gt;20 that anybody who has an opposing point of view is not a&lt;br /&gt;21 rational person.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Many articles say this.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Many articles say this?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2919&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Incidentally, you talked about how the issues that you&lt;br /&gt;2 are addressing are issues that are addressed by sociologists,&lt;br /&gt;3 anthropologists, and psychologists, and other scholars.&lt;br /&gt;4 Have you looked at what associations of those&lt;br /&gt;5 scholars have said about same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir. A number of them I have looked at, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 I don't know that I've necessarily looked at every one, but&lt;br /&gt;8 I've certainly seen a number of them.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Do you know, for example -- I'm going to hand out&lt;br /&gt;10 another binder.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Do you know, for example, what position the American&lt;br /&gt;13 Psychoanalytic Association takes with respect to same-sex&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. My recollection is that their corporate kind of lobbying&lt;br /&gt;16 body has endorsed it.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. When you say their lobbying body --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Or their -- the leaders of their association, let's put&lt;br /&gt;19 it that way. The people that speak for them as -- as -- as a&lt;br /&gt;20 professional scholarly association, their leaders.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Let me ask you to look at tab 3 of this new binder that&lt;br /&gt;22 I just handed you, where you have a publication of the&lt;br /&gt;23 American Psychoanalytic Association. Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I think my tab 3 says "Lesbian Mothers, Gay Fathers and&lt;br /&gt;25 Their Children: A Review." Unless I'm --&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2920&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. We must have a different -- you should have -- you&lt;br /&gt;2 should have Plaintiffs' Exhibit 760 there.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Am I in the wrong book? It's a different book.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. The binder you were just given, the small binder you&lt;br /&gt;5 were just given?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. 3.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Tab 3?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Here it is. He is.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. The American Psychoanalytic Association publication,&lt;br /&gt;10 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 760 --&lt;br /&gt;11 A. A position paper.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Yes. And it says the American Psychoanalytic&lt;br /&gt;13 Association, in 1977 [sic], endorsed the following marriage&lt;br /&gt;14 resolution.&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And it states:&lt;br /&gt;18 "Because marriage is a basic human right&lt;br /&gt;19 and an individual personal choice, RESOLVED,&lt;br /&gt;20 the State should not interfere with&lt;br /&gt;21 same-gender couples who choose to marry and&lt;br /&gt;22 share fully and equally in the rights,&lt;br /&gt;23 responsibilities, and commitment of civil&lt;br /&gt;24 marriage."&lt;br /&gt;25 Were you aware that in 1997, the American&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2921&lt;br /&gt;1 Psychoanalytic Association had adopted that resolution?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, sir, I believe I have -- I believe I have read this&lt;br /&gt;3 one, or read excerpts from this position statement.&lt;br /&gt;4 As I mentioned, there are many such statements.&lt;br /&gt;5 And I'm -- I might be able to save us time by saying, I&lt;br /&gt;6 perfectly understand that many scholarly associations, the&lt;br /&gt;7 leadership groups, as a policy matter have endorsed same-sex&lt;br /&gt;8 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Now, you say "as a policy matter."&lt;br /&gt;10 Let me ask you to look at page 4 of this exhibit,&lt;br /&gt;11 where a number of references are listed. And are you aware&lt;br /&gt;12 of these references? Have you read these materials?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Well, I've read a number of them.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Let me see if I've read every single one.&lt;br /&gt;16 No, sir, I have not read all of them.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Why don't you just identify the ones you've not read.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Bradford. Chan. DiPlacido. Falkner. Green, I don't&lt;br /&gt;19 know. Greenan. King. Herek.&lt;br /&gt;20 I've read Gilbert Herdt, but I can't recall if I've&lt;br /&gt;21 read this article or not by Gilbert Herdt and his colleague&lt;br /&gt;22 Kertzer.&lt;br /&gt;23 House, I don't believe I've read. Kertzner.&lt;br /&gt;24 Kiecolt-Glaser, I think I have read. I'm pretty sure I've&lt;br /&gt;25 actually cited it somewhere, but I can't speak with certainty&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2922&lt;br /&gt;1 on that.&lt;br /&gt;2 Kim, no, I don't think. Although, I'm not sure.&lt;br /&gt;3 Meyer, I don't think so. Morris, I don't think so.&lt;br /&gt;4 Patterson, I think so, but I -- I've certainly read&lt;br /&gt;5 Charlotte Patterson's work on this subject over the years.&lt;br /&gt;6 She has written many articles. And I believe I've read this&lt;br /&gt;7 one, but I'm not 100 percent confident that I have.&lt;br /&gt;8 Peplau, I don't think so. And Williams, I don't&lt;br /&gt;9 think so. Williams, I'm confident, I have not read.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. So you did read the Waite and Gallagher article?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. It's a book.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Book. And you think you've read the Patterson article.&lt;br /&gt;13 You're pretty sure you read the Kiecolt-Glaser&lt;br /&gt;14 article. And you read the two articles by Ama- -- is it --&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Amato, Paul Amato.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Amato. The two articles by Amato.&lt;br /&gt;17 And the article -- or book, I guess it is, by&lt;br /&gt;18 Blumstein and Schwartz. Is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. That's my best -- that's the best answer I can give you&lt;br /&gt;20 right now.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Let me just, while I'm here, the American&lt;br /&gt;22 Psychological Association has also adopted a resolution in&lt;br /&gt;23 favor of gay marriage, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And let me ask you to look at tab 4 in this binder. And&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2923&lt;br /&gt;1 this is Exhibit 765.&lt;br /&gt;2 Have you seen this document before?&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: I believe this is in evidence. Is it&lt;br /&gt;4 not?&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. BOIES: It is, Your Honor. It is, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE WITNESS: Mr. Boies, I'm fairly confident that&lt;br /&gt;7 I read it when it came out, but I can't absolutely give you&lt;br /&gt;8 a -- it's my best -- I certainly know of the endorsement.&lt;br /&gt;9 And I have certainly read of the endorsement.&lt;br /&gt;10 And I know that I've read excerpts. And I believe&lt;br /&gt;11 I read the document in its entirety when it came out, but I&lt;br /&gt;12 cannot say that with absolute certainty.&lt;br /&gt;13 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Now, on the third and fourth and fifth pages of the&lt;br /&gt;15 document, the last three pages of the document, there are a&lt;br /&gt;16 series of references. Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Now, this is -- this is a very long list. And by&lt;br /&gt;19 glancing at it, can you tell me whether you have read most of&lt;br /&gt;20 these or not read most of these?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. By "most" do you mean more than 50 percent?&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Yes. I'm just trying to figure out, is it faster to ask&lt;br /&gt;23 you those that you have read or those you have not read?&lt;br /&gt;24 Which is the faster way to go through this?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Just give me one moment. I think that I have not read&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2924&lt;br /&gt;1 at least 51 percent of these documents.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Okay. Then why don't you just tell me the ones you have&lt;br /&gt;3 read.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. The Anthropological Association statement.&lt;br /&gt;5 Again, I think -- well, that's a different&lt;br /&gt;6 Blumstein and Schwartz. I don't know if I've read that or&lt;br /&gt;7 not.&lt;br /&gt;8 Most of these I have not read. Some of them are&lt;br /&gt;9 duplicative of the other, the previous list that we were&lt;br /&gt;10 going through.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Is the question --&lt;br /&gt;12 THE WITNESS: Eskridge.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: -- whether he has read or not read?&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: Read.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Read.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOIES: Which are the ones that has he read.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE WITNESS: I see. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;18 American Anthropological Association, Eskridge,&lt;br /&gt;19 Goodridge. I think Johnson. I think -- I think those few&lt;br /&gt;20 are it, on this list.&lt;br /&gt;21 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Okay. Okay. So that would -- and you said Eskridge.&lt;br /&gt;23 Did you read both of the Eskridge articles that are here?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. No, sir. Just the Equality Practice. That was his&lt;br /&gt;25 book.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2925&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. So it would be --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I'm sorry. That -- I'm sorry. It was a -- a law review&lt;br /&gt;3 article.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. So you would have -- you would have read --&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I've also read his books, but that's a different --&lt;br /&gt;6 what's listed here is "Equality Practice," as a law review&lt;br /&gt;7 article.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. So you would have read four or perhaps five of the 40 or&lt;br /&gt;9 41 references that are listed here, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I think that's fair, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Let me ask you to turn to tab 10 in the first binder&lt;br /&gt;12 that I gave you this morning. Not the -- not the recent&lt;br /&gt;13 little binder, but the first binder I gave you this morning.&lt;br /&gt;14 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2899.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I'm sorry --&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOIES: May I approach, Your Honor?&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: Sure.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE WITNESS: I'm just having a hard time finding&lt;br /&gt;19 out the binder that I am to look in. One of these?&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. It's this binder here.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Okay. Goes up to 15.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Tab 10 in that binder.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. 10.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2899. It's entitled "Will&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2926&lt;br /&gt;1 Providing Marriage Rights to Same-Sex Couples Undermine&lt;br /&gt;2 Heterosexual Marriage?"&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I do, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Is this a document that you reviewed?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Uhm, it's not listed on my documents included, but it --&lt;br /&gt;7 Badgett is someone whose articles I have read. I don't know&lt;br /&gt;8 whether or not I have specifically reviewed this article.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;10 Exhibit 2899.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. COOPER: No objection to the Court taking&lt;br /&gt;12 judicial notice of it.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE WITNESS: She's a prominent proponent of&lt;br /&gt;15 same-sex marriage, Ms. Badgett. So I've read -- I know I've&lt;br /&gt;16 read a number of her things.&lt;br /&gt;17 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. She is a well-regarded scholar, is she not?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I don't know. I don't know -- know -- know her -- I'm&lt;br /&gt;20 perfectly happy to take your word for that. I am sure she&lt;br /&gt;21 is.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. You don't know that one way or the other?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I'm just saying that I've read several of her articles,&lt;br /&gt;24 in an attempt to acquaint myself with her work, and I&lt;br /&gt;25 appreciate the integrity of those articles. I don't know&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2927&lt;br /&gt;1 quite what else to say. She's obviously taking a very --&lt;br /&gt;2 position quite opposite to my own, on most every possible&lt;br /&gt;3 question. But I respect her as a thinker.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: You have your answer.&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Let me ask you to look at tab 11 in the same binder.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. This is Defendants' Exhibit 2. And I don't know whether&lt;br /&gt;9 this is in evidence or not.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I think it's -- I think it's on my list, Mr. Boies. The&lt;br /&gt;11 Amato article?&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. COOPER: To whatever extent it is not, we have&lt;br /&gt;14 no objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Is that a request to move it in?&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOIES: It is, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;18 (Defendants' Exhibit 2 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;19 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And this is a -- an article in which Amato investigates&lt;br /&gt;21 how children in households with both biological parents&lt;br /&gt;22 differ from children in households with only one biological&lt;br /&gt;23 parent, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, I see that you've read that from a summary that&lt;br /&gt;25 was written by someone else.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2928&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Let me ask --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. What I --&lt;br /&gt;3 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;4 A. My understanding is that he is writing an article on the&lt;br /&gt;5 impact of family formation change, on the cognitive, social,&lt;br /&gt;6 and emotional well-being of the next generation.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. That's the title of the thing?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. But in terms of -- you've read this whole thing, of&lt;br /&gt;10 course?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And do you have a current recollection of it enough to&lt;br /&gt;13 answer a question about what the overall methodology of this&lt;br /&gt;14 article was?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Well, I believe he looked at some data from the Add&lt;br /&gt;16 Health survey. And I believe he was trying to investigate&lt;br /&gt;17 whether or not children who grow up in -- I believe he -- I&lt;br /&gt;18 believe he, at several times in the article, refers to it as&lt;br /&gt;19 "continuously married biological parents."&lt;br /&gt;20 I believe he is trying to compare, using this body&lt;br /&gt;21 of data in this particular article and other books and&lt;br /&gt;22 articles -- he's looked at different bodies of data, but in&lt;br /&gt;23 this particular article it's Add Health. And he's trying to&lt;br /&gt;24 estimate outcome differences, comparing children who are&lt;br /&gt;25 growing up in continuously married two biological parent&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2929&lt;br /&gt;1 homes with children from other family structures. And he's&lt;br /&gt;2 making certain conclusions about those inquiries.&lt;br /&gt;3 And then he's making a policy recommendation, at&lt;br /&gt;4 the end, that it would be much to the advantage --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. I'm not asking you to summarize or give a book report on&lt;br /&gt;6 this. What I just want -- two quick questions that I ought&lt;br /&gt;7 to be able to get answers to.&lt;br /&gt;8 The first is: Is it your understanding that what&lt;br /&gt;9 he compares are the outcome differences between children in&lt;br /&gt;10 households with both biological parents as compared to&lt;br /&gt;11 children in households with only one biological parent? Is&lt;br /&gt;12 that your understanding or not?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Well, not really.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at the second paragraph of&lt;br /&gt;15 the document, okay. It says:&lt;br /&gt;16 "Amato begins by investigating how&lt;br /&gt;17 children in households with both biological&lt;br /&gt;18 parents differ from children in households&lt;br /&gt;19 with only one biological parent."&lt;br /&gt;20 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Can you tell me where you're reading from?&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. The very second paragraph of the document.&lt;br /&gt;23 "Amato begins by investigating how&lt;br /&gt;24 children in households with both biological&lt;br /&gt;25 parents differ from children in households&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2930&lt;br /&gt;1 with only one biological parent."&lt;br /&gt;2 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I was reading from the --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, sir, I see it.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay. Now, is it your understanding that when Amato&lt;br /&gt;7 uses the term "biological parent" in this article, he is&lt;br /&gt;8 including adoptive parents to be the same as biological&lt;br /&gt;9 parents?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. Now, with respect to the issue of biology, you&lt;br /&gt;12 believe that it is more important that children grow up with&lt;br /&gt;13 two parents than that they grow up with a single biological&lt;br /&gt;14 parent, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. That -- that's not familiar to me as a statement that&lt;br /&gt;16 I've made.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Well, for example, have you stated that it is important&lt;br /&gt;18 to encourage unmarried women who have children to give their&lt;br /&gt;19 babies up for adoption by married couples?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. In several publications with certain qualifications in&lt;br /&gt;21 place, I have -- specifically with reference, in my mind, to&lt;br /&gt;22 unmarried teenage girls, I have made such a recommendation.&lt;br /&gt;23 To the best of my memory, I have made such a recommendation.&lt;br /&gt;24 Or I may have been a part of a study that made such a&lt;br /&gt;25 recommendation.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2931&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. All right.&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOIES: May I have just a moment, Your Honor?&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, we've agreed on a list of&lt;br /&gt;5 documents to be admitted. And I would hand that up, if I&lt;br /&gt;6 can.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. COOPER: There's one document not on this list.&lt;br /&gt;9 It's a declaration by Mr. Prentice. But it will be added to&lt;br /&gt;10 the list. It was part of an arrangement.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Fair enough. Do you have an exhibit&lt;br /&gt;12 number on the document to be added?&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. BOUTROUS: Why don't we make that the next --&lt;br /&gt;14 we'll put a --&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Number it later.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOUTROUS: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 749, 1372, 2096, 2258,&lt;br /&gt;18 2259, 2866, 2876, 2877, 2878, 2879, 2898, 2899,&lt;br /&gt;19 2936, 2341 and 2403 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;20 (Defendants' Exhibit 1109 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;22 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. All right. Mr. Blankenhorn, let me -- let me just ask&lt;br /&gt;24 you, hopefully, just two more quick areas.&lt;br /&gt;25 First, would you turn to tab 3 of this binder, the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2932&lt;br /&gt;1 binder that has 15 tabs to it.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I have it, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And this is the review article that you referred to&lt;br /&gt;4 previously, and published in Developmental and Behavioral&lt;br /&gt;5 Pediatrics; is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I'm sorry. I'm really sorry, I must be --&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. 3. Tab 3.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Sorry. "Lesbian Mothers, Gay Fathers, and Their&lt;br /&gt;9 Children."&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Are you familiar with this document?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Uhm, I -- I don't believe so, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay. There's something that's headed the "Abstract."&lt;br /&gt;15 And you know what an abstract is; do you not?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Of course.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And the abstract says:&lt;br /&gt;18 "There is a variety of families headed by&lt;br /&gt;19 a lesbian or gay male parent or same-sex&lt;br /&gt;20 couple. Findings from research suggest that&lt;br /&gt;21 children with lesbian or gay parents are&lt;br /&gt;22 comparable with children with heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;23 parents on key psychosocial developmental&lt;br /&gt;24 outcomes."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2933&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And even though you may not be aware of this article,&lt;br /&gt;3 are you aware of other articles in peer-reviewed journals&lt;br /&gt;4 that reach that conclusion?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, sir, I am aware.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Now, we've talked a lot about the institution of&lt;br /&gt;7 marriage. You would agree that the institution of marriage&lt;br /&gt;8 is constantly evolving, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And always changing, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. I wrote those words in my book.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And no single universally accepted definition of&lt;br /&gt;13 marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I wrote those words, too.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I have no more questions.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Redirect, Mr. Cooper.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor. I can be quite&lt;br /&gt;18 brief, I think.&lt;br /&gt;19 REDIRECT EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, is your -- is your book in front of you&lt;br /&gt;22 the entire book, Future of Marriage?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Do you mean -- oh, no, sir. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: Could I hand the full book, because&lt;br /&gt;25 there's a page I wanted to refer to that isn't in any of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2934&lt;br /&gt;1 these excerpts that are before him.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: Sure.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. COOPER: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: This is Exhibit 9 -- DIX956. And I&lt;br /&gt;5 believe this has already been admitted.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. COOPER: May I hand the book to the witness,&lt;br /&gt;7 Your Honor?&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Yes, indeed. I say, 956 is in?&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOUTROUS: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, do you recall yesterday, when Mr. Boies&lt;br /&gt;13 read a passage from page 2 of your book, The Future of&lt;br /&gt;14 Marriage, in which you say, among other things, that:&lt;br /&gt;15 "I believe that today the principle equal&lt;br /&gt;16 human dignity must apply to gay and lesbian&lt;br /&gt;17 persons."&lt;br /&gt;18 Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Would you look on page 3 of your book, the last two&lt;br /&gt;21 paragraphs. I'd like to read those paragraphs into the&lt;br /&gt;22 record:&lt;br /&gt;23 "Many thinkers, perhaps most notably&lt;br /&gt;24 Isaiah Berlin, the great 20th century&lt;br /&gt;25 philosopher of liberalism, have pointed out&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2935&lt;br /&gt;1 that many important choices we face do not&lt;br /&gt;2 involve choosing between good and bad, but&lt;br /&gt;3 between good and good.&lt;br /&gt;4 "It is good to deter crime by punishing&lt;br /&gt;5 criminals. It is also good to forgive. But&lt;br /&gt;6 doing more punishing means doing less&lt;br /&gt;7 forgiving because the two goods are to some&lt;br /&gt;8 extent mutually exclusive.&lt;br /&gt;9 "Berlin's concept of goods in conflict is&lt;br /&gt;10 central to my understanding of society's need&lt;br /&gt;11 to make choices regarding the definition of&lt;br /&gt;12 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;13 "One good is the equal dignity of all&lt;br /&gt;14 persons. Another good is a mother and father&lt;br /&gt;15 as a child's birthright. These goods are at&lt;br /&gt;16 least partially in conflict. Resolving that&lt;br /&gt;17 conflict, making a morally responsible choice&lt;br /&gt;18 about the future of marriage that is faithful&lt;br /&gt;19 to the essential purposes of the institution&lt;br /&gt;20 while at least recognizing both of these&lt;br /&gt;21 goods is a major aim of this book."&lt;br /&gt;22 Earlier, I think, in your colloquy with Mr. Boies,&lt;br /&gt;23 you mentioned a conflict of goods. Is this -- does this&lt;br /&gt;24 essentially capture your -- your thought on that, or&lt;br /&gt;25 summarize it?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2936&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Turn to page 20 of the witness -- excuse me, the -- of&lt;br /&gt;3 the document behind tab 13 of your witness binder from this&lt;br /&gt;4 morning. And that is another excerpt. That is an excerpt of&lt;br /&gt;5 your book.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. This is from Fatherless America?&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. No. This is from The Future of Marriage.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Oh, yes, I have it. I'm sorry.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Do you recall this morning colloquy with Mr. Boies, in&lt;br /&gt;10 which you made clear that to the degree you must choose&lt;br /&gt;11 between the rights and interests of gays with respect to&lt;br /&gt;12 same-sex marriage on the one hand, and the interests that you&lt;br /&gt;13 have articulated previously that are served by customary&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage, you would, with anguish, choose those interests&lt;br /&gt;15 served by customary marriage; do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. All right. I want you to refer now to page 20, the last&lt;br /&gt;18 full paragraph of your -- of the page in your book The Future&lt;br /&gt;19 of Marriage. And, again, I'd like to read that, as well.&lt;br /&gt;20 "In the case of same-sex marriage, one&lt;br /&gt;21 priority is the particular rights and needs&lt;br /&gt;22 of same-sex couples, the right to equal&lt;br /&gt;23 respect, the right to form loving, stable&lt;br /&gt;24 partnerships and families, and the need for&lt;br /&gt;25 greater social acceptance.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2937&lt;br /&gt;1 "Another priority is the collective&lt;br /&gt;2 rights and needs of children. The right to&lt;br /&gt;3 know and be loved by a mother and a father,&lt;br /&gt;4 and the need for as many children as possible&lt;br /&gt;5 to grow up under a strong shelter of&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage, our society's most pro-child&lt;br /&gt;7 institution.&lt;br /&gt;8 "To the degree that these two priorities&lt;br /&gt;9 can be in harmony, or at least exist together&lt;br /&gt;10 in peace, I want to embrace them both."&lt;br /&gt;11 Is that your view?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Do you believe that they can be embraced in harmony?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Do you believe that, for example, many of the items that&lt;br /&gt;16 you identified this morning on the list of good public policy&lt;br /&gt;17 outcomes that would flow from same-sex marriage can be&lt;br /&gt;18 achieved through, for example, domestic partnerships?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I do. That's my understanding of the -- that's been my&lt;br /&gt;20 own conclusion, in trying to wrestle with this concept of&lt;br /&gt;21 goods in conflict.&lt;br /&gt;22 And that's -- this is the conclusion that I have&lt;br /&gt;23 come to, as I have tried to -- to reconcile these -- this&lt;br /&gt;24 conflict, as best I can.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And did you speak to that yesterday, in connection with&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2938&lt;br /&gt;1 describing the process you had gone through which culminated,&lt;br /&gt;2 I think, in the publication of an article in the New York&lt;br /&gt;3 Times early last year?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes, sir. Endorsing the protection of marriage for its&lt;br /&gt;5 distinctive purpose, but also establishing very strong&lt;br /&gt;6 domestic partnership structures.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I have no further&lt;br /&gt;8 questions.&lt;br /&gt;9 I would like to submit into the record for judicial&lt;br /&gt;10 review a copy of that New York Times article. I don't have&lt;br /&gt;11 it in my hands right now. But I will get copies into my&lt;br /&gt;12 hands and into the court's and into counsel's.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: Very well. That will be marked as DIX&lt;br /&gt;15 next in order.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. COOPER: Here they are now.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: You have able assistance.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. COOPER: Yes, indeed. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;19 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Defendants' Exhibit 2720 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. COOPER: Thank you. And so I have no further&lt;br /&gt;22 questions, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE COURT: Very well. Then, thank you,&lt;br /&gt;24 Mr. Blankenhorn. You may step down. Thank you for your&lt;br /&gt;25 testimony.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2939&lt;br /&gt;1 (Witness excused.)&lt;br /&gt;2 Any additional witnesses, Mr. Cooper?&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. COOPER: I beg your pardon, any what?&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Call your next witness.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, we have no further&lt;br /&gt;6 witnesses.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Very well. Now, I understood that you&lt;br /&gt;8 had some documents that you wanted to add. Have we taken&lt;br /&gt;9 care of that this morning?&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. COOPER: I think we have resolved it. And my&lt;br /&gt;11 colleague, Mr. Thompson, has been the lead for us on that,&lt;br /&gt;12 and he can speak to that.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, this will just take a&lt;br /&gt;14 very brief moment, but there are a couple of items.&lt;br /&gt;15 We have a proffer of documents. And the plaintiffs&lt;br /&gt;16 have not objected to this list of documents. These are the&lt;br /&gt;17 official campaign speech and materials of&lt;br /&gt;18 ProtectMarriage.com. And we have a list of those documents.&lt;br /&gt;19 In addition, there is one other document, DIX2717,&lt;br /&gt;20 which the plaintiffs have not objected to. So with the&lt;br /&gt;21 Court's permission, we would submit that list. That's DIX?&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. THOMPSON: 2717.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;24 (Defendants' Exhibit 2717 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2940&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. THOMPSON: In addition, Your Honor, a moment&lt;br /&gt;2 ago there was reference to the fact that we had an additional&lt;br /&gt;3 document for which we didn't have a number. We now have the&lt;br /&gt;4 document. We have a number. It's under seal, but may I pass&lt;br /&gt;5 that to the clerk?&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: You may.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. THOMPSON: And it's DIX2719.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Fine. And that's being admitted&lt;br /&gt;9 without objection, I gather?&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOUTROUS: That's correct, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Okay.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Defendants' Exhibit 2719 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. THOMPSON: In addition, Your Honor, just in the&lt;br /&gt;14 nature of housekeeping, we have the counterdesignations of&lt;br /&gt;15 Professor Young and Nathanson, the pink and the yellow.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. THOMPSON: We understand the Court will resolve&lt;br /&gt;18 that at the Court's convenience, but we just wanted to note&lt;br /&gt;19 that we would still like the pink and the yellow in the&lt;br /&gt;20 record.&lt;br /&gt;21 And, in addition, we have made some&lt;br /&gt;22 counterdesignations of Dr. Tam's deposition. We understand&lt;br /&gt;23 that there may be objections to that, but we'd still like to&lt;br /&gt;24 submit those, subject to whatever objections the plaintiffs&lt;br /&gt;25 have.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2941&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. BOUTROUS: Your Honor, we just received those&lt;br /&gt;2 this morning so we would like, if possible, the opportunity&lt;br /&gt;3 to review them and make submissions by the end of the week,&lt;br /&gt;4 with our position or counterdesignations.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: That would be fine.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. THOMPSON: And the same goes for Dr. Robinson.&lt;br /&gt;8 And we have no objection to their taking until the end of the&lt;br /&gt;9 week on that, for their --&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: Dr.?&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: Robinson. There are some counters&lt;br /&gt;12 for him.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: I, too, have some housekeeping that I&lt;br /&gt;16 want to do. But perhaps --&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. THOMPSON: I have one more item, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. THOMPSON: And then, finally, Your Honor, we&lt;br /&gt;20 did note, as the Court is aware, that our motions to compel&lt;br /&gt;21 are outstanding. And we're not in a position to formally&lt;br /&gt;22 rest our case until those are resolved.&lt;br /&gt;23 If we were to receive documents from the No On 8&lt;br /&gt;24 campaign, then we might want leave to submit those documents&lt;br /&gt;25 and/or call witnesses pertaining to those subject matters.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2942&lt;br /&gt;1 But other than that, we have no further witnesses&lt;br /&gt;2 and no further documents.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: Very well. We have either this morning&lt;br /&gt;4 or last evening issued an order calling for a response from&lt;br /&gt;5 the third parties that you have subpoenaed, the three&lt;br /&gt;6 organizations, and have also given the plaintiffs an&lt;br /&gt;7 opportunity to chime in, if they wish to do so. They may or&lt;br /&gt;8 may not wish to do so.&lt;br /&gt;9 But we've set a briefing schedule on that. And so&lt;br /&gt;10 we should receive those by --&lt;br /&gt;11 THE LAW CLERK: Friday.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: -- Friday.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. THOMPSON: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: So I think that will be taken care of.&lt;br /&gt;15 And housekeeping from the plaintiffs?&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOUTROUS: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. And&lt;br /&gt;17 they are truly housekeeping.&lt;br /&gt;18 The first issue, the Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2332A,&lt;br /&gt;19 which was a list of materials considered by Mr. Blankenhorn,&lt;br /&gt;20 was not moved into evidence. We would like to move that into&lt;br /&gt;21 evidence so it's in the record before the Court.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: 2332A?&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOUTROUS: That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Hearing no objection.&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. COOPER: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2943&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;2 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2332A received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;4 Another exhibit issue, during Mr. Boies's&lt;br /&gt;5 examination of Mr. Blankenhorn he referred to Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;6 Exhibit 744, which was the book, The Future of Marriage, by&lt;br /&gt;7 Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOUTROUS: Defendants' Exhibit 956 is the book.&lt;br /&gt;10 It's in evidence. We could either move ours in, too, or I&lt;br /&gt;11 could clarify for the record that when Mr. Boies was&lt;br /&gt;12 referring to Plaintiffs' Exhibit 744, he was referring to the&lt;br /&gt;13 book which is Defendants' Exhibit 956, which is in evidence.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: Very well. We'll simply note in the&lt;br /&gt;15 record that those two books are the same book by different&lt;br /&gt;16 exhibit numbers.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;18 As the Court will recall, we had moved into&lt;br /&gt;19 evidence a couple of -- two documents from the Library of&lt;br /&gt;20 Congress. And we did not have the official copies. We&lt;br /&gt;21 represented to the Court that they were in the Library of&lt;br /&gt;22 Congress.&lt;br /&gt;23 We now have official copies, so I would simply like&lt;br /&gt;24 to substitute in the official copies. Plaintiffs' Exhibit&lt;br /&gt;25 2581, which was the IRS letter from 1974; and then&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2944&lt;br /&gt;1 plaintiffs' Exhibit 2566, which was the letter to the&lt;br /&gt;2 Mattachine Society.&lt;br /&gt;3 And I will provide copies to the Court and to&lt;br /&gt;4 opposing counsel.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;7 And then, finally, we have a number of documents&lt;br /&gt;8 that we just received from the -- where we disputed issues in&lt;br /&gt;9 the privilege log. And we would like to reserve the right to&lt;br /&gt;10 review those and supplement the record, where appropriate and&lt;br /&gt;11 as appropriate, once we have had a chance to review them.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well. That will be fine.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;14 I think that's it from my list.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: I was going to ask the plaintiffs, and&lt;br /&gt;16 now that the defendants have essentially rested, whether you&lt;br /&gt;17 intend to call any rebuttal witnesses.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. BOUTROUS: We do not, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;19 THE COURT: Mr. Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;20 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, I do apologize. I&lt;br /&gt;21 forgot one last housekeeping.&lt;br /&gt;22 Fatherless America has been admitted twice under&lt;br /&gt;23 the wrong number. It's -- we labeled it DIX103, but it's&lt;br /&gt;24 actually 108. So we just wanted the record to be clear that&lt;br /&gt;25 Fatherless America is 108, and the record should be corrected&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2945&lt;br /&gt;1 to reflect that.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: All right. Anything further from any&lt;br /&gt;3 party? How about the attorney general?&lt;br /&gt;4 MS. PACHTER: No, Your Honor. We have nothing.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: Or any of the other defendants?&lt;br /&gt;6 All right. We have some loose ends for the Court&lt;br /&gt;7 to take care of, one of which has been mentioned. And that&lt;br /&gt;8 is the motion to compel compliance with the No On 8 subpoenas&lt;br /&gt;9 that the defendants are seeking. And that should be taken&lt;br /&gt;10 care of shortly.&lt;br /&gt;11 We have, as yet, unresolved the motion to withdraw&lt;br /&gt;12 by Dr. Tam. And I think that's fully briefed. And so it&lt;br /&gt;13 simply remains to be ruled upon by the Court.&lt;br /&gt;14 Similarly, I believe the motion to intervene by&lt;br /&gt;15 Imperial County has been fully briefed. And that remains to&lt;br /&gt;16 be ruled on by the Court.&lt;br /&gt;17 We have 137 documents that the plaintiffs lodged&lt;br /&gt;18 with the Court, that have not been submitted on the record.&lt;br /&gt;19 Do you recall those, Mr. Boutrous? I believe those&lt;br /&gt;20 came from the production.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOUTROUS: Your Honor, I believe that they were&lt;br /&gt;22 documents that were under seal, but let me -- if I could just&lt;br /&gt;23 investigate and report back, right now.&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Well, we have the documents.&lt;br /&gt;25 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2946&lt;br /&gt;1 (Law clerk hands documents to Mr. Boutrous.)&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOUTROUS: May I investigate these?&lt;br /&gt;3 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Things do run downhill, don't they?&lt;br /&gt;5 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOUTROUS: Yes, Your Honor. We have dealt with&lt;br /&gt;7 these issues through the exhibits we have put into evidence,&lt;br /&gt;8 so they can now remain with us, unless the Court would like&lt;br /&gt;9 them back.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: I think we have enough, Mr. Boutrous.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;13 All right. That's helpful.&lt;br /&gt;14 Amicus briefs. Do the parties have a position on&lt;br /&gt;15 amicus briefs?&lt;br /&gt;16 My inclination -- I have some inclination with&lt;br /&gt;17 reference to that, but I would be happy to hear any&lt;br /&gt;18 suggestions that the parties wish to offer.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. BOUTROUS: Your Honor, our position would be,&lt;br /&gt;20 to the extent the Court feels it would be useful, relatively&lt;br /&gt;21 brief amicus briefs filed -- I think the Court had indicated&lt;br /&gt;22 seven days after the close of evidence at one of our earlier&lt;br /&gt;23 hearings. We would welcome that, as long as the Court felt&lt;br /&gt;24 it was useful to the Court.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: Mr. Cooper.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2947&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, we don't have any kind of,&lt;br /&gt;2 you know, strident opposition to that, but it's difficult for&lt;br /&gt;3 me to imagine that the Court needs additional material to&lt;br /&gt;4 chew on as you consider the issues before you.&lt;br /&gt;5 But I do think that it would be important to have&lt;br /&gt;6 some meaningful opportunity after any amicus briefs were&lt;br /&gt;7 filed, for the parties then to put in their own -- their own&lt;br /&gt;8 papers, obviously, to the Court.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: Obviously, I quite agree.&lt;br /&gt;10 If it's agreeable to the parties, let me say that&lt;br /&gt;11 the Court will set a deadline of seven days from today, that&lt;br /&gt;12 will be next Wednesday, which I believe is February 3rd, for&lt;br /&gt;13 applications to file amicus briefs.&lt;br /&gt;14 And the Court will consider any such applications,&lt;br /&gt;15 and either grant or deny those as may be appropriate.&lt;br /&gt;16 And I will set a 15-page limitation on any amicus&lt;br /&gt;17 participation, and provide a period of time for the parties&lt;br /&gt;18 to file whatever response, if any, that they wish to make.&lt;br /&gt;19 I agree with Mr. Cooper that it's -- it's an&lt;br /&gt;20 abundant record, and I doubt amicus briefs can add too much.&lt;br /&gt;21 But one never knows. So I think we should at least leave the&lt;br /&gt;22 door open to amicus participation.&lt;br /&gt;23 And I believe that's it from my end. I assume&lt;br /&gt;24 there's nothing further from any of the parties?&lt;br /&gt;25 One other matter, Mr. Boutrous?&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2948&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. BOUTROUS: In terms of post-trial filings.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: Yes. Here's what I'd like. I'd like&lt;br /&gt;3 to take some time to go over all of this material.&lt;br /&gt;4 I don't think, at this juncture, it would be&lt;br /&gt;5 helpful to have post-trial briefs. You may very well,&lt;br /&gt;6 however, wish to submit references to the evidence that have&lt;br /&gt;7 been submitted, with your proposed findings of fact and&lt;br /&gt;8 conclusions of law. Those you have already submitted.&lt;br /&gt;9 And I'm sure that you presented the evidence in the&lt;br /&gt;10 case with those proposed findings in mind, and the&lt;br /&gt;11 conclusions. And so it would be helpful if you could furnish&lt;br /&gt;12 those to the Court.&lt;br /&gt;13 I realize that you, too, have a lot of material to&lt;br /&gt;14 go through. So I'll be guided by your suggestion about how&lt;br /&gt;15 much time you'll need in order to do that.&lt;br /&gt;16 What I would like to do, after receiving those, and&lt;br /&gt;17 after concluding today's proceedings, is to consider that&lt;br /&gt;18 material and then set a date for closing argument.&lt;br /&gt;19 And what I will probably do, in connection with&lt;br /&gt;20 setting that date, is to perhaps key up some questions that&lt;br /&gt;21 have come to the fore as a result of the review of the&lt;br /&gt;22 evidence, and give you an opportunity to address that in&lt;br /&gt;23 closing argument and in any post-trial briefing that you wish&lt;br /&gt;24 to make on the law.&lt;br /&gt;25 But I'd rather leave that date open at the present&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2949&lt;br /&gt;1 time. When the time comes, I'll have the clerk call both&lt;br /&gt;2 sides and give you a range of dates so that you can work it&lt;br /&gt;3 out consistent with, I'm sure, your many other obligations.&lt;br /&gt;4 But I would, at this point, I think, only request&lt;br /&gt;5 references to the evidence that you've submitted in&lt;br /&gt;6 connection with your proposed findings and conclusions.&lt;br /&gt;7 How long do you think it will -- how long a time&lt;br /&gt;8 deadline would be reasonable for that submission?&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOUTROUS: 30 days would be fine with us, Your&lt;br /&gt;10 Honor. And I think that that would -- sounds like an&lt;br /&gt;11 excellent approach.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Mr. Cooper?&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. COOPER: It seems to me that 30 days should&lt;br /&gt;14 be -- should be adequate, Your Honor, yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Very well. That will be, then -- well,&lt;br /&gt;16 why don't we set February 26. That's -- that's just about 30&lt;br /&gt;17 days. All right. February 26. And, probably, by that time,&lt;br /&gt;18 I'll have a much better idea of what kind of schedule we&lt;br /&gt;19 should set for the closing argument.&lt;br /&gt;20 All right. Anything further?&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOUTROUS: Your Honor, on behalf of the&lt;br /&gt;22 plaintiffs, we just wanted to thank the Court's staff for&lt;br /&gt;23 making it so easy to try the case. And we very much&lt;br /&gt;24 appreciate everything everyone did during the trial.&lt;br /&gt;25 Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2950&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Well, I want to extend my&lt;br /&gt;2 congratulations to the lawyers in the case for, obviously, a&lt;br /&gt;3 fascinating case. Extremely well-presented on both sides.&lt;br /&gt;4 Obviously, there are some old hands in the&lt;br /&gt;5 courtroom in this proceeding. But I have been particularly&lt;br /&gt;6 struck by the very fine work of many of the younger lawyers&lt;br /&gt;7 in the case, both here in the courtroom and, I'm sure, behind&lt;br /&gt;8 the scenes.&lt;br /&gt;9 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;10 It really -- the old hands should take great pride&lt;br /&gt;11 and pleasure in the younger colleagues that you've worked&lt;br /&gt;12 with. They have done a splendid job, and so you have much to&lt;br /&gt;13 be pleased with.&lt;br /&gt;14 And I would just like to take a moment to&lt;br /&gt;15 personally congratulate you and tell you what a good job&lt;br /&gt;16 you've all done.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. BOUTROUS: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. BOIES: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;20 (At 12:00 noon, the proceedings were adjourned.)&lt;br /&gt;21&lt;br /&gt;22 - - - -&lt;br /&gt;23&lt;br /&gt;24&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;2951&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;2 I N D E X&lt;br /&gt;3&lt;br /&gt;4&lt;br /&gt;DEFENDANTS' WITNESSES PAGE VOL.&lt;br /&gt;5&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN, DAVID&lt;br /&gt;6 Cross-Examination Resumed by Mr. Boies 2838 12&lt;br /&gt;Redirect Examination by Mr. Cooper 2933 12&lt;br /&gt;7&lt;br /&gt;8&lt;br /&gt;9 - - - -&lt;br /&gt;10&lt;br /&gt;11&lt;br /&gt;12&lt;br /&gt;13&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;15&lt;br /&gt;16&lt;br /&gt;17&lt;br /&gt;18&lt;br /&gt;19&lt;br /&gt;20&lt;br /&gt;21&lt;br /&gt;22&lt;br /&gt;23&lt;br /&gt;24&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;2952&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;I N D E X&lt;br /&gt;2&lt;br /&gt;3 PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBITS IDEN VOL. EVID VOL.&lt;br /&gt;4 749 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;1372 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;5 2096 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2258 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;6 2259 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2332A 2943 12&lt;br /&gt;7 2341 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2403 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;8 2866 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2876 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;9 2877 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2878 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;10 2879 2912 12&lt;br /&gt;2879 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;11 2898 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;2899 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;12 2936 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;13&lt;br /&gt;14 DEFENDANTS' EXHIBITS IDEN VOL. EVID VOL.&lt;br /&gt;15 2 2927 12&lt;br /&gt;1109 2931 12&lt;br /&gt;16 2717 2939 12&lt;br /&gt;2719 2940 12&lt;br /&gt;17 2720 2938 12&lt;br /&gt;18&lt;br /&gt;19&lt;br /&gt;20&lt;br /&gt;21&lt;br /&gt;22&lt;br /&gt;23&lt;br /&gt;24&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;2&lt;br /&gt;3 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTERS&lt;br /&gt;4 We, KATHERINE POWELL SULLIVAN and DEBRA L. PAS,&lt;br /&gt;5 Official Reporters for the United States Court, Northern&lt;br /&gt;6 District of California, hereby certify that the foregoing&lt;br /&gt;7 proceedings in C 09-2292 VRW, Kristin M. Perry, et al. vs.&lt;br /&gt;8 Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his official capacity as Governor&lt;br /&gt;9 of California, et al., were reported by us, certified&lt;br /&gt;10 shorthand reporters, and were thereafter transcribed under&lt;br /&gt;11 our direction into typewriting; that the foregoing is a full,&lt;br /&gt;12 complete and true record of said proceedings at the time of&lt;br /&gt;13 filing.&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;15 /s/ Katherine Powell Sullivan&lt;br /&gt;16&lt;br /&gt;Katherine Powell Sullivan, CSR #5812, RPR, CRR&lt;br /&gt;17 U.S. Court Reporter&lt;br /&gt;18&lt;br /&gt;19&lt;br /&gt;20 /s/ Debra L. Pas&lt;br /&gt;21 Debra L. Pas, CSR #11916, RMR CRR&lt;br /&gt;U.S. Court Reporter&lt;br /&gt;22&lt;br /&gt;23 Wednesday, January 27, 2010&lt;br /&gt;24&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;&lt;img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/5550389171341329480-6901740698327428256?l=theignorantheterosexual.blogspot.com' alt='' /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</content><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://theignorantheterosexual.blogspot.com/feeds/6901740698327428256/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5550389171341329480&amp;postID=6901740698327428256' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5550389171341329480/posts/default/6901740698327428256'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/5550389171341329480/posts/default/6901740698327428256'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://theignorantheterosexual.blogspot.com/2010/01/prop-8-transcripts-day-twelve.html' title='Prop 8 Transcripts - Day Twelve'/><author><name>Ken McPherson</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/18168987028053740568</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5550389171341329480.post-6281392161299766012</id><published>2010-01-28T12:58:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-28T12:59:11.114-08:00</updated><title type='text'>Prop 8 Transcripts - Day Eleven</title><content type='html'>1 P R O C E E D I N G S&lt;br /&gt;2 JANUARY 26, 2010 8:37 A.M.&lt;br /&gt;3&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Very well. Good morning, counsel.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Counsel greet the Court.)&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Ready to continue your cross-examination&lt;br /&gt;7 of Dr. Miller?&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: I am, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 KENNETH MILLER,&lt;br /&gt;10 called as a witness for the Defendants herein, having been&lt;br /&gt;11 previously duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well. Let me remind the witness,&lt;br /&gt;13 you are still under oath.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: You understand the oath you took&lt;br /&gt;16 yesterday applies to this testimony, as well?&lt;br /&gt;17 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Very well. Proceed, Mr. Boies.&lt;br /&gt;19 CROSS EXAMINATION RESUMED&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Good morning, Professor Miller.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Good morning, Mr. Boies.&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: As a housekeeping matter, Your Honor, I&lt;br /&gt;24 would offer, at this time, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 794A, which was&lt;br /&gt;25 the index of materials relied on by the witness; that he&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2588&lt;br /&gt;1 circled those that he identified as his own, did not circle&lt;br /&gt;2 those that were provided by counsel, and then put question&lt;br /&gt;3 marks about those who he didn't know which was which.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: Very well. Let me just see if I&lt;br /&gt;6 understand.&lt;br /&gt;7 The circled ones are the ones that he found?&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. THOMPSON: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: The question marks, he doesn't remember.&lt;br /&gt;10 And the balance were furnished by counsel.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;13 That exhibit will be admitted. It's not marked as --&lt;br /&gt;14 I'll ask the clerk to so mark it.&lt;br /&gt;15 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 794A received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;16 THE CLERK: I have the original here, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: Ah, all right.&lt;br /&gt;18 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Now, at the break, Professor Miller, we were talking about&lt;br /&gt;20 polls. And you said that you might have seen some polls, but&lt;br /&gt;21 you didn't recall. And I had asked you to look at tab 78.&lt;br /&gt;22 Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Uhm, yes. I don't think we actually looked at tab 78.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I don't think we actually got there.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2589&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. But I had asked you to look at it. And I'd ask you to&lt;br /&gt;2 look at it now.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Okay. I have it here.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. I'm sorry, say again.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I have it in the tab here.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Now, this is the exit polls that were taken following&lt;br /&gt;7 Proposition 8. Have you seen this before?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I believe I have seen this, as well as a couple of other&lt;br /&gt;9 exit polls.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;11 Exhibit 2853.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: That number again, sir?&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: 2853.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;16 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2853 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;17 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Now, from looking at the exit polls that you looked at,&lt;br /&gt;19 was it clear to you that people who attended church more often&lt;br /&gt;20 were highly more likely to vote yes on Proposition 8 than other&lt;br /&gt;21 people?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I'm looking at the exhibit here.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. My question actually had to do with what your state of&lt;br /&gt;24 mind was. We'll go to the exhibit.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Okay. I think it's fair, based on a number of surveys&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2590&lt;br /&gt;1 that I've seen. I can't remember whether the Los Angeles Times&lt;br /&gt;2 poll -- this poll, post-election analysis by Patrick Egan and&lt;br /&gt;3 Ken Sherrill, all informed my view about this.&lt;br /&gt;4 And I think it is fair to say that those who are more&lt;br /&gt;5 frequent attenders of religious services were more in favor of&lt;br /&gt;6 Proposition 8 than other people by a considerable amount.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And if you turn to page 8, where it talks about "Vote by&lt;br /&gt;8 church attendance" in the middle; do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And it says that:&lt;br /&gt;11 "The 32 percent of the population that&lt;br /&gt;12 attended church weekly voted yes on&lt;br /&gt;13 Proposition 8 84 percent of the time."&lt;br /&gt;14 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I do see that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Is that consistent with your understanding?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I don't know if it would be 84, but it would be a high&lt;br /&gt;18 percentage. That's consistent.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And everybody else voted no more than they voted yes,&lt;br /&gt;20 correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. It's broken into three categories. The occasional&lt;br /&gt;22 attenders voted no by a narrow margin. And the people who&lt;br /&gt;23 never attended church, in this poll, was by a large margin.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Well, now, when you say the people that attended&lt;br /&gt;25 occasionally voted no by a narrow margin, they voted no&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2591&lt;br /&gt;1 54 percent of the time, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. 54 to 46, is what it says here.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Yes. And that was a margin that was greater than the&lt;br /&gt;4 final margin, in terms of the actual vote, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. The final vote was about 52 to 48.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. So the answer to my question is yes?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Narrowly, yes, yes, that's true.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: Now, could we put up the defendants'&lt;br /&gt;9 demonstrative 25.&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. While we're doing that, Professor Miller --&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. -- one of the strong allies of the gay and lesbian&lt;br /&gt;14 community that you identified were labor unions, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;16 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Now, did you investigate how members of labor unions&lt;br /&gt;18 actually voted in the Proposition 8 election?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Uhm, I don't recall if I've looked at exit polls that&lt;br /&gt;20 broke it down by union membership. I don't recall what the&lt;br /&gt;21 vote was.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Well, let's look at page 12, and see if that refreshes&lt;br /&gt;23 your recollection.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. All right.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And do you see the third item down, that breaks people&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2592&lt;br /&gt;1 down based on whether they have a union member in the&lt;br /&gt;2 household?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And of the people who had a union member in the household,&lt;br /&gt;5 56 percent voted yes, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. According to this poll, that's correct.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I don't have any reason to doubt that. I haven't looked&lt;br /&gt;9 at the methodology of this poll, but I don't have any reason to&lt;br /&gt;10 doubt it.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And is it consistent with your understanding that a&lt;br /&gt;12 majority of the people with a union member in the household&lt;br /&gt;13 voted in favor of Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. This would be evidence to suggest that's the case.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Do you know of any evidence to suggest that's not the&lt;br /&gt;16 case?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. No, I haven't really investigated it closely.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Uhm, now, let me ask you to look at your demonstrative 25.&lt;br /&gt;19 And this was a list of professional associations that favored&lt;br /&gt;20 gay and lesbian marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Uhm, I can't remember whether I said it was marriage or&lt;br /&gt;22 LGBT rights, but --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Well, let me ask you, do these professional associations&lt;br /&gt;24 favor gay and lesbian marriage?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. At least some associations within these categories did,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2593&lt;br /&gt;1 yes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. When you were going through this long list of churches and&lt;br /&gt;3 labor unions and professional associations that you said were&lt;br /&gt;4 in favor of gays and lesbians, were you meaning to say that&lt;br /&gt;5 they were in favor of gay and lesbian marriage, or that they&lt;br /&gt;6 were simply in favor of certain gay and lesbian rights?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Uhm, I think most of them that I looked at came from&lt;br /&gt;8 support for the Leno bills in the California legislature, which&lt;br /&gt;9 would have created gender-neutral marriage in California, as&lt;br /&gt;10 well as amicus briefs in Strauss v. Horton, or In Re Marriage&lt;br /&gt;11 Cases, which would have established same-sex marriage in&lt;br /&gt;12 California. So those would have all been in the category of&lt;br /&gt;13 supporters of same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And with respect to these associations, I'm not sure I&lt;br /&gt;15 have your testimony.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. What is your testimony about these --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I'm confident that there were groups in each of these&lt;br /&gt;19 categories that have supported same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Okay. Well, let's go through those categories. First,&lt;br /&gt;21 psychologists. Have you investigated why psychologists and&lt;br /&gt;22 psychologist associations favor same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Uhm, I don't believe I've read any position statements by&lt;br /&gt;24 them on this. I've just seen they're -- they're being&lt;br /&gt;25 registered as supporters of the legislation or the litigation.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2594&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. So as I understand it, you have seen them be in favor of&lt;br /&gt;2 it, but you haven't investigated why they are in favor; is that&lt;br /&gt;3 fair?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. For psychologists, I have not, no.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Let's take psychiatrists. Have you investigated why&lt;br /&gt;6 psychiatrists are in favor and why psychiatrist associations&lt;br /&gt;7 are in favor of same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. No, I have not.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Let's take something closer to home. University&lt;br /&gt;10 professors. Have you investigated why university professors&lt;br /&gt;11 and university professor associations are in favor of same-sex&lt;br /&gt;12 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Uhm, I would -- there's -- I think there's an actual&lt;br /&gt;14 support by the California State Faculty association. I haven't&lt;br /&gt;15 read that.&lt;br /&gt;16 I can say, based on my own experience as a university&lt;br /&gt;17 professor and somebody in that arena, that for the most part I&lt;br /&gt;18 think it would go to the norm of fairness that would be an&lt;br /&gt;19 important consideration for many university professors.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, legal organizations, have you investigated why legal&lt;br /&gt;21 organizations support same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I don't know if I've -- if I've read any position papers.&lt;br /&gt;23 But, again, I would say it would be, probably, for the same&lt;br /&gt;24 reason, a commitment to the norm of fairness and equality.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Let me ask you to look at tab 103.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2595&lt;br /&gt;1 Now, this is a Gallup News Service poll, dated&lt;br /&gt;2 February 20, 2007. And it's Defendants' Exhibit 271. Have you&lt;br /&gt;3 reviewed this document?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I believe this is one of the polls that I reviewed, but I&lt;br /&gt;5 can't recall, actually.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Defendants'&lt;br /&gt;7 Exhibit 271.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: Very well. 271 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 271 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Now, this poll, on the first and second page, talks about&lt;br /&gt;13 a question that was asked during the last presidential&lt;br /&gt;14 election, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I'm just reading the question now. Okay. I have the&lt;br /&gt;16 question here, yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And people were asked whether if their party nominated a&lt;br /&gt;18 well-qualified person for president, would they vote for that&lt;br /&gt;19 person if that person had certain characteristics, correct?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And respondents, 95 percent of them said that if a&lt;br /&gt;22 qualified Catholic was nominated they would vote for them,&lt;br /&gt;23 correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. That's what the poll says, yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And do you have any reason to doubt those results?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2596&lt;br /&gt;1 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And the poll says that if a African American was&lt;br /&gt;3 nominated, who was well-qualified, 94 percent would vote for&lt;br /&gt;4 him or her, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, I see that figure.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And 92 percent would vote for a qualified Jewish&lt;br /&gt;7 candidate, and 88 percent would vote for a qualified woman&lt;br /&gt;8 candidate. Correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I see those figures, yes, correct.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And 87 percent would vote for a qualified Hispanic&lt;br /&gt;11 candidate, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I see that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And 72 percent would vote for a qualified Mormon&lt;br /&gt;14 candidate, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Uhm, yes, I see that.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. 67 percent would vote for a qualified candidate who had&lt;br /&gt;17 been married for the third time, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;19 A. That's what the poll says.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. 57 percent would vote for somebody who was 72 years of&lt;br /&gt;22 age, if he was well-qualified, correct?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. But only 55 percent would vote for a well-qualified person&lt;br /&gt;25 who was a homosexual, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2597&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Uhm, yes. It's very close to the 72-year-old person.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Yes. And 40 points below a Catholic, right?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. According to this poll, yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And 39 percent below a black or African American, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes. And 10 percent above an atheist.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Yes. So does that tell you something about the extent to&lt;br /&gt;7 which there's discrimination and stereotyping and prejudice&lt;br /&gt;8 against homosexuals in this country? Yes or no, sir?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. It's a data point. It's a data point.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Is that a yes?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. It tells me something. It's one data point I would want&lt;br /&gt;12 to investigate further, certainly.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. You don't have any reason to doubt the results of these,&lt;br /&gt;14 do you?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I haven't looked at the methodology, but I don't have any&lt;br /&gt;16 reason to doubt the findings.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And in your investigation of whether there was prejudice&lt;br /&gt;18 against gays and lesbians, and whether gays and lesbians had&lt;br /&gt;19 political power, did you investigate polls like this?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I did look at some polls, yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Let me turn back to the subject of initiatives, and ask&lt;br /&gt;22 you to look at tab 84. And you said that one of the things&lt;br /&gt;23 that you had looked at were materials from the Human Rights&lt;br /&gt;24 Campaign. Am I correct about that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2598&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And this is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2859. Is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And did you look at this document from the Human Rights&lt;br /&gt;4 Campaign?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Let me take a look. I may have. I don't recall.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;7 Exhibit 2859.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: Very well. 2859 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2859 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Let me ask you to look at page 5, first paragraph. It&lt;br /&gt;13 says there:&lt;br /&gt;14 "A fundamental American value holds that&lt;br /&gt;15 people who do their jobs, pay their taxes,&lt;br /&gt;16 and contribute to their communities should&lt;br /&gt;17 not be singled out for unfair discrimination.&lt;br /&gt;18 But federal law fails to extend this basic&lt;br /&gt;19 fairness to untold millions of Americans&lt;br /&gt;20 across this country who happen to be lesbian&lt;br /&gt;21 or gay. They are fired from their jobs,&lt;br /&gt;22 refused work, paid less, and otherwise&lt;br /&gt;23 discriminated against in the workplace, with&lt;br /&gt;24 no protection under federal law."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that, sir?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2599&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Do you have any reason to disagree with that?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Let me take another look at it, please.&lt;br /&gt;4 (Witness reading.)&lt;br /&gt;5 Well, the last sentence beginning with "they," I have&lt;br /&gt;6 no idea what they mean with respect -- the author means with&lt;br /&gt;7 respect to how many.&lt;br /&gt;8 The prior sentence says that untold millions across&lt;br /&gt;9 this country, who happen to be lesbian or gay, are not covered&lt;br /&gt;10 by federal law for employment discrimination. That's currently&lt;br /&gt;11 the case. At least until the ENDA law is passed by Congress,&lt;br /&gt;12 if so. But there's no indication from this paragraph as to how&lt;br /&gt;13 many are fired from their job on the basis of their sexual&lt;br /&gt;14 orientation.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Okay. Let's break that up, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. First, you do agree that there are some gays and lesbians&lt;br /&gt;18 who are fired from their jobs, refused work, paid less, and&lt;br /&gt;19 otherwise discriminated against in the workplace because of&lt;br /&gt;20 their sexual orientation? You would agree with that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I have no reason to disagree with that. I expect that's&lt;br /&gt;22 the case, yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Well, not only do you expect that is the case, but in&lt;br /&gt;24 terms of your investigation of gay and lesbian discrimination&lt;br /&gt;25 and political power, you have found out that that's the case,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2600&lt;br /&gt;1 correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Well, I'm aware that there are lawsuits,&lt;br /&gt;3 antidiscrimination suits, in many states. And so, on that&lt;br /&gt;4 basis, I can say that it is the case that there is&lt;br /&gt;5 discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the&lt;br /&gt;6 workplace.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And have you investigated how many gays and lesbians are&lt;br /&gt;8 fired from their jobs, refused work, paid less, and otherwise&lt;br /&gt;9 discriminated against in the workplace simply because they are&lt;br /&gt;10 gay or lesbian? Have you investigated that?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. The total number, no, I have not.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. The approximate number, have you looked at that?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. No, I have not.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Have you tried to find out whether that number is large or&lt;br /&gt;15 small?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I assume it's a substantial number. I haven't looked at&lt;br /&gt;17 the specific numbers.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Okay. Let me ask you to turn to the next page. The first&lt;br /&gt;19 paragraph says:&lt;br /&gt;20 "Anti-gay discrimination in the American&lt;br /&gt;21 workplace knows few bounds. As the 130-plus&lt;br /&gt;22 cases presented here show, anti-gay&lt;br /&gt;23 discrimination occurs in every region of the&lt;br /&gt;24 country, in large cities and small towns, on&lt;br /&gt;25 factory floors and in restaurant dining&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2601&lt;br /&gt;1 rooms."&lt;br /&gt;2 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I see that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And the first sentence of the next paragraph:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Anti-gay discrimination often means enduring&lt;br /&gt;6 daily harassment, including name calling,&lt;br /&gt;7 humiliation and physical threats from&lt;br /&gt;8 co-workers and bosses alike."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And based on the work that you've done, investigating&lt;br /&gt;12 discrimination against gays and lesbians and their political&lt;br /&gt;13 power, did you find that anti-gay discrimination often means&lt;br /&gt;14 enduring daily harassment, including name calling, humiliation&lt;br /&gt;15 and physical threats from co-workers and bosses alike?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I have no reason to doubt that.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Okay. Let me ask you next to look at tab 30.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 874. And it's a publication&lt;br /&gt;20 of the California Safe Schools Coalition.&lt;br /&gt;21 Have seen this document before?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I may have. I don't recall it, actually.&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;24 Exhibit 874.&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2602&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Very well. 874 is in.&lt;br /&gt;2 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 874 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;3 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Are you familiar with the California Safe Schools&lt;br /&gt;5 Coalition, sir?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I actually don't recall learning anything about that&lt;br /&gt;7 coalition.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Are you familiar with the 4H Center for Youth Development&lt;br /&gt;9 at the University of California Davis?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Again, I don't recall that organization.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. This says it's a summary fact sheet from a report by the&lt;br /&gt;12 California Safe Schools Coalition and the 4H Center for Youth&lt;br /&gt;13 Development at the University of California Davis. Do you see&lt;br /&gt;14 that?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Can you direct me to where that is. I'm sorry.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Right at the top.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. 34, tab 34?&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Tab 30.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Oh, I'm sorry.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Do you have tab 30?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I do. So I didn't have that in front of me before.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Okay. And this is a publication from the California Safe&lt;br /&gt;23 Schools Coalition, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And I know that you said that you don't remember whether&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2603&lt;br /&gt;1 or not you have seen this before, but let me direct your&lt;br /&gt;2 attention, on the first page, under "Key Findings."&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And the first one says:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Harassment and bullying based on actual or&lt;br /&gt;6 perceived sexual orientation are pervasive."&lt;br /&gt;7 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I see that sentence, yeah.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And the next sentence says:&lt;br /&gt;10 "7.5 percent of California students reported&lt;br /&gt;11 being harassed on the basis of actual or&lt;br /&gt;12 perceived sexual orientation. That&lt;br /&gt;13 translates to over 200,000 middle school and&lt;br /&gt;14 high school students harassed every year."&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Do you have any reason to disagree with that?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I don't have any basis for knowing one way or the other.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Did you investigate that --&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Uhm --&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. -- as part of what you did?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. In terms of harassment in schools?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. No, I did not.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. The next sentence says:&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2604&lt;br /&gt;1 "Harassment based on actual or perceived&lt;br /&gt;2 sexual orientation has dangerous consequences&lt;br /&gt;3 for students."&lt;br /&gt;4 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Do you have any reason to disagree with that?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Okay. Let me now turn to tab 89. And you will recall&lt;br /&gt;9 that this is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2864, which was an amicus&lt;br /&gt;10 brief submitted by Professors Eskridge and Cain, who you have&lt;br /&gt;11 previously identified.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And I would like to direct your attention to page 17. And&lt;br /&gt;14 I want to direct your attention to the material at the very top&lt;br /&gt;15 of the page 17. Take a moment, though, to familiarize yourself&lt;br /&gt;16 with the context.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. This will take just a moment.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. When you've finished, let me know.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Okay. I have read the paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Okay. And the portion that I'm interested in is at the&lt;br /&gt;21 top of page 17, where Professors Eskridge and Cain say:&lt;br /&gt;22 "Many prejudice voters favor any measure that&lt;br /&gt;23 harms or excludes lesbians, gay men,&lt;br /&gt;24 bisexuals, or transgender persons. And even&lt;br /&gt;25 moderate voters are reluctant, because of the&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2605&lt;br /&gt;1 anti-gay stereotypes, for example, quote,&lt;br /&gt;2 predatory homosexuals, closed quote, to,&lt;br /&gt;3 quote, recruit, closed quote, vulnerable&lt;br /&gt;4 children and destroy traditional families&lt;br /&gt;5 that the state long built into its public&lt;br /&gt;6 education and state policy."&lt;br /&gt;7 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. That's a compound sentence, so I would like to break it&lt;br /&gt;11 down.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Okay. Well, let's take it piece by piece.&lt;br /&gt;13 First, do you believe that there are anti-gay&lt;br /&gt;14 stereotypes that relate to gays being, quote, predatory&lt;br /&gt;15 homosexuals who, quote, recruit vulnerable children?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I know at least at some time there has been these&lt;br /&gt;17 stereotypes. I don't know the extent to which. So I believe&lt;br /&gt;18 that those stereotypes do exist, yes.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And have you investigated the extent to which those&lt;br /&gt;20 stereotypes exist?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. No, I have not.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And is there also an anti-gay stereotype that homosexuals&lt;br /&gt;23 will destroy traditional families, in your view, sir?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, I -- yeah --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. I'm just asking for your view.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2606&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I understand. This is a little bit different than the&lt;br /&gt;2 first one, it seems to me.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Simple question. Do you --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Well --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. -- believe --&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Right.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Based on the investigation that you have done, do you&lt;br /&gt;8 believe --&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I believe there's a view that homosexuals may certainly&lt;br /&gt;10 undermine traditional families.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. Now, do you believe that those anti-gay stereotypes&lt;br /&gt;12 that you just identified affect some voters, and affected some&lt;br /&gt;13 voters who voted in favor of Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Let me go back. I didn't say -- I don't think I said the&lt;br /&gt;15 second one was a stereotype. I think the -- I said the second&lt;br /&gt;16 one was there's a view that homosexuals will undermine -- if&lt;br /&gt;17 certain events occur with respect to the recognition of&lt;br /&gt;18 same-sex marriage, that that would undermine traditional&lt;br /&gt;19 families.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Do you believe, sir, that there's a stereotype --&lt;br /&gt;21 leaving -- leaving same-sex marriage aside, okay.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Well, I just don't want to conflate --&lt;br /&gt;23 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Listen to the question, please, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. All right.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2607&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Do you believe that -- leaving same-sex marriage aside --&lt;br /&gt;2 there is a stereotype, using "stereotype" in the way that&lt;br /&gt;3 you've used that term, okay --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Right.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. -- that homosexuals undermine traditional families?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I just don't want to conflate the two.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Nobody is asking you to conflate the two. I'm asking a&lt;br /&gt;8 simple question.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. About same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. No, not about same-sex marriage. I said "leaving same-sex&lt;br /&gt;11 marriage aside." Okay. Leaving same-sex marriage aside.&lt;br /&gt;12 Do you believe that there's an anti-gay stereotype&lt;br /&gt;13 that homosexuals undermine traditional families, even if we&lt;br /&gt;14 didn't have a same-sex marriage issue? Based on your&lt;br /&gt;15 investigation, do you believe that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. You don't know?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. Let's deal with the anti-gay stereotypes that you&lt;br /&gt;20 do know, stereotypes that there are predatory homosexuals who&lt;br /&gt;21 recruit vulnerable children.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Do you think that led somebody, some people, some number&lt;br /&gt;24 of people, to vote for Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Possibly so.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2608&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Possibly so, sir?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Again, when we talk about the polls on Proposition 8 --&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. I'm not asking for the polls. I'm asking for your opinion&lt;br /&gt;4 as an expert. Do you understand that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yeah.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay. You came in here saying that you were an expert,&lt;br /&gt;7 and that you had done a study of gay and lesbian political&lt;br /&gt;8 power, and discrimination against gays and lesbians, and&lt;br /&gt;9 whether that was occurring. Correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Now, in connection with that, did you reach a conclusion&lt;br /&gt;12 as to whether anti-gay stereotypes, including the anti-gay&lt;br /&gt;13 stereotypes that there were predatory homosexuals recruiting&lt;br /&gt;14 vulnerable children, affected some of the voters who voted in&lt;br /&gt;15 favor of Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. My view is that at least some people voted for&lt;br /&gt;17 Proposition 8 on the basis of anti-gay stereotypes and&lt;br /&gt;18 prejudice.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. Now, what proportion of the people who voted for&lt;br /&gt;20 Proposition 8 did so based on anti-gay stereotypes and&lt;br /&gt;21 prejudice?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. That's what I cannot tell you. And I have seen no poll&lt;br /&gt;23 that would give me that information.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Have you done any investigation that would permit you to&lt;br /&gt;25 make any kind of approximation of that?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2609&lt;br /&gt;1 A. No, and I don't know anyone who has.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Okay. Let me ask you, now, to turn to tab 82. And this&lt;br /&gt;3 is the chapter in the book Dangerous Democracy, that you and&lt;br /&gt;4 Professor Cain wrote.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And let me ask you to look, first, at page 50.&lt;br /&gt;7 And under the heading "Minority Rights" --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. -- you write:&lt;br /&gt;10 "One also can expect the initiative process&lt;br /&gt;11 to produce different outcomes than the&lt;br /&gt;12 legislative process will, in the areas of&lt;br /&gt;13 protecting minority rights and promoting&lt;br /&gt;14 minority interests."&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And then you identify several reasons why that is so,&lt;br /&gt;18 correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Take a minute to read this.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Reading) Okay.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Now, if you would turn to page 52. And I'm going to ask&lt;br /&gt;22 you about the first full paragraph there.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And this refers to a study that you did of what you&lt;br /&gt;25 referred to as three high-use initiative states, Oregon,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2610&lt;br /&gt;1 Colorado, and California, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And this was a study that covered the prior 40 years,&lt;br /&gt;4 correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, this was a 1999 study I did.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And it covered the 40 years preceding 1999, correct?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. It was 1960 to '99, something like that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. 39 years?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. 39 years.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Okay. You describe it as covering the past four decades,&lt;br /&gt;11 correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And let me direct your attention to the middle of that&lt;br /&gt;14 paragraph, where you say: "The problem, however." Do you see&lt;br /&gt;15 that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;18 "The problem, however" -- you write-- "is&lt;br /&gt;19 that initiatives that directly and&lt;br /&gt;20 differentially affect minorities can easily&lt;br /&gt;21 tap into a strain of anti-minority sentiment&lt;br /&gt;22 in the electorate. The initiatives from the&lt;br /&gt;23 three states in this category" --&lt;br /&gt;24 UNIDENTIFIED MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: Before I leave,&lt;br /&gt;25 return the family to Jesus (inaudible).&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2611&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Carry on, Mr. Boies.&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOIES: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;3 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. You write:&lt;br /&gt;5 "The problem, however, is that initiatives&lt;br /&gt;6 that directly and differentially affect&lt;br /&gt;7 minorities, can easily tap into a strain of&lt;br /&gt;8 anti-minority sentiment in the electorate."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. You then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;12 "The initiatives from the three states in&lt;br /&gt;13 this category sought to ban state efforts to&lt;br /&gt;14 prevent, quote, private, closed quote, racial&lt;br /&gt;15 discrimination in housing, restrict busing to&lt;br /&gt;16 desegregate public schools, restrict state&lt;br /&gt;17 efforts to protect the rights of homosexuals,&lt;br /&gt;18 establish English as the state's official&lt;br /&gt;19 language, restrict illegal immigration, ban&lt;br /&gt;20 state affirmative action for women and&lt;br /&gt;21 minorities, and restrict bilingual&lt;br /&gt;22 education."&lt;br /&gt;23 And was that an accurate description of the&lt;br /&gt;24 initiatives that you had studied?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes. I also said, though, that:&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2612&lt;br /&gt;1 "These initiatives should not be too easily&lt;br /&gt;2 caricatured as majority efforts to tyrannize&lt;br /&gt;3 minorities."&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Well, let's just look at that. What you said, you did&lt;br /&gt;5 have -- that was not a complete sentence, was it, that you --&lt;br /&gt;6 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;7 A. ... some posed that danger, right.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Yes, exactly.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Right.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. You said:&lt;br /&gt;11 "These initiatives should not be too easily&lt;br /&gt;12 caricatured as majority efforts to tyrannize&lt;br /&gt;13 minorities; although, many of them at least&lt;br /&gt;14 presented that danger."&lt;br /&gt;15 Correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. That's what the sentence says, yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And after that you wrote what we just described, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 "The problem, however" --&lt;br /&gt;19 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;21 "... differentially affect minorities can&lt;br /&gt;22 easily tap into a strain of anti-minority&lt;br /&gt;23 sentiment in the electorate."&lt;br /&gt;24 You wrote that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. There's an intervening sentence.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2613&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Yes, there is. You wrote, "The problem, however, is that&lt;br /&gt;2 initiatives," et cetera, correct? And then you give some&lt;br /&gt;3 examples of that. Am I correct?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Before that, I wrote:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Some of the measures, e.g. shifting from a&lt;br /&gt;6 policy of bilingual education, English&lt;br /&gt;7 emersion, arguably represented bona fide, if&lt;br /&gt;8 controversial, efforts to promote the&lt;br /&gt;9 interests of minorities, and enjoyed some&lt;br /&gt;10 support in affected minority communities."&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Yes. And immediately after that, what you say is that&lt;br /&gt;12 some of the measures represented that. And then you went on to&lt;br /&gt;13 say, "The problem however ..." And you were talking about the&lt;br /&gt;14 problem with these initiatives, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes, I'm wrestling with this question in this paragraph,&lt;br /&gt;16 yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Well, it was your paragraph, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It was. Well, I was a coauthor. I can't claim it all&lt;br /&gt;19 myself.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. No, but you don't reject this; do you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I do now.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. You do now, yes. Testifying as an expert for the&lt;br /&gt;23 defendant, you do now.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. No. In my book that I published last year, I have a&lt;br /&gt;25 different analysis of this issue.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2614&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. In your book, you never said this was wrong, did you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;2 The book you published in 2009, you never said this was wrong,&lt;br /&gt;3 did you?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. It's a totally different analysis of this issue.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. You've never said this was wrong. Yes or no, did you ever&lt;br /&gt;6 say this was wrong?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Did I ever say that this prior paragraph was wrong in my&lt;br /&gt;8 book?&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. No, I gave a different analysis.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Did you ever say it was wrong? That's a yes or no&lt;br /&gt;12 question.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Not in those words, no.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Did you ever say it was inaccurate?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Not in those words.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Okay. Now, I'm just asking now for your present view,&lt;br /&gt;17 okay. You were describing in this paragraph the four-decade&lt;br /&gt;18 study of initiatives in three high-use initiative states.&lt;br /&gt;19 Do you believe that your description here is&lt;br /&gt;20 inaccurate, as far as that study was concerned?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I think I would cast it somewhat differently.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. I'm sure you would. But that's not my question. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;23 You were purporting here --&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. -- to describe the results of a survey that you did,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2615&lt;br /&gt;1 correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, that's correct.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Do you believe that you described the results of the&lt;br /&gt;4 survey that you did accurately?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I think incompletely.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Incompletely.&lt;br /&gt;7 Well, let's -- let's take it one step at a time.&lt;br /&gt;8 When you say, "The problem is that initiatives directly and&lt;br /&gt;9 differentially" or "can directly and differentially affect&lt;br /&gt;10 minorities," do you believe that that is true?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Okay. And do you believe that initiatives that directly&lt;br /&gt;13 and differentially affect minorities can easily tap into a&lt;br /&gt;14 strain of anti-minority sentiment in the electorate? Do you&lt;br /&gt;15 believe that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I think on occasion that can occur.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Okay. And do you believe that that has occurred?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. And is it the case that you still believe that the&lt;br /&gt;20 initiatives that you've studied in this category -- let me ask&lt;br /&gt;21 you, when you say the initiatives from the three states in this&lt;br /&gt;22 category, you're talking about the category of initiatives that&lt;br /&gt;23 directly and differentially affect minorities and that tap into&lt;br /&gt;24 a strain of anti-minority sentiment in the electorate, right?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2616&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And you give examples of initiatives that directly and&lt;br /&gt;2 differentially affect minorities that tap into a strain of&lt;br /&gt;3 anti-minority sentiment, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes, that's correct.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And the initiative examples that you give of that kind&lt;br /&gt;6 include initiatives to restrict state efforts to protect the&lt;br /&gt;7 rights of homosexuals, correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Among several others, yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Yes, among several others. I didn't in any way mean to&lt;br /&gt;10 imply that was the only minority that was suffering here.&lt;br /&gt;11 You then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;12 "By contrast, no voter-approved initiatives&lt;br /&gt;13 in those states during that period" of 40&lt;br /&gt;14 years "expressly expanded the rights of&lt;br /&gt;15 minorities."&lt;br /&gt;16 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Was that an accurate statement, sir?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I don't have any reason to disagree with that, at this&lt;br /&gt;20 point, no.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at page 42. And let me ask&lt;br /&gt;22 you to look at the very last sentence there, where you write:&lt;br /&gt;23 "Initiative government leads to a higher&lt;br /&gt;24 level of policy responsiveness to the median&lt;br /&gt;25 statewide voters. But it produces biases&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2617&lt;br /&gt;1 against individual and minority rights;&lt;br /&gt;2 precisely what the checks and balances system&lt;br /&gt;3 was meant to protect."&lt;br /&gt;4 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. When you refer there to the "median statewide voters,"&lt;br /&gt;7 what are you referring to?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. This is a political science term. If you look at the&lt;br /&gt;9 electorate and you look at the opinion, the public opinion of&lt;br /&gt;10 the electorate on a distribution, the median is the --&lt;br /&gt;11 basically, the opinion in the center of that curve.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Let's -- let's look next at tab 35. And this is your&lt;br /&gt;13 Santa Clara Law Review article, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I'm getting there.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Is this already in evidence?&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOIES: It is, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.&lt;br /&gt;19 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And I'd like to ask you about some passages here that&lt;br /&gt;21 relate to the same subject that we were talking about, which is&lt;br /&gt;22 the relationship of initiatives to undermining protections for&lt;br /&gt;23 minorities.&lt;br /&gt;24 And I'd like to begin on page 8. In the first full&lt;br /&gt;25 paragraph, the next to the last sentence is what I'm primarily&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2618&lt;br /&gt;1 interested in. But, for context, the immediately-preceding&lt;br /&gt;2 sentence says:&lt;br /&gt;3 "First, the process of Populist-oriented&lt;br /&gt;4 initiative lawmaking is not necessarily,&lt;br /&gt;5 quote, more democratic, closed quote, than&lt;br /&gt;6 the representative system, if one conceives&lt;br /&gt;7 of, quote, democracy, closed quote, as not&lt;br /&gt;8 just, quote, majority rule, closed quote, but&lt;br /&gt;9 instead a process that includes a range of&lt;br /&gt;10 democratic norms."&lt;br /&gt;11 You then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;12 "Second, the substance of Populist-oriented&lt;br /&gt;13 initiative lawmaking tends to undermine&lt;br /&gt;14 representative government and impose&lt;br /&gt;15 majoritarian values at the expense of&lt;br /&gt;16 minority rights."&lt;br /&gt;17 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I see that.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. What did you mean in that sentence by "majoritarian&lt;br /&gt;20 values"?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I assume what I meant was the viewpoint of the majority of&lt;br /&gt;22 the voters participating in the election.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Let me ask you to look, next, at page 12 of this article.&lt;br /&gt;24 At the bottom of the page.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2619&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Where you write, quote:&lt;br /&gt;2 "All of these consequences of the Populist&lt;br /&gt;3 triumph -- the threats to minority rights,&lt;br /&gt;4 the pressure on the courts and the&lt;br /&gt;5 undermining of representative government --&lt;br /&gt;6 are disturbing to commentators from a range&lt;br /&gt;7 of political persuasions who admire the&lt;br /&gt;8 progressive conception of state government."&lt;br /&gt;9 And when you referred to "commentators from a range&lt;br /&gt;10 of political persuasions," did you have any particular&lt;br /&gt;11 commentators in mind?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Let me think. Certainly, most critics of the initiative&lt;br /&gt;13 process today come from the left. Early on, in the progressive&lt;br /&gt;14 era, most critics of the initiative process came from the&lt;br /&gt;15 right. For example, William Howard Taft was an early critic of&lt;br /&gt;16 the initiative process.&lt;br /&gt;17 And this is what I've called the Madisonian kind of&lt;br /&gt;18 critique of the initiative process, and this was the framework&lt;br /&gt;19 I was using during this period.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Indeed, if you turn to page 33 of your article --&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Let's see.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. -- at the bottom of the page, this is at footnote 65, you&lt;br /&gt;23 write, quote:&lt;br /&gt;24 "Direct democracy's threat to minority rights&lt;br /&gt;25 is, of course, one of the primary reasons&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2620&lt;br /&gt;1 Madison and most of the other Founders&lt;br /&gt;2 favored a representative system replete with&lt;br /&gt;3 checks and balances. See generally James&lt;br /&gt;4 Madison, Alexander Hamilton &amp; John Jay -- the&lt;br /&gt;5 Federalist Papers."&lt;br /&gt;6 And that's what you were referring to a moment ago,&lt;br /&gt;7 when you talked about the Madisonian analysis that you were&lt;br /&gt;8 pursuing at this time; is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Usually focused on the Federalist Papers. And that's the&lt;br /&gt;10 Madisonian analysis I was using as a critique to pure or direct&lt;br /&gt;11 democracy, and the disadvantages of that system during that&lt;br /&gt;12 period of my -- when I was in graduate school, yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Are you familiar with the Federalist Society?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes, I am.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And would you consider the Federalist Society, in your&lt;br /&gt;16 terms, a left organization?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Okay. You'd consider it a right organization, correct, in&lt;br /&gt;19 the left/right spectrum?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I don't know if I'm the real expert on that in the&lt;br /&gt;21 courtroom, but I would say probably so.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you to look at page 11 of this&lt;br /&gt;23 article. And I'm interested in the third sentence of the first&lt;br /&gt;24 full paragraph there. But just so that you have the context,&lt;br /&gt;25 I'll read the first two sentences. You write:&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2621&lt;br /&gt;1 "With respect to the second substantive&lt;br /&gt;2 concern, minority rights, it is clear that&lt;br /&gt;3 the direct initiative can be and has been&lt;br /&gt;4 used to disadvantage minorities. The checks&lt;br /&gt;5 and balances system of representative&lt;br /&gt;6 government is designed to harmonize minority&lt;br /&gt;7 rule with protection of minority rights."&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I think you meant majority rule with minority rights.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. I did. And let me just read that, to be clear. And then&lt;br /&gt;10 let me take them one sentence at a time. First you write:&lt;br /&gt;11 "With respect to the second substantive&lt;br /&gt;12 concern, minority rights, it is clear that&lt;br /&gt;13 the direct initiative can be and has been&lt;br /&gt;14 used to disadvantage minorities."&lt;br /&gt;15 That's what you wrote, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And you believe that today, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And then you next write:&lt;br /&gt;20 "The checks and balances system of&lt;br /&gt;21 representative government is designed to&lt;br /&gt;22 harmonize majority rule with protection of&lt;br /&gt;23 minority rights."&lt;br /&gt;24 And you wrote that at the time, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I did.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2622&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And you believe that today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. You then write:&lt;br /&gt;4 "In contrast, the direct initiative system by&lt;br /&gt;5 bypassing checks and balances, is weighted&lt;br /&gt;6 heavily towards majority rule at the expense&lt;br /&gt;7 of certain minorities. Racial minorities,&lt;br /&gt;8 illegal immigrants, homosexuals, and criminal&lt;br /&gt;9 defendants have been exposed to the&lt;br /&gt;10 electorate's momentary passions as&lt;br /&gt;11 Californians have adopted a large number of&lt;br /&gt;12 initiatives that represent Populist backlash&lt;br /&gt;13 against representative governments' efforts&lt;br /&gt;14 to protect or promote the interests of racial&lt;br /&gt;15 or other minorities."&lt;br /&gt;16 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And after your reference to homosexuals in that statement,&lt;br /&gt;19 you have a footnote 68, correct?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Now, if you turn to page 34, you'll see footnote 68. And&lt;br /&gt;22 you say:&lt;br /&gt;23 "The recent example is Proposition 22 of&lt;br /&gt;24 2000."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2623&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Now, was Proposition 22 of 2000 -- were you saying here&lt;br /&gt;3 that Proposition 22 of 2000 was an example of the direct&lt;br /&gt;4 initiative system bypassing checks and balances at the expense&lt;br /&gt;5 of certain minorities? Is that what you were saying here, sir?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. That's what the footnote indicates.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you to look at your deposition.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. The footnote is factually incorrect, however. It says&lt;br /&gt;9 that "Proposition 22 constitutionalizes the state ban on&lt;br /&gt;10 same-sex marriages," which it did not.&lt;br /&gt;11 So I would say that the footnote is both factually&lt;br /&gt;12 and analytically incorrect.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Well, let me just be sure I understand what you're saying.&lt;br /&gt;14 Obviously, Proposition 22 was a statutory --&lt;br /&gt;15 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. -- not a constitutional thing. And you got that wrong,&lt;br /&gt;17 you're saying?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I did.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. But, nevertheless, regardless of whether you got it&lt;br /&gt;20 wrong whether it was a statute or a constitutional amendment,&lt;br /&gt;21 what you were saying here is that Proposition 22 was an example&lt;br /&gt;22 of the direct initiative system bypassing checks and balances&lt;br /&gt;23 at the expense of certain minorities, in this case the&lt;br /&gt;24 homosexual minority. That's what you were saying here,&lt;br /&gt;25 correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2624&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That's what I wrote at the time. I no longer believe&lt;br /&gt;2 that.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. You no longer believe that. Well, sir, let's see about&lt;br /&gt;4 that. Look at your deposition, page 162. It's at tab 1. Page&lt;br /&gt;5 162, lines 22 to 25.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Almost there.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Now, first, your deposition was taken in December of 2009,&lt;br /&gt;8 correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Okay. And this was after you wrote your book, correct,&lt;br /&gt;11 sir?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Your most recent book, the one that you're referring to?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And you were asked:&lt;br /&gt;16 "QUESTION: Do you agree that the direct&lt;br /&gt;17 initiative can be and has been used to&lt;br /&gt;18 disadvantage minorities?&lt;br /&gt;19 "ANSWER: I believe that's a fair&lt;br /&gt;20 interpretation of the history of the&lt;br /&gt;21 initiative process."&lt;br /&gt;22 Did you give that testimony under oath on December 9,&lt;br /&gt;23 2009?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes. And I would say the same thing today.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2625&lt;br /&gt;1 Now, let me ask you to turn to tab 80. And this is a&lt;br /&gt;2 article that you wrote in the Seattle University Law Review,&lt;br /&gt;3 that is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2855, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Tab 8?&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Tab 80, eight zero.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Eight zero. Sorry. Okay. I have the article.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;8 Exhibit 2855.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. THOMPSON: 2856?&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOIES: 2855.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: Oh, okay. No objection.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well. 2855 is in.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2855 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Let me ask you to look at the bottom of page 6. And here&lt;br /&gt;16 you write:&lt;br /&gt;17 "At times, government efforts to assist&lt;br /&gt;18 minorities has stirred resentment, which in&lt;br /&gt;19 turn has fueled counter-efforts to&lt;br /&gt;20 reestablish and reinforce majoritarian&lt;br /&gt;21 interests. At the state level, the&lt;br /&gt;22 initiative process has provided a convenient&lt;br /&gt;23 vehicle for repealing or preempting&lt;br /&gt;24 representative government's efforts to assist&lt;br /&gt;25 minorities. In some states, such as&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2626&lt;br /&gt;1 California and Colorado, voters have approved&lt;br /&gt;2 a steady stream of such initiatives in recent&lt;br /&gt;3 decades, nearly all of which have been&lt;br /&gt;4 challenged in court."&lt;br /&gt;5 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And was that based, in part, on the four-decade study of&lt;br /&gt;8 initiatives in Oregon, Colorado, and California, that you have&lt;br /&gt;9 referred to previously?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. In the next paragraph -- I'm primarily interested in the&lt;br /&gt;12 third sentence, but, if you wish, I can read the first two&lt;br /&gt;13 sentences for context. The third sentence says:&lt;br /&gt;14 "In the American system, courts have long&lt;br /&gt;15 assumed responsibility for protecting racial&lt;br /&gt;16 and certain other 'discreet and insular'&lt;br /&gt;17 minorities, especially when prejudice against&lt;br /&gt;18 them 'tends seriously to curtail the&lt;br /&gt;19 operation of those political processes&lt;br /&gt;20 ordinarily to be relied on to protect&lt;br /&gt;21 minorities.'"&lt;br /&gt;22 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And then you go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;25 "When an initiative affects a minority thus&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2627&lt;br /&gt;1 protected, it is predictable that after the&lt;br /&gt;2 election the measure's opponents will&lt;br /&gt;3 petition the courts to strike it down. This&lt;br /&gt;4 conflict between the initiative system's&lt;br /&gt;5 tendency to produce measures directed at&lt;br /&gt;6 protected minorities, and the courts'&lt;br /&gt;7 commitment to strictly scrutinize such&lt;br /&gt;8 measures, naturally generates litigation."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Now, when you referred to "the operation of those&lt;br /&gt;12 political processes ordinarily to be relied on to protect&lt;br /&gt;13 minorities" -- do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Let me take a look, again.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. It's in the sentence where you say --&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yeah.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;18 "In the American system, courts have long&lt;br /&gt;19 assumed responsibility for protecting racial&lt;br /&gt;20 and certain other discreet and insular&lt;br /&gt;21 minorities, especially when prejudice against&lt;br /&gt;22 them tends seriously to curtail the operation&lt;br /&gt;23 of those political processes ordinarily to be&lt;br /&gt;24 relied on to protect those minorities."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that? First question --&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2628&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Do you see where we're --&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, my question is, when you refer to "those political&lt;br /&gt;5 processes ordinarily to be relied on to protect minorities,"&lt;br /&gt;6 what political processes are you referring to?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. My understanding of this quote, coming from, as I&lt;br /&gt;8 recall --&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. This quote that you wrote?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yeah. I'm quoting somebody else, though, which is Justice&lt;br /&gt;11 Stone --&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Well, you have --&lt;br /&gt;13 A. -- I believe.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. -- included a quote from Justice Stone within your&lt;br /&gt;15 sentence, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Right. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Now, what is your understanding of those political&lt;br /&gt;18 processes ordinarily to be relied on to protect minorities?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I think he's referring to the democratic processes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Which democratic processes?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Legislatures. That's -- I think that's what he's&lt;br /&gt;22 referring to, is the legislative process.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you to look at tab 35, page 12.&lt;br /&gt;24 And was it accurate, in 2001, to say that:&lt;br /&gt;25 "In California, over the past four&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2629&lt;br /&gt;1 decades" --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I'm sorry. Can you direct me to where you're -- I find&lt;br /&gt;3 the sentence, yeah.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;5 "In California, over the past four decades,&lt;br /&gt;6 approximately two-thirds of all&lt;br /&gt;7 voter-approved initiatives have been&lt;br /&gt;8 challenged in court, and of those, nearly&lt;br /&gt;9 half have been invalidated in part or in&lt;br /&gt;10 their entirety."&lt;br /&gt;11 Was that an accurate statement, sir?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Many of those didn't involve minority-rights issues, but&lt;br /&gt;13 that's an accurate statement.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Well, let's go on to what you write here. You say:&lt;br /&gt;15 "In California and other states, challenge&lt;br /&gt;16 and invalidation rates vary by subject&lt;br /&gt;17 matter."&lt;br /&gt;18 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Which is the point you just made, that some of these&lt;br /&gt;21 related to minority rights, and some didn't.&lt;br /&gt;22 You then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;23 "Populist-oriented initiatives that affect&lt;br /&gt;24 unpopular minorities or undermine&lt;br /&gt;25 representative government are frequently&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2630&lt;br /&gt;1 challenged and sometimes invalidated."&lt;br /&gt;2 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And then you say:&lt;br /&gt;5 "By contrast, initiatives that seek to&lt;br /&gt;6 protect the environment (a fairly common&lt;br /&gt;7 initiative type) rarely face trouble in the&lt;br /&gt;8 courts."&lt;br /&gt;9 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Now, let me ask you to look at tab 80. This is your&lt;br /&gt;12 Seattle Law Review article, again Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2855.&lt;br /&gt;13 And I would like you to look at page 7.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Too many binders here. Okay. We are at tab 80?&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Tab 80, page 7. And this is a passage we've already&lt;br /&gt;16 looked at, but I want to ask you another question in the&lt;br /&gt;17 context of what I've just been examining.&lt;br /&gt;18 The very last sentence, above the heading "Criminal&lt;br /&gt;19 Justice Initiatives," you write:&lt;br /&gt;20 "This conflict between the initiatives&lt;br /&gt;21 system's tendency to produce measures&lt;br /&gt;22 directed at protected minorities, and the&lt;br /&gt;23 courts' commitment to strictly scrutinize&lt;br /&gt;24 such measures, naturally generates&lt;br /&gt;25 litigation."&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2631&lt;br /&gt;1 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And had you made a study of the extent to which&lt;br /&gt;4 initiatives directed at protected minorities had, in fact, been&lt;br /&gt;5 litigated?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And based on that study, you believed that that statement&lt;br /&gt;8 was correct, true?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you believe that statement is correct today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Frequent litigation, yes. In terms of "directed at," I'm&lt;br /&gt;12 not sure that I would use that terminology. But affecting,&lt;br /&gt;13 certainly.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Now, let me ask you to look at tab 82. And this is&lt;br /&gt;15 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2857. It is your chapter in the book&lt;br /&gt;16 Dangerous Democracy.&lt;br /&gt;17 And for present purposes, I want to start at page 53.&lt;br /&gt;18 And it's the sentences right above your heading "Initiative&lt;br /&gt;19 Politics and the Courts."&lt;br /&gt;20 And you ask a question there. You ask, quote:&lt;br /&gt;21 "What prevents initiatives from unfairly&lt;br /&gt;22 undermining individual rights and altering&lt;br /&gt;23 the constitutional structure of government?"&lt;br /&gt;24 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2632&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And you answer: "The courts," correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And would that still be your view?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I believe that the courts have an important role in&lt;br /&gt;5 checking the initiative system. And my view has broadened&lt;br /&gt;6 beyond this, but that statement, I believe, is true.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And, indeed, when you have a initiative that's a&lt;br /&gt;8 constitutional amendment, only the courts can prevent that&lt;br /&gt;9 initiative from unfairly undermining individual rights,&lt;br /&gt;10 correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Unless it's repealed.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 While we're on page 53, going down under the heading&lt;br /&gt;14 "Judicial Review and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty," the&lt;br /&gt;15 third sentence, you say:&lt;br /&gt;16 "In exercising judicial review, the courts'&lt;br /&gt;17 responsibility is to check majority actions&lt;br /&gt;18 that run counter to constitutional principles&lt;br /&gt;19 (including individual rights, especially&lt;br /&gt;20 those of unpopular minorities)."&lt;br /&gt;21 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And as a political scientist, you would agree with that&lt;br /&gt;24 statement today, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yeah. I think there's a difference between protecting&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2633&lt;br /&gt;1 rights and expanding rights, which is where I get into my --&lt;br /&gt;2 you now have the shift in the analysis.&lt;br /&gt;3 But if there's an established right, and it's being&lt;br /&gt;4 violated by the initiative process, then I think the courts&lt;br /&gt;5 have a responsibility for checking that.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Right. And when Proposition 8 was passed, gays and&lt;br /&gt;7 lesbians had had the right in California to marry, correct,&lt;br /&gt;8 sir?&lt;br /&gt;9 That's a yes or no question. Or you could say, "I&lt;br /&gt;10 don't know."&lt;br /&gt;11 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;12 But it's yes, no, or, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. It was a contested question. There was a pending ballot&lt;br /&gt;14 initiative before the Court --&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. At the time that Proposition 8 was passed, in the months&lt;br /&gt;16 of July, and August, September, and October, 2008, did gays and&lt;br /&gt;17 lesbians have the right to marry in California, in your&lt;br /&gt;18 opinion, Dr. Miller?&lt;br /&gt;19 Yes, no, or, I don't know?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. The court had issued a decision, and they had a right to&lt;br /&gt;21 marry, yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. So the answer to my question is: Yes?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes. The court had, through that decision, created a&lt;br /&gt;24 right.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, just as a matter of understanding your terminology,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2634&lt;br /&gt;1 the difference between protecting rights and expanding&lt;br /&gt;2 rights --&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. -- did Brown against Board of Education protect a right or&lt;br /&gt;5 expand a right, in your view?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I believe the Fourteenth Amendment was --&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. My question, sir, is not what your analysis is. Because&lt;br /&gt;8 we could go all day on some of this. My simple question: In&lt;br /&gt;9 your view as a political scientist, did Brown against Board of&lt;br /&gt;10 Education protect a right or expand a right, as you use those&lt;br /&gt;11 terms?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I believe it was correctly interpreting the Fourteenth&lt;br /&gt;13 Amendment and protecting the right established in the&lt;br /&gt;14 Fourteenth Amendment.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Okay. So you believe that Brown against Board of&lt;br /&gt;16 Education was not expanding a right; it was protecting a right&lt;br /&gt;17 guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. That's my view.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you to look, next, at page 55. And&lt;br /&gt;20 I'm going to ask you about the paragraph at the bottom of the&lt;br /&gt;21 page. And --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Did you say 55?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Tab 82.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Oh, I'm sorry.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. The one we're looking at, page 55.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2635&lt;br /&gt;1 A. One second.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And the third sentence there says, quote:&lt;br /&gt;3 "If the role of the courts in exercising&lt;br /&gt;4 judicial review is to act as a filter" --&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I'm sorry, Mr. Boies. I'm not sure where we are at. This&lt;br /&gt;6 is page 55?&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Page 55.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Line --&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. The bottom of the page, the last paragraph, the paragraph&lt;br /&gt;10 that begins, "The Populist view."&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Okay. I have it.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. It says:&lt;br /&gt;13 "The Populist view that judges should be&lt;br /&gt;14 extra deferential to initiatives has much&lt;br /&gt;15 intuitive appeal. However, as Julian Eule&lt;br /&gt;16 noted, if one accepts the underlying&lt;br /&gt;17 rationale for judicial review, this is in&lt;br /&gt;18 fact 180 degrees off the mark."&lt;br /&gt;19 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. You then go on to write:&lt;br /&gt;22 "If the role of the courts in exercising&lt;br /&gt;23 judicial review is to act as a filter to&lt;br /&gt;24 protect constitutional principles and&lt;br /&gt;25 minority rights against majoritarian attack,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2636&lt;br /&gt;1 then the courts need to be more vigilant, not&lt;br /&gt;2 less, when reviewing initiatives."&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And you then go on to give some reasons for that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And one of the reasons, number one, you say:&lt;br /&gt;8 "... in a representative system, the courts&lt;br /&gt;9 are but one of the many institutional checks&lt;br /&gt;10 on majority rule, whereas in the initiative&lt;br /&gt;11 process, the courts are the only&lt;br /&gt;12 institutional filter, the check of first and&lt;br /&gt;13 last resort."&lt;br /&gt;14 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. You then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;17 "As we have argued, it is easier for&lt;br /&gt;18 violations of minority rights or other&lt;br /&gt;19 constitutional norms to emerge from an&lt;br /&gt;20 otherwise unfiltered majoritarian process&lt;br /&gt;21 than one in which there are multiple checks&lt;br /&gt;22 and balances."&lt;br /&gt;23 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, you believed that at the time, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2637&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Okay. This is compound now. We've got --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. All I'm asking you is whether you believed it when you&lt;br /&gt;3 wrote it.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Which part, the paragraph, or the subparagraph 1?&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. All of it, sir.&lt;br /&gt;6 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;7 Did you believe all of this paragraph at the time you&lt;br /&gt;8 wrote it?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Uhm, to an extent. This was a coauthored article.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. I understand. But you didn't disagree with this, did you,&lt;br /&gt;11 at the time?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I was exploring this idea. I had read this article by&lt;br /&gt;13 Julian Eule. I wasn't quite sure whether there was merit to&lt;br /&gt;14 it. The court should use extra -- you've asked me about the&lt;br /&gt;15 paragraph saying that the Court should be more vigilant, not&lt;br /&gt;16 less, in reviewing initiatives.&lt;br /&gt;17 That's a view of some in the academy. Others have&lt;br /&gt;18 the opposite view, that courts should be more deferential to&lt;br /&gt;19 initiatives.&lt;br /&gt;20 And I was exploring the view that they should be&lt;br /&gt;21 more -- more exacting in their review.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Sure. This is a little bit different than a situation&lt;br /&gt;23 where you say you saw the light and changed your mind. Here&lt;br /&gt;24 I'm just asking about what you believed at the time you wrote&lt;br /&gt;25 this.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2638&lt;br /&gt;1 You don't say here that you're exploring the issue,&lt;br /&gt;2 do you?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. No, I don't.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. No. And you don't say, "Maybe this is right, and maybe&lt;br /&gt;5 this is wrong; I don't know." You say this pretty positively,&lt;br /&gt;6 don't you?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I probably should have phrased it differently because I&lt;br /&gt;8 don't think I strongly held this view at any time.&lt;br /&gt;9 I think the better view is that the Court should&lt;br /&gt;10 exercise the same -- in terms of -- we can talk about sub 1 and&lt;br /&gt;11 those issues. But in terms of judicial review of initiatives,&lt;br /&gt;12 I think the better view is that initiatives should be treated&lt;br /&gt;13 the same as enactments of the legislature.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Well, let's look at number 1.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. The first sentence.&lt;br /&gt;17 "... in a representative system, the courts&lt;br /&gt;18 are but one of many institutional checks on&lt;br /&gt;19 majority rule ..."&lt;br /&gt;20 You would agree with that today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And then:&lt;br /&gt;23 "... whereas in the initiative process, the&lt;br /&gt;24 courts are the only institutional filter, the&lt;br /&gt;25 check of first and last resort."&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2639&lt;br /&gt;1 And in California, at least, you would agree with&lt;br /&gt;2 that statement today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes. I don't --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay. If the answer is "yes," we don't have to go into&lt;br /&gt;5 more.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Well, in terms of actually defeating the initiative&lt;br /&gt;7 institutionally, I mean, there are filters in terms of the&lt;br /&gt;8 attorney general's ballot and summary. And there are other&lt;br /&gt;9 institutional actors that have a role --&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Yes, but --&lt;br /&gt;11 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. -- once the initiative is passed, once the initiative is&lt;br /&gt;13 passed, the only filter is the courts, correct, in California&lt;br /&gt;14 at least?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Unless the initiative, by its own terms, allows for&lt;br /&gt;16 legislative amendment or repeal.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And Proposition 8 didn't do that, did it?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Did not.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. You then say in this article:&lt;br /&gt;20 "It is easier for violation of minority&lt;br /&gt;21 rights or other constitutional norms to&lt;br /&gt;22 emerge from an otherwise unfiltered&lt;br /&gt;23 majoritarian process than one in which there&lt;br /&gt;24 are multiple checks and balances."&lt;br /&gt;25 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2640&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Now, first, that is something that you did believe at this&lt;br /&gt;3 time. And you wrote it repeatedly, in article after article,&lt;br /&gt;4 at this time, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. At that time, I believed that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. In terms of the standard of judicial review --&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Excuse me, what?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. In terms of the standard of judicial review in the&lt;br /&gt;10 preceding paragraph --&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Wait a minute. Wait a minute, sir. Wait a minute.&lt;br /&gt;12 You say here:&lt;br /&gt;13 "It is easier for violation of minority&lt;br /&gt;14 rights or other constitutional norms to&lt;br /&gt;15 emerge from an otherwise unfiltered&lt;br /&gt;16 majoritarian process than one in which there&lt;br /&gt;17 are multiple checks and balances."&lt;br /&gt;18 That's what you wrote here, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I'm not contesting that.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And you wrote the substance of that repeatedly, and we've&lt;br /&gt;21 shown you a number of examples --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. -- of that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And you clearly believed that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2641&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2856.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: That's tab --&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. BOIES: I'm sorry, that's at tab 81. 81.&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And, in particular, I want you to look at page 10. And&lt;br /&gt;7 this is an article "Anatomy of a Backlash," written by you,&lt;br /&gt;8 correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. This is a conference paper. It was never published.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. This was prepared for delivery at the 2005 Annual Meeting&lt;br /&gt;11 of the American Political Science Association, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes. I've already testified about that.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. In fact, this was one of the articles you testified about&lt;br /&gt;14 on direct examination, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. This was one of the articles that you were listing when&lt;br /&gt;17 you were being qualified as an expert, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And on page 10, you say -- and this is 11 lines from the&lt;br /&gt;20 bottom of the page. It's the sentence that begins, "Once this&lt;br /&gt;21 majority."&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And the majority that you're referring to there is the&lt;br /&gt;24 majority that passes a initiative, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2642&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. You say, quote:&lt;br /&gt;2 "Once this majority embeds its preference in&lt;br /&gt;3 the state constitution, neither the state&lt;br /&gt;4 legislature nor the state court can undue the&lt;br /&gt;5 provision. As a consequence, the federal&lt;br /&gt;6 courts provide the only institutional check&lt;br /&gt;7 on the new constitutional provision."&lt;br /&gt;8 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you believed that when you delivered this paper in&lt;br /&gt;11 2005, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And you believe that today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. It depends on the institutional rules of the state.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Sir, the state you're talking about here -- the state&lt;br /&gt;16 we're talking about throughout this trial is California,&lt;br /&gt;17 correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Right. So when we --&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And you know --&lt;br /&gt;20 A. -- say the --&lt;br /&gt;21 (Simultaneous colloquy.)&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And you know that in California, once an initiative is&lt;br /&gt;23 passed, okay --&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yeah.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. -- as you write here, the federal courts provide the only&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2643&lt;br /&gt;1 institutional check on the new state constitutional provision?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. The legislature could put something back on the ballot, or&lt;br /&gt;3 the people could, to repeal it.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. But, again, it has to go back to the same majoritarian&lt;br /&gt;5 group that passed it in the first place, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I'd reject that. It's a different majority in every&lt;br /&gt;7 election. It's a different electorate in every election.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Do the prejudices and stereotypes of that electorate&lt;br /&gt;9 change, in your view?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes. If you compare all the evidence over time, there's&lt;br /&gt;11 much less stereotyping and prejudice against many minority&lt;br /&gt;12 groups.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And that's true for, in your view, all minority groups,&lt;br /&gt;14 correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I believe so. I think in particular -- if you want to&lt;br /&gt;16 look at this Proposition 22 in --&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Do you remember what my question was?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. What was my question?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Maybe you should re-ask the question.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Is it true of all minority groups?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. That --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. That, in your view --&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Stereotyping and prejudice --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Is being reduced.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2644&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I'd have to look more closely at that. But, in general, I&lt;br /&gt;2 think we have less stereotyping and prejudice in the&lt;br /&gt;3 United States than we used to.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. But you recognize there are still stereotyping and&lt;br /&gt;5 prejudice against gays and lesbians today, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I believe it's less than in the past.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. But you don't have any idea how many or what percentage of&lt;br /&gt;10 the voters in favor of Proposition 8 were motivated by&lt;br /&gt;11 stereotypes and prejudice, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Let me turn to the subject of hate crimes legislation.&lt;br /&gt;14 You identified the federal hate crimes law, which you&lt;br /&gt;15 described as the Matthew Shepard law, as the example that you&lt;br /&gt;16 could come up with of a federal law that demonstrated gay and&lt;br /&gt;17 lesbian political power.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. That was one indice of it.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Oh. Were there other federal laws that were passed that,&lt;br /&gt;20 in your view, demonstrate gay and lesbian political power?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. That's the one I examined. I can't think of any other.&lt;br /&gt;22 There have been executive orders --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Sir, do you understand the question? The question was&lt;br /&gt;24 about laws that were passed, that you think demonstrate gay and&lt;br /&gt;25 lesbian political power.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2645&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That's one I offered in my report. And I don't have --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. The only one, correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. In terms of federal legislation coming out of Congress.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. All federal legislation comes out of Congress, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes. There is also federal regulations.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. But all federal legislation comes out of congress?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And this is the only federal legislation that has been&lt;br /&gt;9 passed that you believe demonstrates the political power of&lt;br /&gt;10 gays and lesbians, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. That was the only one I identified.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And it's the only one you know, correct?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Now, do you know what the formal name of that legislation&lt;br /&gt;15 was?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. The Matthew Shepard Bill.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Actually, would it refresh your recollection if I told you&lt;br /&gt;18 it was the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Bill?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And you know who James Byrd was, don't you?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. He was a victim of hate crime.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And he was an African American, right?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, he was.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And this Matthew Shepard and James Byrd legislation was&lt;br /&gt;25 supported not only by gays and lesbians, but by the African&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2646&lt;br /&gt;1 American community and a wide variety of other minorities,&lt;br /&gt;2 correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. African Americans were already protected under hate crimes&lt;br /&gt;4 legislation, though.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. This legislation was supported by not only gays and&lt;br /&gt;6 lesbians, but by the African American community as well,&lt;br /&gt;7 correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. There was a coalition that supported this, that's correct.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And, indeed, this legislation was something that was&lt;br /&gt;10 valuable not only to gays and lesbians, but to every citizen in&lt;br /&gt;11 this country, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I -- I don't know what you mean by that.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Don't you feel, as an individual citizen, that prohibiting&lt;br /&gt;14 hate crimes benefits you?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. So this was legislation that benefited every citizen in&lt;br /&gt;17 this country, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It particularly benefited those groups that are targeted&lt;br /&gt;19 for hate crimes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Yes, but it's also something that you believe and the vast&lt;br /&gt;21 majority of Americans believe benefits everybody, correct?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. In terms of good public policy?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Many Americans believe it's a good thing to be able to&lt;br /&gt;25 protect victims of hate crime, yes. And I -- I agree with&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2647&lt;br /&gt;1 that.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And, incidentally, you're familiar with Megan's Law; are&lt;br /&gt;3 you not?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes, I am.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And Megan's Law was something that was adopted because&lt;br /&gt;6 Megan, who was a young girl, was kidnapped, raped, and killed,&lt;br /&gt;7 correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And Megan's Law enjoyed wide popular support, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I believe that's true, yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And you wouldn't view the passage of Megan's Law as&lt;br /&gt;12 demonstrating the political power of children, would you? Or&lt;br /&gt;13 would you? Maybe you would.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I don't know. I mean, I think there was a lot of concern&lt;br /&gt;16 about children. And to the extent that that's manifest in&lt;br /&gt;17 political mobilization and support for children's rights&lt;br /&gt;18 advocates, I mean, I would have to look -- I haven't actually&lt;br /&gt;19 examined it very closely.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. So you think this Megan's Law might have been the result&lt;br /&gt;21 of political power of little girls who were raped and killed?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. No, I think sympathetic allies.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Sympathetic allies. That was exactly my -- actually, the&lt;br /&gt;24 point I was trying to make.&lt;br /&gt;25 When you have things like hate crimes, that is&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2648&lt;br /&gt;1 something that virtually all Americans believe ought to be&lt;br /&gt;2 adopted, correct? We ought to prohibit that. That's a&lt;br /&gt;3 widely-held view in this country?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. It's a widely-held view. When you get into the details,&lt;br /&gt;5 there can be reasons for concern.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Whether or not there are reasons for concern, you would&lt;br /&gt;7 agree that it is a very widely-held view that we ought to&lt;br /&gt;8 prohibit hate crimes, regardless of what the minority is?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Fighting is often about the details of what the&lt;br /&gt;10 legislation says. But there's a widely-held view that we&lt;br /&gt;11 should criminalize hate crimes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Now, have you looked at hate crimes in your investigation?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I haven't looked at it in depth, but I am familiar with&lt;br /&gt;14 some statistics about hate crimes, yes?&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And where do those statistics comes from.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. There's FBI statistics. I think I also looked at some&lt;br /&gt;17 from Los Angeles County.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Well, let me show you some documents and see if this is&lt;br /&gt;19 what you looked at. Let me ask you -- and to move things&lt;br /&gt;20 along, let me ask you to look at tabs 12, 13, 14, and 15, which&lt;br /&gt;21 are respectively Plaintiffs' Exhibits 491, 492, 493, and 494.&lt;br /&gt;22 And these are the Hate Crime Statistics from the&lt;br /&gt;23 Uniform Crime Report of the United States Department of&lt;br /&gt;24 Justice, for the years 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I'm sorry, can you tell me the tabs again.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2649&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Tab 12 through 15.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Okay. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And were these statistics that you looked at?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I believe I've reviewed these, yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And did you discern from this that the second largest&lt;br /&gt;6 minority that was targeted by hate crimes were gays and&lt;br /&gt;7 lesbians?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I need to refresh my memory by looking at the chart.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Let me begin with Exhibit 494, which is behind tab 15,&lt;br /&gt;10 which are the Hate Crime Statistics for 2008, that were&lt;br /&gt;11 published November 23, 2009.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And what minority was most subject to violent hate crimes,&lt;br /&gt;14 if you know?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Was most?&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Yeah -- let me -- let me ask you independent of these&lt;br /&gt;17 exhibits.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yeah.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Do you have an opinion as to what minority is most subject&lt;br /&gt;20 to violent hate crimes?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I would guess that gays and lesbians are high. Racial&lt;br /&gt;22 minorities. And there's -- I think, those would be the two.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Now, have you investigated that as part of your analysis?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Not closely, no. I've reviewed some of these reports.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, adjusting for percent of the population, do you have&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2650&lt;br /&gt;1 a judgment as to what minority is most subject to hate crimes,&lt;br /&gt;2 generally?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I would have to take a closer look at it.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And you've not done that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Not in terms of per capita of the population.&lt;br /&gt;6 It's also, again, as I said, difficult to know what&lt;br /&gt;7 the -- the actual number of gays and lesbians in the population&lt;br /&gt;8 is.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Do you have an estimate of that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I've only derived that from other people's estimates.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Do you have an opinion on that?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Not -- not a very well-formed one. But it's somewhere in&lt;br /&gt;13 the neighborhood of, maybe, 5 percent. But it could go either&lt;br /&gt;14 direction.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;16 Exhibits 491, 492, 493, and 494.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Very well. Those exhibits will be&lt;br /&gt;19 admitted.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 491, 492, 493 and 494 received&lt;br /&gt;21 in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;22 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Now, you also said you thought you'd looked at some&lt;br /&gt;24 statistics for California or Los Angeles. Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2651&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Let me ask you to look at Exhibit 675, which is behind tab&lt;br /&gt;2 100, and Exhibit 834, which is behind tab 92.&lt;br /&gt;3 And these relate to hate crimes in California and Los&lt;br /&gt;4 Angeles County, correct?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Let's see. We're dealing with --&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. BOIES: Exhibit 675, which is behind tab 100,&lt;br /&gt;8 which is "Hate Crime in California 2007."&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: Tab 100?&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOIES: Tab 100.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: It's not in my binder.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. BOIES: Maybe perhaps -- is it 102 of your&lt;br /&gt;13 binder?&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. THOMPSON: 2007?&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. THOMPSON: Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. BOIES: I apologize.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Tab 102?&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. BOIES: Tab 102.&lt;br /&gt;20 THE COURT: 102.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: 102.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: 102 is 675.&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: "Hate Crime in California 2007."&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Right. And tab 92?&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. BOIES: Tab 92 should be "Hate Crime Report&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2652&lt;br /&gt;1 2008," from Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: I believe that it is 834.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. BOIES: I would offer Exhibits 675 and 834.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: Very well. They are admitted.&lt;br /&gt;6 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 675 and 834 received in&lt;br /&gt;7 evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;8 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Were these documents that you reviewed?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I believe I reviewed these, yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Now, you described yesterday all the powerful, in your&lt;br /&gt;12 words, political allies that gays and lesbians had in&lt;br /&gt;13 California. Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And, nevertheless, you acknowledge that Proposition 8&lt;br /&gt;16 passed, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I acknowledged that it passed.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And the reason it passed was because of religion, correct,&lt;br /&gt;19 sir?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I don't know if I would agree with that.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. You don't?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Okay. First, let's go to your demonstrative number 22.&lt;br /&gt;24 And in this demonstrative that's going to be coming&lt;br /&gt;25 up, you talked about the religions that supported gay and&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2653&lt;br /&gt;1 lesbian rights; do you recall that generally?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I recall that generally, yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 (Document displayed)&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And you didn't have a chart that described the religions&lt;br /&gt;5 that opposed gay and lesbian rights, did you?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. That's correct. This is a rebuttal report.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And on tab -- or demonstrative 22. You talk about the&lt;br /&gt;8 California Council of Churches?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you say it represents denominations with more than&lt;br /&gt;11 1.5 million members, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And then you list denominations, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yeah. This is not an exhaustive list of their membership,&lt;br /&gt;15 but this is some of them.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Now, it's also not a list of churches that support gay&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage, is it.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Well, the organization --&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Sir --&lt;br /&gt;20 A. (Continuing) -- to which the churches belong --&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Sir, can I ask you to listen to the question?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Do the churches that are listed here support gay marriage?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Some of them do.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2654&lt;br /&gt;1 A. And all of them belong to an organization that promotes&lt;br /&gt;2 it.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And? Some of them don't, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Well, they are still part of this organization, which is&lt;br /&gt;5 advocating on behalf of same-sex marriage. So it's hard to say&lt;br /&gt;6 that they don't support same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Professor Miller, do churches put out statements about&lt;br /&gt;8 what their position is with respect to same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. The national or international organizations do, yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And did you look at those?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. I did, through the Pew report, yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And by looking at those, could you tell that some of the&lt;br /&gt;13 churches listed here do not support same-sex marriage, or not?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Some of the national, international organizations do not&lt;br /&gt;15 -- on this list do not; but, obviously, the local units of&lt;br /&gt;16 these organizations belong to the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;17 Churches, which opposed Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Do you belong to organizations that have views different&lt;br /&gt;19 than yours, that publish views different than yours?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. And so the mere fact that you are a member of an&lt;br /&gt;22 organization that has a view, doesn't mean that you have that&lt;br /&gt;23 view, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. So the mere fact that these churches are members of the&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2655&lt;br /&gt;1 California Council of Churches, doesn't mean that they have the&lt;br /&gt;2 same view on same-sex marriage as the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;3 Churches, correct?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. My view is that many --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. No, no. Please, just listen to the question. Do you&lt;br /&gt;6 remember the question?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Why don't you restate it, please.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. The mere fact that these churches are members of the&lt;br /&gt;9 California Council of Churches, does not mean that they share&lt;br /&gt;10 the opinion of the California Council of Churches on same-sex&lt;br /&gt;11 marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. The problem is the definition of "church," because local&lt;br /&gt;13 units of these churches may well support same-sex marriage even&lt;br /&gt;14 though the national or international hierarchy does not.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Sir, that may or may not be so, as you just said.&lt;br /&gt;16 However, my question is: The California Council of Churches&lt;br /&gt;17 has a position on same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It supports it.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. The mere fact that these churches and denominations that&lt;br /&gt;20 you list here are members of the Council of Churches does not&lt;br /&gt;21 mean that they support gay marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;22 Because you can be a member of an organization and&lt;br /&gt;23 not necessarily agree with every position that that&lt;br /&gt;24 organization takes, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. If you strongly disagree, you would probably leave the&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2656&lt;br /&gt;1 organization; but I would agree that -- in at least some form&lt;br /&gt;2 with your statement, yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Incidentally, you say there are 1.5 million members of&lt;br /&gt;4 denominations that belong to the Council of Churches. How many&lt;br /&gt;5 members of the Catholic church are there in California?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I don't know if I can recall off the top of my head.&lt;br /&gt;7 It's, I believe, the largest denomination in the State of&lt;br /&gt;8 California.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. The largest denomination. And does it have 30 percent of&lt;br /&gt;10 the electorate?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. That sounds about right, that 30 percent of the electorate&lt;br /&gt;12 identifies -- well, I'm not sure if it's the electorate. I&lt;br /&gt;13 think it's more the population.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Thirty percent of the population?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Which is a different thing.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Well, and, actually, you probably ought to use population,&lt;br /&gt;17 because this is 1.5 million members. It's not members of the&lt;br /&gt;18 electorate. It's members of the churches.&lt;br /&gt;19 So if we take a comparable number for Catholics,&lt;br /&gt;20 what's the comparable number?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I'd have to check. I don't know --&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Approximately, sir?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. A third of 36 million.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Twelve million?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Twelve million maybe.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2657&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. So 1.5 million members of the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;2 Churches, 12 million members of the Catholic church, correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes. And I should say for both of these, these numbers&lt;br /&gt;4 are contested, because there is difficulty in estimating church&lt;br /&gt;5 membership. Different denominations measure by different&lt;br /&gt;6 means, either by church attendance or the by individual's&lt;br /&gt;7 self-identification.&lt;br /&gt;8 And so with that caveat, I think it's fair to say&lt;br /&gt;9 there are more Catholics in California than members of these&lt;br /&gt;10 organizations.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. You say it's contested. Do you have an opinion as to&lt;br /&gt;12 whether or not approximately 30 percent of California's&lt;br /&gt;13 population identify as Roman Catholics?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I think "identify" -- I don't know how closely they are&lt;br /&gt;15 connected to the church, whether they attend worship services&lt;br /&gt;16 or -- but I think about a third identify as Catholic.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And what is the next largest religious group in&lt;br /&gt;18 California?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Category?&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. This is, again, based on, I believe, Pew research studies.&lt;br /&gt;22 They identify Evangelicals as the second largest group. And&lt;br /&gt;23 Evangelicals is a broad category. It's not hierarchy like the&lt;br /&gt;24 Roman Catholic church.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And what percentage of Californians identify as&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2658&lt;br /&gt;1 Evangelicals?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I think in these studies, again, where the figures are not&lt;br /&gt;3 totally clear --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. No, no. I'm asking for your opinion.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. My opinion --&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. In your opinion.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. With the caveats I have given about the difficulty of&lt;br /&gt;8 measurement, I would say about 20 percent.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. That's your best judgment?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. That's my best judgment.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. So you've got 30 percent Catholic and 20 percent&lt;br /&gt;12 Evangelical, correct?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. In the population.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And that would -- if you take your 36 million for the&lt;br /&gt;15 population of California, that's 18 million people, right?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. More or less.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Now, you know what the position is of the Catholic church&lt;br /&gt;18 with respect to same-sex marriage and homosexuality, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, the Catholic church condemns homosexual acts as a&lt;br /&gt;21 serious depravity, correct?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I don't know if I have seen that specific statement. I&lt;br /&gt;23 know they disapprove --&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Let me ask you to look at Plaintiffs' Exhibit 770 behind&lt;br /&gt;25 tab 22.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2659&lt;br /&gt;1 (Witness complied.)&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Second page, last paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;4 Exhibit 770.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: 770 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;7 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 770 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;8 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. You see at the bottom it says:&lt;br /&gt;10 "Sacred scripture condemns homosexual acts&lt;br /&gt;11 'as a serious depravity.'"&lt;br /&gt;12 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Professor Miller, do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I'm trying to see the context of the quote.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. When you have the context of that quote, let me know.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;17 My understanding of the Catholic church's position is&lt;br /&gt;18 that there's a balance between moral disapproval of homosexual&lt;br /&gt;19 activities and desire to respect the dignity of the individual,&lt;br /&gt;20 which is on the next page.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. We are talking here about homosexual acts, correct?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes. I just wanted to clarify --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Homosexual acts, the Catholic church takes the position&lt;br /&gt;24 that those are a serious depravity, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. The church -- it says:&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2660&lt;br /&gt;1 "Sacred scripture condemns homosexual acts as&lt;br /&gt;2 'a serious depravity.'"&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Do you have any doubt that that's the position of the&lt;br /&gt;4 Catholic church?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Did you know that before I just showed you this?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I knew that the Catholic church morally disapproved of&lt;br /&gt;8 homosexual acts, yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Now, you said that Evangelicals were a collection of&lt;br /&gt;10 churches, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. What's the largest church in California after the Catholic&lt;br /&gt;13 church?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I'm not sure -- you mean, Evangelicals generally, or?&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Evangelicals will include more than one church, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. They are more than one church. They are described within&lt;br /&gt;18 the umbrella of Evangelicals.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Many of them are independent churches that don't have a&lt;br /&gt;20 Ecclesiastical hierarchy of any kind.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. There are churches that are Evangelical that do have a&lt;br /&gt;22 hierarchy, correct?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Again, this is a difficult area of definition because&lt;br /&gt;24 within some of these traditional -- I'm trying to explain why&lt;br /&gt;25 it's difficult for me to answer that question.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2661&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Let me try to ask a question that maybe you can answer.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Is it true that the Southern Baptist Convention is the&lt;br /&gt;4 largest single church in California after the Roman Catholic&lt;br /&gt;5 Church?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I actually don't know that. I believe that's true in the&lt;br /&gt;7 United States, but I'm not sure about in California.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Have you investigated that?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I may have looked at it, but I don't recall.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Now, you know what the view of the Southern Baptist&lt;br /&gt;11 Convention is with respect to homosexual behavior, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And that is that it's an abomination and shameful,&lt;br /&gt;14 correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I knew that they morally disapproved. I didn't know about&lt;br /&gt;16 those terms.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Let me ask you to look at Plaintiffs' Exhibit 771, which&lt;br /&gt;18 is behind tab 23.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. BOIES: And which I would offer.&lt;br /&gt;20 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: 771 one is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;22 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 771 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;23 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And the third paragraph where it says:&lt;br /&gt;25 "The Bible clearly teaches that homosexual&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2662&lt;br /&gt;1 behavior is an abomination and shameful&lt;br /&gt;2 before God."&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I see that sentence, yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Now, did you investigate the position of religions other&lt;br /&gt;6 than Evangelicals and Roman Catholics and the California&lt;br /&gt;7 Council of Churches with respect to Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, I did.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And what religious groups did you investigate?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I believe I looked at Jewish traditions, various -- the&lt;br /&gt;11 Jewish traditions and their positions on that, which were&lt;br /&gt;12 divided.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Which was divided?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Right.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;16 A. The majority of the Jewish community supported Proposition&lt;br /&gt;17 8 very strongly -- I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I have that&lt;br /&gt;18 reversed. I'm getting a little tired.&lt;br /&gt;19 The -- their position is that they favor same-sex&lt;br /&gt;20 marriage, the Jewish community in general, and the majority&lt;br /&gt;21 opposed Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Now, did you investigate what the view of Orthodox Judaism&lt;br /&gt;23 was?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2663&lt;br /&gt;1 A. As well as reform and conservative Judaism.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And what was the view of Orthodox Judaism?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Orthodox Judaism opposed -- opposes same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And, in fact, Orthodox Judaism believes that:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Homosexual acts, like adulterous and&lt;br /&gt;6 incestuous behavior, are condemned in the law&lt;br /&gt;7 of Moses. Those who do these things, both&lt;br /&gt;8 men and women, are according to God's law of&lt;br /&gt;9 the Old Covenant to be put to death."&lt;br /&gt;10 Correct? That's the law of the Orthodox branch of&lt;br /&gt;11 Judaism?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I don't recall that quote.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Look at tab 70, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2844.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: Which I would offer.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Very well. 2844 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2844 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;18 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Do you see the second paragraph on the first page where it&lt;br /&gt;20 says what I previously read?&lt;br /&gt;21 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: This is Orthodox Judaism?&lt;br /&gt;23 THE WITNESS: I believe this is Greek Orthodox --&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: This looks like Orthodox church --&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. BOIES: Maybe it is the Greek, your Honor. I&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2664&lt;br /&gt;1 think you are right. I have my exhibits backwards.&lt;br /&gt;2 But that's a good question.&lt;br /&gt;3 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Did you investigate the view of Orthodox Christianity?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, I did.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And is this the view of Orthodox Christianity?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I believe I did.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Is this the view of Orthodox Christianity?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I don't recall.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Well, let me try to be sure I understand what you are&lt;br /&gt;11 saying.&lt;br /&gt;12 You investigated the views of Orthodox Christianity,&lt;br /&gt;13 correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And Orthodox Christianity is actually quite a large&lt;br /&gt;16 religion in California, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. It could be -- well, there's diversity within Orthodox&lt;br /&gt;18 Christianity, different national groups. There's Greek and&lt;br /&gt;19 Russian Orthodox.&lt;br /&gt;20 I actually don't remember. There are various views&lt;br /&gt;21 on this issue.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Are you aware of any Orthodox Christianity group that&lt;br /&gt;23 promotes or favors same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. As I recall from that list, from the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;25 Churches, there were Orthodox churches listed in that&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2665&lt;br /&gt;1 coalition.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Those were individual churches, correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I don't believe so. I think it was --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay. Let's go back to demonstrative 22.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Document displayed)&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And you have listed the Greek Orthodox church as a member&lt;br /&gt;7 of the California Council of Churches, but you are not&lt;br /&gt;8 suggesting that the Greek Orthodox church favors same-sex&lt;br /&gt;9 marriage, are you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;10 Or are you? I guess I don't know. Are you or are&lt;br /&gt;11 you not?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Again, they are part of a coalition --&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. I understand they are part of a coalition or part of the&lt;br /&gt;14 California Council of Churches.&lt;br /&gt;15 My question is a very simple one: Does the Greek&lt;br /&gt;16 Orthodox church favor same-sex marriage? "Yes," "no," "I don't&lt;br /&gt;17 know."&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I don't know what the global Greek Orthodox church's view&lt;br /&gt;19 on this is.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Do you believe that there is a Greek Orthodox church in&lt;br /&gt;21 California that is separate from what you refer to as the&lt;br /&gt;22 global Greek Orthodox church?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Again, I don't know why --&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Again, "yes," "no," "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I believe there's local units of the Greek Orthodox&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2666&lt;br /&gt;1 church, including one that would join the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;2 Churches.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And does that local unit, as you describe it, favor&lt;br /&gt;4 same-sex marriage? "Yes," "no," "I don't recall, or "I don't&lt;br /&gt;5 know," or "I never knew."&lt;br /&gt;6 A. To the extent they are part of this coalition, they are.&lt;br /&gt;7 In terms of whether they would -- as a matter of doctrine and&lt;br /&gt;8 practice, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And you keep referring to the California Council of&lt;br /&gt;10 Churches as a coalition. By that do you mean that they have&lt;br /&gt;11 gotten together for the purpose of supporting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;12 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I believe that's a major part of their legislative agenda&lt;br /&gt;14 over the past couple of years, yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Of the California Council of Churches?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. The California Council of Churches does a lot of different&lt;br /&gt;18 things, right?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I would assume so. I'm not intimately familiar with their&lt;br /&gt;20 work.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, let me try to speed this&lt;br /&gt;22 along.&lt;br /&gt;23 Let me offer Plaintiff's Exhibits 2840, which are at&lt;br /&gt;24 tab 66; 2839, which are -- is at tab 65; 2842, which is at tab&lt;br /&gt;25 68. Those are all various statements by various religious&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2667&lt;br /&gt;1 groups.&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: What was the last one?&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. BOIES: 2842, which is at tab 68.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: All right. There being no objection&lt;br /&gt;6 2840, 39 and 42 are admitted.&lt;br /&gt;7 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 2840, 2839 and 2842 received in&lt;br /&gt;8 evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;9 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. As part of your work, did you investigate the extent to&lt;br /&gt;11 which the groups favoring Proposition 8, the religious groups&lt;br /&gt;12 favoring Proposition 8, contributed far more in money and&lt;br /&gt;13 manpower than the groups opposing Proposition 8? Did you&lt;br /&gt;14 investigate that?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I wasn't able to determine in a quantitative way the&lt;br /&gt;16 monetary and organizational contributions of the progressive&lt;br /&gt;17 churches to the No On 8 campaign. I didn't have any access to&lt;br /&gt;18 the No On 8 campaign's internal documents to know about that.&lt;br /&gt;19 I know a little bit more about the religious&lt;br /&gt;20 contributions, religious organizations' contributions to the&lt;br /&gt;21 Yes On 8 campaign.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And that's -- that's because you did have access to the&lt;br /&gt;23 Yes on Proposition 8 campaign, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yeah. I don't know the extent to the -- of the documents.&lt;br /&gt;25 I have seen some that would allow me to form some judgments on&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2668&lt;br /&gt;1 this, but I can't make a comparative judgment.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Well, let me ask you to look at Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2552,&lt;br /&gt;3 which is behind tab 96.&lt;br /&gt;4 (Witness complied.)&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: 2552?&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: 2552.&lt;br /&gt;7 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Is this one of the document that you had available to you?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yeah, I believe so. I have seen this document, yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;11 Exhibit 2552.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: 2552 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2552 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And if you go to the second page, the second paragraph&lt;br /&gt;17 that begins, "Grass roots signatures."&lt;br /&gt;18 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And this is an email from Mr. Prentice, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. It appears to be so, yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And this says:&lt;br /&gt;23 "The response from churches is larger than&lt;br /&gt;24 ever before experienced in California. More&lt;br /&gt;25 than 2,000 pastors have been addressed at&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2669&lt;br /&gt;1 events and 300 churches have offered their&lt;br /&gt;2 staff and facilities as distribution centers&lt;br /&gt;3 for petitions."&lt;br /&gt;4 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And that's talking about the pastors and churches that are&lt;br /&gt;7 supporting Proposition 8, correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. It seems to be, yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And that's the way you interpreted it when you reviewed&lt;br /&gt;10 this document, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Let me ask you to look next at exhibit -- Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;13 Exhibit 2561 behind tab 95.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Witness complied.)&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Is this one of the documents that you reviewed?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;18 Exhibit 2561.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. THOMPSON: Subject to our standing objections,&lt;br /&gt;20 your Honor, no objection.&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Very well. 2561 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;22 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2561 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;23 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And the last sentence of the first paragraph -- well, let&lt;br /&gt;25 me begin earlier than that.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2670&lt;br /&gt;1 This is also an email from Mr. Prentice, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And it says:&lt;br /&gt;4 "As you probably know, the LDS Church is sold&lt;br /&gt;5 out for the Marriage Amendment. The giving&lt;br /&gt;6 from the state's Mormons is topping&lt;br /&gt;7 $6 million right now with no signs of slowing&lt;br /&gt;8 down."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And this is dated August 25, 2008, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And then the last sentence in that paragraph says:&lt;br /&gt;14 "You may know that the Mormons have been out&lt;br /&gt;15 walking neighborhoods the last two Saturdays&lt;br /&gt;16 with about 20,000 total volunteers."&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I see that sentence, yes.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And you didn't have any reason to disagree with that&lt;br /&gt;19 sentence, did you?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yeah. I don't have any personal knowledge, but I don't&lt;br /&gt;21 have any reason to disagree with that.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: Apparently, it takes massaging to get&lt;br /&gt;23 Evangelicals to action, according to this.&lt;br /&gt;24 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. BOIES: In that case, it may not be that&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2671&lt;br /&gt;1 different from the rest of us.&lt;br /&gt;2 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Now, you said that you could not make a comparative&lt;br /&gt;4 analysis as to whether the contributions of religious groups&lt;br /&gt;5 opposed to Proposition 8 were greater or lesser than the&lt;br /&gt;6 contributions of religious groups favoring Proposition 8; is&lt;br /&gt;7 that correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Well, I can't make a quantitative, sort of ratio&lt;br /&gt;9 comparison. I think it would be fair to say that the&lt;br /&gt;10 contribution of religious organizations in favor of Proposition&lt;br /&gt;11 8 was larger than the, at least, financial contributions --&lt;br /&gt;12 perhaps also organizational contributions -- to the No On 8&lt;br /&gt;13 campaign. But, again, I haven't seen the internal document of&lt;br /&gt;14 the No On 8 campaign.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Let me see if I understand what you're saying.&lt;br /&gt;16 Are you saying that it's your opinion that religious&lt;br /&gt;17 groups that favored Proposition 8 devoted substantially more&lt;br /&gt;18 time, money, volunteers than the religious groups opposed to&lt;br /&gt;19 Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;20 MR. THOMPSON: Objection. Compound.&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Objection overruled.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Again, this is based mainly on media reports --&lt;br /&gt;23 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I'm asking for your opinion. If you don't have an&lt;br /&gt;25 opinion, if you haven't looked at enough that would allow you,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2672&lt;br /&gt;1 as an expert, to have an opinion, you can say so.&lt;br /&gt;2 Do you have an opinion on that?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. So with the caveats about my inability to get some&lt;br /&gt;4 information on the other side, I do have an opinion, which is&lt;br /&gt;5 to say that in my view there was a larger contribution of money&lt;br /&gt;6 and organizational resources from religious groups to the Yes&lt;br /&gt;7 On 8 campaign than on the No On 8 campaign.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether, in fact, the&lt;br /&gt;9 religious groups that favored Proposition 8 supplied most of&lt;br /&gt;10 the institutional support for Proposition 8?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. By "institutional support" that would be, umm --&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Is "institutional support" a phrase that you use as a&lt;br /&gt;13 political scientist, sir?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yeah, I just want to make sure that we are --&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Well, let's first -- you use that term, right?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And what do you mean by it when you use it?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. So in an initiative campaign it could be --&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. What is it? Not what it could be. When you use that&lt;br /&gt;20 term, what do you mean by it?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Well, it depends on the campaign. Different campaigns are&lt;br /&gt;22 run differently.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Let's talk about Proposition 8, just to pick one out of&lt;br /&gt;24 the air.&lt;br /&gt;25 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2673&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Okay. Fair enough.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. In Proposition 8 what did you mean by "institutional&lt;br /&gt;3 support"?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. So there would be fundraising. There would be&lt;br /&gt;5 organization of the -- sort of get out the vote, mobilizing&lt;br /&gt;6 voters. There would be professional campaign staff. There&lt;br /&gt;7 would be probably attorneys involved in the campaign.&lt;br /&gt;8 So this is what in the political science literature&lt;br /&gt;9 is sometimes called the initiative, sort of, I guess,&lt;br /&gt;10 institutional structures, support structures.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. And you believe that churches and religious&lt;br /&gt;12 organizations provided most of the institutional support for&lt;br /&gt;13 Proposition 8, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I don't know whether a lot of those people I just listed&lt;br /&gt;15 were churches and religious organizations. They were&lt;br /&gt;16 certainly --&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Let me ask you to look at tab 25, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 796.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Tab 25?&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Tab 25, Exhibit 796.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Okay, I have got it.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Turn to page 55, please.&lt;br /&gt;22 (Witness complied.)&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Second paragraph you say.&lt;br /&gt;24 "Churches and religious organizations&lt;br /&gt;25 supplied most of Proposition 8's&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2674&lt;br /&gt;1 institutional support with Catholics,&lt;br /&gt;2 Evangelicals and Mormons leading the way."&lt;br /&gt;3 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And this is the article that you wrote in the French&lt;br /&gt;6 journal that you referred to as your peer-reviewed article,&lt;br /&gt;7 correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: And I would offer Plaintiffs' Exhibit&lt;br /&gt;10 796.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: 796 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 796 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And this was published in, 2009, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And you then go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;18 "California's Roman Catholic bishops and many&lt;br /&gt;19 Evangelical pastors, including in black&lt;br /&gt;20 churches, encouraged parishioners to support&lt;br /&gt;21 the initiative through financial&lt;br /&gt;22 contributions and volunteer efforts."&lt;br /&gt;23 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And you believe that all that is true, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2675&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes. When I wrote this, I was relying on press reports&lt;br /&gt;2 and that was my understanding, and nothing that I have learned&lt;br /&gt;3 since then contradicts that.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay. You then go on to say that:&lt;br /&gt;5 "Leaders of the Mormon church organized a&lt;br /&gt;6 massive effort to support the initiative."&lt;br /&gt;7 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And you go on to say:&lt;br /&gt;10 "While Mormons are only about two percent of&lt;br /&gt;11 California's population, members of the&lt;br /&gt;12 church, both from California and from other&lt;br /&gt;13 states, provided critical financial&lt;br /&gt;14 contributions and volunteer support."&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And you believed that at the time, correct, and still do?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And even though you may not be an expert on the No On 8&lt;br /&gt;20 campaign, do you know enough about it to have an opinion as to&lt;br /&gt;21 whether the primary institutional support for the No On 8&lt;br /&gt;22 campaign were churches and religious organizations?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. In terms of primary, I would say probably not. They were&lt;br /&gt;24 certainly part of the coalition, but the coalition was&lt;br /&gt;25 different on the No side than on the Yes side.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2676&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. What part of the support for the No On 8 campaign was&lt;br /&gt;2 provided by churches and religious organizations, sir?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Certainly grassroots organizing.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. How much? What percentage?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. What percentage? I don't know --&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Approximately?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I have no idea, because I haven't seen that information.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Now, you do know that religion was critical in determining&lt;br /&gt;9 voter attitudes towards Proposition 8, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I believe religion was a factor for some voters certainly.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Well, it was more than just a factor. It was critical in&lt;br /&gt;12 determining voter attitudes towards Proposition 8, correct?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I think it was a critical factor for some voters, yes.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Well, sir, let me ask you to look at the next page in the&lt;br /&gt;15 article that you wrote in 2009.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. The last paragraph on page 56. You say:&lt;br /&gt;18 "Egan and Cheryl noted that several factors&lt;br /&gt;19 contributed to the support for Proposition 8,&lt;br /&gt;20 including age, party identification, ideology&lt;br /&gt;21 and religion."&lt;br /&gt;22 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. You then go on to write:&lt;br /&gt;25 "In particular, these researchers confirmed&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2677&lt;br /&gt;1 that religion was critical in determining&lt;br /&gt;2 voter attitudes towards Proposition 8."&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And you believed that at the time, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I think what I probably meant to say was some voter&lt;br /&gt;7 attitudes, given that list that I just put above there about&lt;br /&gt;8 party identification, age, ideology and religiosity being four&lt;br /&gt;9 factors. And I believe that religion was a critical factor for&lt;br /&gt;10 at least some voters, yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. You don't say "at least some voters" here, do you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. No, I don't.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;14 A. But I don't think I ever believed that it was a critical&lt;br /&gt;15 factor for all voters. And it was a critical factor for some&lt;br /&gt;16 clearly.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And did you believe that it was a critical factor in&lt;br /&gt;18 determining the election?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. That, again, I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. That, again, you don't know.&lt;br /&gt;21 Well, let me ask you to look back at page 47 of this&lt;br /&gt;22 article. And for context, I want you to look at the sentences&lt;br /&gt;23 right at the top of the page, you know, where you say that:&lt;br /&gt;24 "Many observers were mystified as to how&lt;br /&gt;25 California, who was in the forefront of&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2678&lt;br /&gt;1 same-sex marriage and civil rights for gays&lt;br /&gt;2 and lesbians and who gave Obama such an&lt;br /&gt;3 overwhelming majority and had so many&lt;br /&gt;4 Democrats could have voted for Proposition&lt;br /&gt;5 8."&lt;br /&gt;6 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And this is the dilemma or conflict that we talked about&lt;br /&gt;9 earlier, of having all of these so-called powerful forces and&lt;br /&gt;10 allies that you say that gays and lesbians have in California&lt;br /&gt;11 and, yet, confronting that with the passage of Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;12 We talked about that before.&lt;br /&gt;13 Now, you then answer that question, correct? You&lt;br /&gt;14 answer why and how this apparent contradiction can be&lt;br /&gt;15 explained, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And you say.&lt;br /&gt;18 "The apparent contradiction can be explained&lt;br /&gt;19 by examining the religious characteristics of&lt;br /&gt;20 California's Democratic voters."&lt;br /&gt;21 Correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I still agree with that, yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And you still agree with that?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes. Among a number of factors --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Oh, oh, you don't say "among a number of factors" here, do&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2679&lt;br /&gt;1 you, sir?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I do later --&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Well, right here, you say:&lt;br /&gt;4 "The apparent contradiction can be explained&lt;br /&gt;5 by examining the religious characteristics of&lt;br /&gt;6 California's Democratic voters."&lt;br /&gt;7 That's what you say here, right?&lt;br /&gt;8 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Dr. Miller?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Let me find the quote.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. It's on page 47.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Uh-huh.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Remember at the top of the page --&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. (Continuing) -- we went through the contradiction. And&lt;br /&gt;16 then you say -- and it's a one-sentence paragraph. Do you see&lt;br /&gt;17 it? One-sentence paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Got it.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;20 "The apparent contradiction can be explained&lt;br /&gt;21 By examining the religious characteristics of&lt;br /&gt;22 California's Democratic voters."&lt;br /&gt;23 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Okay. And you believed that then and you believe it now,&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2680&lt;br /&gt;1 correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Yes, I do. Religious characteristics was an important&lt;br /&gt;3 factor in the election.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, sir, you didn't say "an important factor" here, did&lt;br /&gt;5 you? I ask you, please, look at this language. Because I'm&lt;br /&gt;6 asking you: When you wrote this language, you clearly believed&lt;br /&gt;7 what you were writing in, 2009, correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, I did.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Now, since 2009, have you changed your mind?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I think this was an important -- a critically important&lt;br /&gt;11 factor was the religious characteristics of Democratic voters.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I think there were other factors in the election as well.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Were there other critical factors?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I think there were a number of factors that --&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Were there other critical factors. You used the word&lt;br /&gt;17 "critical" factor.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Again, we haven't seen polling on why people voted for&lt;br /&gt;19 Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. All I'm asking for is your opinion. You have come in here&lt;br /&gt;21 as an expert, okay?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And you wrote in, 2009, just last year, that:&lt;br /&gt;24 "The apparent contradiction that we have been&lt;br /&gt;25 talking about can be explained by examining&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2681&lt;br /&gt;1 the religious characteristics of California's&lt;br /&gt;2 Democratic voters."&lt;br /&gt;3 Now, you then said that you thought religious&lt;br /&gt;4 characteristics were a critical factor in determining how&lt;br /&gt;5 people voted. You said that just a moment ago. Do you&lt;br /&gt;6 remember that?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Now, what I'm asking you, in your opinion, were there any&lt;br /&gt;9 other critical factors in determining how people voted?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. Would you list those critical factors?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Again, this is without the benefit of polling data because&lt;br /&gt;13 we had --&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. No, no, no. All I'm asking is your opinion. Your opinion&lt;br /&gt;15 based on all the investigation that you have done, because you&lt;br /&gt;16 have come in here as an expert to give your opinion, right?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Okay. Now, based on all the investigation that you have&lt;br /&gt;19 done, what is your opinion as to what the other critical&lt;br /&gt;20 factors -- not just factors, but what critical factors are?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. So I believe that religiosity is a critical factor.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Yes. And, indeed, that's what you say here --&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. (Continuing) -- right?&lt;br /&gt;25 And you don't list any other factor at all here, do&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2682&lt;br /&gt;1 you?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. No. That wasn't -- but I did later on in the article.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Well, did you list any other factors later in the article&lt;br /&gt;4 that you call critical factors?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I believe I -- among other things, I listed --&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Sir, can I just get you to answer the question. I&lt;br /&gt;7 promised your counsel I was going to be through by now and I'm&lt;br /&gt;8 now over my time. If you could just focus on my questions.&lt;br /&gt;9 Did you list any other factors --&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I didn't list any others that were critical, but I, again,&lt;br /&gt;11 haven't done an investigation as to whether those other factors&lt;br /&gt;12 were critical. I think some were certainly important.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. In fact, in the article you say that:&lt;br /&gt;14 "Opportunity to establish gay marriage was&lt;br /&gt;15 lost in large part because California's&lt;br /&gt;16 Democratic coalition divided along religious&lt;br /&gt;17 lines."&lt;br /&gt;18 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Can you point me to that part of the article?&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. First of all -- I will. It's pages 57 and 58. What I'm&lt;br /&gt;21 really asking is, that's your view?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. It would help me to be able to see it, so. 57, 58?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Yeah. And I don't have any objection to you looking at&lt;br /&gt;24 it, but do you understand that I'm asking for your opinion?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2683&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And is it your opinion that the opportunity to establish&lt;br /&gt;2 same-sex marriage in California was lost in large part because&lt;br /&gt;3 the state's Democratic coalition divided along religious lines?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I think that the analysis of the article is that there&lt;br /&gt;5 was --&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Please, Mister -- Dr. Miller.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, we have -- the witness has&lt;br /&gt;8 been cross examined for about two and a half hours. He&lt;br /&gt;9 indicated about an hour ago he's a little tired. I would&lt;br /&gt;10 request that he be given a 10 minute break.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Well, there is something about pots and&lt;br /&gt;12 kettles, talking about long cross-examinations, Mr. Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: But it might be helpful to take a break.&lt;br /&gt;15 It might clear the air. We will take 10 minutes and resume at&lt;br /&gt;16 10 minutes after the hour.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Whereupon there was a recess in the proceedings&lt;br /&gt;18 from 10:57 a.m. until 11:10 a.m.)&lt;br /&gt;19 THE COURT: Mr. Boies, you may continue your&lt;br /&gt;20 examination of the witness.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;22 As a housekeeping matter, I would offer -- and this&lt;br /&gt;23 is without objection -- Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1397, one three&lt;br /&gt;24 nine seven, which is behind tab 31, and Plaintiffs' Exhibit&lt;br /&gt;25 2856, which is behind tab 81.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2684&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: 81?&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOIES: That's the tab number.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: Very well. Then those exhibits are&lt;br /&gt;4 admitted.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 1397 and 2856 received in&lt;br /&gt;6 evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. BOIES: And one other housekeeping matter.&lt;br /&gt;8 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Professor Miller, you have Plaintiffs' Exhibit 794-A&lt;br /&gt;10 there, which is the index of materials you considered.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And I just have two questions on this.&lt;br /&gt;13 The first question is: You went through and you&lt;br /&gt;14 circled those items that you could recall having researched and&lt;br /&gt;15 obtained yourself, as opposed to what you were given by&lt;br /&gt;16 counsel, correct?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. These are the ones I was certain about, yes.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And you circled, by my count, about 23 percent of the&lt;br /&gt;19 materials listed here, correct?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I haven't done a percentage. I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Well, would you agree it was less than a quarter?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Again, I don't know. It's -- I would say it's less than&lt;br /&gt;23 half and I don't know how much less than half.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Now --&lt;br /&gt;25 A. And there were many that were -- maybe I should explain&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2685&lt;br /&gt;1 the question marks, if you want an explanation on that.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Go ahead. Explain it.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Okay. These involve reports about religious&lt;br /&gt;4 organizations, and I did a lot of my own research on this. I&lt;br /&gt;5 also received some materials from counsel about religious&lt;br /&gt;6 organizations and their positions on Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;7 It's difficult for me to sort out from this very long&lt;br /&gt;8 list of materials which ones I independently found and which&lt;br /&gt;9 ones counsel provided, but I think my report used mainly the&lt;br /&gt;10 ones that I had independently investigated, and I certainly&lt;br /&gt;11 looked at everything that I put in my report before I put it&lt;br /&gt;12 there.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And these were the materials that you in your report&lt;br /&gt;14 indicated that you had considered and relied on, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Now, I do want to follow up what you just said about the&lt;br /&gt;17 question marks that you attached to a number of the documents&lt;br /&gt;18 that relate to religious organizations?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. You are aware that Dr. Nathanson put in a report, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. You did not see that report prior to preparing your&lt;br /&gt;23 report, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And you did not talk to Dr. Nathanson or anybody&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2686&lt;br /&gt;1 representing him prior to the time you put in your report,&lt;br /&gt;2 correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. That's correct. Well, anyone representing him, I don't&lt;br /&gt;4 know.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Anybody other than your counsel?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Correct.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Right. So that if you received any of the Nathanson's&lt;br /&gt;8 materials, you would have received them from counsel, correct?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And I would represent to you that between 140 and 150 of&lt;br /&gt;11 the question marks that you put down are on items that appeared&lt;br /&gt;12 on Dr. Nathanson's list of materials in the report that he&lt;br /&gt;13 submitted prior to the time that you submitted your report.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I wouldn't know one way or the other.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And I take it you would agree with me that if these items&lt;br /&gt;16 appeared on Dr. Nathanson's list, you got them from your&lt;br /&gt;17 counsel. It's not just a pure coincidence that the two of you&lt;br /&gt;18 came up with exactly the same list of documents, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I wouldn't know what to say about where the documents came&lt;br /&gt;20 from, except that I know that I got the documents -- some of&lt;br /&gt;21 them, not all of them -- with a question mark from counsel.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. All right. Let me go back to the question that I had when&lt;br /&gt;23 we broke.&lt;br /&gt;24 I think I was asking you whether it was your opinion&lt;br /&gt;25 that the opportunity to establish gay and lesbian marriage in&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2687&lt;br /&gt;1 California was lost in large part because of the state's&lt;br /&gt;2 democratic coalition divided along religious lines.&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you have an opinion on that, sir? I'm not asking&lt;br /&gt;4 you what you wrote in one article or another.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Right, right.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. I'm simply asking as you sit here now as an expert&lt;br /&gt;7 proffered by the defendants, do you have an opinion on that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And what is that opinion?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I believe that that sentence is substantially correct. I&lt;br /&gt;11 would probably want to explain it and put it in context, but I&lt;br /&gt;12 don't -- I don't disagree with the main idea in the sentence.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And just to be clear, when you are talking about the&lt;br /&gt;14 sentence, you are talking about the statement that the&lt;br /&gt;15 opportunity to establish gay and lesbian marriage in California&lt;br /&gt;16 was lost in large part because the state's Democratic coalition&lt;br /&gt;17 divided along religious lines.&lt;br /&gt;18 Correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;19 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Sir?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. The sentence doesn't say that. It says, "The opportunity"&lt;br /&gt;22 --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. I didn't say the sentence said that. What I have tried to&lt;br /&gt;24 say is regardless of what you have written --&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Right, okay.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2688&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Okay? Regardless of what you have written, as you sit&lt;br /&gt;2 here now, do you agree that the opportunity to establish&lt;br /&gt;3 same-sex marriage in California was lost in large part because&lt;br /&gt;4 the state's democratic coalition divided along religious lines?&lt;br /&gt;5 Do you agree with that?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I think in large part that's a fair statement, yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. And let me ask you to look at page 57, first full&lt;br /&gt;8 paragraph, the last five lines. You write:&lt;br /&gt;9 "The evidence indicates that through the&lt;br /&gt;10 teaching and mobilization of churches or by&lt;br /&gt;11 other means many of the state's blacks and&lt;br /&gt;12 Latinos viewed the marriage controversy in&lt;br /&gt;13 terms of religion rather than civil rights&lt;br /&gt;14 and, thus, believed that they could without&lt;br /&gt;15 contradiction support civil rights, identify&lt;br /&gt;16 as a Democratic, vote for Barack Obama, and&lt;br /&gt;17 vote for Proposition 8."&lt;br /&gt;18 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, I do.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And you wrote that, correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes, I did.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Now, when you say "the evidence indicates," what evidence&lt;br /&gt;23 were you referring to?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. So this would be a couple of things. One is the exit poll&lt;br /&gt;25 data and post election surveys indicating that a substantial&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2689&lt;br /&gt;1 share of African-Americans and Latinos supported Proposition 8.&lt;br /&gt;2 And then additional information, basically based on&lt;br /&gt;3 press reports, of mobilization in the black and Latino&lt;br /&gt;4 communities on behalf of Proposition 8, some but not all of&lt;br /&gt;5 which was based in churches.&lt;br /&gt;6 So that's the evidence in sum.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Now, as a political scientist --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. (Continuing) -- are you aware of any principle that&lt;br /&gt;10 suggests that a religions majority should not be able to use&lt;br /&gt;11 the law to impose their principles on a religious minority?&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. THOMPSON: Objection to the form.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Objection overruled.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. It's a pretty broad statement.&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. From time to time throughout history -- and you're aware&lt;br /&gt;17 of this I presume from your political science background --&lt;br /&gt;18 there have been conflicts between a majority religion and a&lt;br /&gt;19 minority religion with the majority religion attempting to&lt;br /&gt;20 impose through law restrictions on the minority religion,&lt;br /&gt;21 correct?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. There have been times in history, world history, where&lt;br /&gt;23 that's been the case, yes.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And as a matter of political science, is there a generally&lt;br /&gt;25 held view that that is an undesirable way to organize a civil&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2690&lt;br /&gt;1 society?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. More a majority to impose its religious --&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Principles?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. (Continuing) -- principles.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. On a minority?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I think in a general sense that would be an accepted&lt;br /&gt;7 principle.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. That that's undesirable?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. That would be a principle that many political scientists&lt;br /&gt;10 would agree with, a general principle, yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. I just want to be sure I understand what you mean by the&lt;br /&gt;12 general principle.&lt;br /&gt;13 You are saying that the general principle that a&lt;br /&gt;14 religious majority should not be able to use law to impose&lt;br /&gt;15 their views on others is a generally accepted principle of&lt;br /&gt;16 political science?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. There might be exceptions to that.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. What?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. There might be exceptions, but I think that's a general&lt;br /&gt;20 principle.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. As you sit here now, are you aware of any exceptions to&lt;br /&gt;22 the general principle that it is undesirable for a religious&lt;br /&gt;23 majority to use law to impose its views on a minority?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I guess if you look at American history, there have been&lt;br /&gt;25 times where a religious coalition built in support of a&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2691&lt;br /&gt;1 project --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. No, no. I'm not asking about a religious coalition. I'm&lt;br /&gt;3 asking --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. A religious majority, okay. Maybe in favor of abolition.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And the religious majority there -- what was the&lt;br /&gt;6 minority -- first of all, the abolitionists weren't a majority,&lt;br /&gt;7 right?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I'm not sure. They were a part of the coalition that&lt;br /&gt;9 ended slavery, right.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. The abolitionists were actually quite a small minority as&lt;br /&gt;11 a matter of history, right? "Yes, "no," "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Well, activist abolitionists, yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Second, who was the minority that the abolitionists were&lt;br /&gt;14 imposing their view on?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Slaveholders.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Slaveholders. And in your view were slaveholders a&lt;br /&gt;17 minority that needed protection?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. No. They may have had views about -- which I believe are&lt;br /&gt;19 distorted views, about the religious justification for slavery.&lt;br /&gt;20 That would be a religious minority.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And I'm just trying to understand what you just said.&lt;br /&gt;22 You're saying that slaveholders may have had a&lt;br /&gt;23 religious basis for their view and, therefore, it was&lt;br /&gt;24 inappropriate to impose a different view on them?&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, I'm going to object to&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2692&lt;br /&gt;1 this whole line of questioning. It's well beyond the scope of&lt;br /&gt;2 direct. I didn't get into anything from the nineteenth&lt;br /&gt;3 century.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Well, counsel is attempting to inquire&lt;br /&gt;5 about Proposition 8, and he's responding to the witness's&lt;br /&gt;6 comments.&lt;br /&gt;7 If the witness were to directly respond to the&lt;br /&gt;8 questions, there would not be the need to go into these&lt;br /&gt;9 matters, Mr. Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, he asked about world&lt;br /&gt;12 history, was the first line in this question.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: The objection is overruled. This is&lt;br /&gt;14 cross-examination, Mr. Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Professor Miller, focusing on today and focusing on&lt;br /&gt;17 California and the United States, as a professor of political&lt;br /&gt;18 science who is said to be an expert in political science in&lt;br /&gt;19 California and the United States, do you believe that it is&lt;br /&gt;20 generally accepted that it is not appropriate for a majority&lt;br /&gt;21 religion or majority religion coalition to impose their views&lt;br /&gt;22 on a minority?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I need to change the --&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Please answer this question.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. I think there might be circumstances where political&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2693&lt;br /&gt;1 science generally would be quite disposed to agree with a&lt;br /&gt;2 religiously-based argument that might be held by a majority,&lt;br /&gt;3 but, again, I think the principle you are driving at is that&lt;br /&gt;4 would political science in general believe it is inappropriate&lt;br /&gt;5 or undesirable for a religious majority to impose on a&lt;br /&gt;6 religious minority its views. And I think probably a majority&lt;br /&gt;7 of political scientists would agree with that.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I have no more questions.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: Mr. Thompson, redirect?&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. THOMPSON: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Before you do that, I should ask counsel&lt;br /&gt;12 for the Attorney General if she wishes to inquire of this&lt;br /&gt;13 witness regarding his views on the responsibility of the&lt;br /&gt;14 Attorney General?&lt;br /&gt;15 MS. PACHTER: I would be happy to, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;17 CROSS EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;18 BY MS. PACHTER:&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Good morning, Dr. Miller.&lt;br /&gt;20 Earlier I believe you testified in response to one of&lt;br /&gt;21 Mr. Boies' questions that the role of the Attorney General in&lt;br /&gt;22 the title and summary process somehow ameliorated, served to&lt;br /&gt;23 ameliorate the otherwise anti-Democratic tendencies of the&lt;br /&gt;24 institution in California.&lt;br /&gt;25 And I was wondering if you could tell me what the&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / PACHTER 2694&lt;br /&gt;1 basis was for that opinion?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. The basis for the opinion is -- we're talking about&lt;br /&gt;3 institutional checks on direct Democracy, and one of the stages&lt;br /&gt;4 of the initiative process is that the Attorney General writes a&lt;br /&gt;5 title and summary. So the proponents don't get to write their&lt;br /&gt;6 own title and summary in California.&lt;br /&gt;7 And so to the extent that the Attorney General is&lt;br /&gt;8 able to craft a title of the initiative, then that provides an&lt;br /&gt;9 institutional input into the initiative process, so it's less&lt;br /&gt;10 pure majoritarian than if that stage did not occur.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. How does it provide that check on the process?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Well, again, it's not the proponents writing the title and&lt;br /&gt;13 summary. It's an outside independent elected official who does&lt;br /&gt;14 that.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Is it your understanding that the Attorney General can do&lt;br /&gt;16 anything other than provide a neutral title and summary?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Well, that was certainly contested in this last -- in the&lt;br /&gt;18 Proposition 8 election.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. What was contested in the Proposition 8 election?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. The title that Attorney General Brown provided for&lt;br /&gt;21 Proposition 8 was contested by the parties on both sides. Some&lt;br /&gt;22 thought that it was unfairly characterizing the initiative, and&lt;br /&gt;23 others believed it was fairly characterizing the initiative.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I understand that, but your understanding of the law in&lt;br /&gt;25 California, Dr. Miller, is it that the Attorney General must&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / PACHTER 2695&lt;br /&gt;1 provide a neutral title and summary, or is it your&lt;br /&gt;2 understanding that the Attorney General can provide a title and&lt;br /&gt;3 summary that casts an opinion about the measure that's being&lt;br /&gt;4 submitted to the voters?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Okay, here is my understanding. I believe that that law&lt;br /&gt;6 tells the Attorney General to provide a neutral opinion.&lt;br /&gt;7 I believe most students of California politics would&lt;br /&gt;8 say that there is within the Attorney General's office some&lt;br /&gt;9 discretion on how to characterize initiatives. And these are&lt;br /&gt;10 often considered very important because voters get to see this&lt;br /&gt;11 title and summary as an important cue to them.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And one of the things that opponents or somebody who&lt;br /&gt;13 challenges the Attorney General's title and summary can do is&lt;br /&gt;14 to go to court and argue that the title and summary was not&lt;br /&gt;15 neutral under California law, isn't that right?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Can the Attorney General do more than&lt;br /&gt;19 provide a neutral title and summary?&lt;br /&gt;20 Do you know?&lt;br /&gt;21 THE WITNESS: Do I know?&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: Do you know whether the Attorney General&lt;br /&gt;23 can do something in addition to providing a neutral title and&lt;br /&gt;24 summary for the initiative?&lt;br /&gt;25 THE WITNESS: My -- it's different in different&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / PACHTER 2696&lt;br /&gt;1 states. I can't recall any in --&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: We are talking about California.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE WITNESS: Right. In California, I'm not aware of&lt;br /&gt;4 any time where the Attorney General has done more --&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: No, that's not the question.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE WITNESS: Yes. I guess the answer is I don't&lt;br /&gt;7 know.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: The question is: Can the Attorney&lt;br /&gt;9 General do something more than simply providing a neutral title&lt;br /&gt;10 and summary?&lt;br /&gt;11 THE WITNESS: The Attorney General can publicly&lt;br /&gt;12 oppose the initiative or support it. In terms of institutional&lt;br /&gt;13 challenges, I'm not aware of any.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: You don't know, is that it?&lt;br /&gt;15 THE WITNESS: That's right.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: You don't know.&lt;br /&gt;17 MS. PACHTER: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Anything further?&lt;br /&gt;19 MS. PACHTER: No.&lt;br /&gt;20 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;21 Now, redirect, Mr. Thompson?&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. THOMPSON: Thank you, your Honor. And I have my&lt;br /&gt;23 very last binder of the trial, for myself anyway. It's very&lt;br /&gt;24 short. May I approach, please?&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: Well, that's good news.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - CROSS EXAMINATION / PACHTER 2697&lt;br /&gt;1 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;2 (Whereupon, binders were tendered&lt;br /&gt;3 to the Court and the witness.)&lt;br /&gt;4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Professor Miller, you were asked some questions about&lt;br /&gt;7 materials provided to you by counsel. And my question is: How&lt;br /&gt;8 many of the topics in your report did you personally&lt;br /&gt;9 investigate?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. All of them.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. How many of the materials considered in your -- listed at&lt;br /&gt;12 the end of your report, the 427 of them, how many did you&lt;br /&gt;13 personally consider?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I reviewed most of them. I can't recall closely analyzing&lt;br /&gt;15 all of them, but I believe that I reviewed -- I tried to review&lt;br /&gt;16 all of them, yes.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And please describe the research methodology that underlay&lt;br /&gt;18 your opinions relating to progressive religious support for the&lt;br /&gt;19 No On 8 campaign?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I'm sorry. Can you rephrase the question?&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Sure. Please describe the research methodology that&lt;br /&gt;22 underlay your opinions relating to progressive religious&lt;br /&gt;23 support for the No On 8 campaign?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. So I did extensive reading of progressive religious&lt;br /&gt;25 organizations' websites; the Pew report, which provides a lot&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2698&lt;br /&gt;1 of -- or the Pew website, which provides lots of information&lt;br /&gt;2 across various denominations; and those are some of the&lt;br /&gt;3 important things that I looked at.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. All right. Now, I would like to switch gears. You were&lt;br /&gt;5 asked some questions about a study you had done over a&lt;br /&gt;6 four-decade period of ballot initiatives and you had made some&lt;br /&gt;7 comments about California and Colorado and another state and&lt;br /&gt;8 how there was a potential of some of these initiatives to tap&lt;br /&gt;9 into anti-minority sentiment.&lt;br /&gt;10 And my question is: How successful were the&lt;br /&gt;11 California initiatives in the 1970's that had the potential to&lt;br /&gt;12 tap into a strain of anti-minority sentiment against&lt;br /&gt;13 homosexuals?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. The only one I'm aware of that I can recall is Proposition&lt;br /&gt;15 6. I think that was the only one on the ballot during that&lt;br /&gt;16 decade, and it was defeated by the voters.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And how successful were the California initiatives in the&lt;br /&gt;18 1980's that had the potential to tap into a strain of&lt;br /&gt;19 anti-minority sentiment against gays and lesbians?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Those were the three measures dealing with HIV, Aids and&lt;br /&gt;21 the -- either quarantine or reporting of suspected HIV&lt;br /&gt;22 patients, which was, I considered, very anti-homosexual and --&lt;br /&gt;23 or a gay and lesbian initiative. And it was -- all those&lt;br /&gt;24 initiatives were defeated by the voters decisively in&lt;br /&gt;25 California.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2699&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. All tight. Now, you were asked some questions about&lt;br /&gt;2 polling, and you were asked questions about whether a majority&lt;br /&gt;3 of the gay and lesbian community supported the repeal of DOMA.&lt;br /&gt;4&lt;br /&gt;5 I would like to direct your attention to tab D of&lt;br /&gt;6 your binder.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And this is a document prepared by Professor Segura and a&lt;br /&gt;9 Ken Cimino, and it's DIX-2649.&lt;br /&gt;10 And I would like to direct your attention to the last&lt;br /&gt;11 page, table five, where it says halfway through the table,&lt;br /&gt;12 "Self-identified LGBT," and it lists in the right-hand column&lt;br /&gt;13 that the support, at least at the time of this document, which&lt;br /&gt;14 was 2005, for same-sex marriage was 73.5 percent.&lt;br /&gt;15 Do you have any basis to dispute that number, the&lt;br /&gt;16 validity of that number?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. No.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, we would move the&lt;br /&gt;19 admission of DIX-2649.&lt;br /&gt;20 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, we would object. Mr. Segura,&lt;br /&gt;21 Dr. Segura was on the stand and he could have been examined&lt;br /&gt;22 about this document.&lt;br /&gt;23 There is no foundation for it to come in through this&lt;br /&gt;24 witness, who never saw it. And we think it is not appropriate&lt;br /&gt;25 to bring in the document after the witness is off the stand so&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2700&lt;br /&gt;1 the witness can't explain it or to put it in context.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: This was, I gather, not an exhibit that&lt;br /&gt;3 was used with Professor Segura.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: It was, as a matter of fact, and I&lt;br /&gt;5 forgot to move it into evidence, and --&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: In that case, your Honor, I withdraw my&lt;br /&gt;7 objection.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. THOMPSON: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: 2649 will be admitted.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. THOMPSON: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;11 (Defendants' Exhibit 2649 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;12 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Now, you were also asked some questions about prejudice&lt;br /&gt;14 today in society directed against gays and lesbians.&lt;br /&gt;15 What polling data, if any, are you aware of that&lt;br /&gt;16 analyzes the relative warmness or feelings of the people of&lt;br /&gt;17 California towards gays and lesbians?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Of California specifically?&lt;br /&gt;19 I'm aware of a field poll. This is the field&lt;br /&gt;20 organization poll in, I believe, it was 2006, where there was&lt;br /&gt;21 questions asked sort of similar to the National Election&lt;br /&gt;22 Studies Feeling Thermometer Index, zero to 100. And the --&lt;br /&gt;23 this was in, as I recall, 2006 and from my memory 65 percent,&lt;br /&gt;24 something like that, close to two-thirds of Californians held&lt;br /&gt;25 either positive or neutral views towards gays and lesbians.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2701&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. All right. Now, let me ask you some questions about&lt;br /&gt;2 religion and prejudice.&lt;br /&gt;3 Do you recall that you were shown document from the&lt;br /&gt;4 Vatican and the Southern Baptist Convention?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. All right. I would like to direct your attention to tab&lt;br /&gt;7 your binder. This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 5. It's called "The&lt;br /&gt;8 Ten Declarations For Protecting Biblical Marriage."&lt;br /&gt;9 And the first line is:&lt;br /&gt;10 "God loves all people. Therefore, we love&lt;br /&gt;11 all people and we will do so regardless of&lt;br /&gt;12 how some view or define themselves sexually."&lt;br /&gt;13 How does this comport with your understanding of the&lt;br /&gt;14 position of Evangelical churches?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I think this is very consistent with the vast majority of&lt;br /&gt;16 Evangelical churches.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, we would move the&lt;br /&gt;18 admission of Plaintiffs' Exhibit 5.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. BOIES: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;20 THE COURT: Very well. Exhibit 5 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;21 (Defendants' Exhibit 5 received in evidence)&lt;br /&gt;22 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Now, you were also asked about the role that prejudice may&lt;br /&gt;24 have played in the Proposition 8 campaign.&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. THOMPSON: And, your Honor, with the Court's&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2702&lt;br /&gt;1 permission, I would like to play what I believe is a&lt;br /&gt;2 thirty-second ad that was run during the campaign. It's&lt;br /&gt;3 DX-2308. I would like to publish it on the screen.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Has it been moved in?&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. THOMPSON: No, your Honor. I would be happy to&lt;br /&gt;6 play it and then let Mr. Boies see it and object at that time&lt;br /&gt;7 if he -- or however the Court would prefer to proceed.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I did not go into messaging&lt;br /&gt;9 with this witness. I did not put to him the campaign messages&lt;br /&gt;10 or ask him about that. I don't know what's on the --&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Well, it is certainly something that was&lt;br /&gt;12 put in in the plaintiffs' case.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. BOIES: Yes, it was. It was clearly put in in&lt;br /&gt;14 the plaintiff's case. I'm just talking about the scope of&lt;br /&gt;15 cross-examination.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Well, let's hear it and then I can&lt;br /&gt;17 determine whether it's beyond the scope.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. THOMPSON: Well, in fact, why don't we&lt;br /&gt;19 actually -- very well. Let's play it.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Is this a video or an audio.&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. THOMPSON: It is, your Honor. It is a video. I&lt;br /&gt;23 think we are experiencing technical difficulty, and I'm happy&lt;br /&gt;24 to move to a different subject and come back to this, unless we&lt;br /&gt;25 can --&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2703&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: All right. Why don't we do that?&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. THOMPSON: Yes. I apologize, your Honor. We&lt;br /&gt;3 will come back to that in just a short moment, because I don't&lt;br /&gt;4 have very much.&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Now, you were asked some questions about laws that were&lt;br /&gt;7 enacted pursuant to the Defense of Marriage Act; do you recall&lt;br /&gt;8 that?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. When were the vast majority of those laws passed?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. You mean, the state Defense of Marriage Acts? The vast&lt;br /&gt;12 majority were in the mid-2000s; 2004, in that period.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. How do you explain the timing of those laws?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. So my analysis, as I set forward in my book, is that they&lt;br /&gt;15 are largely following the Goodridge decision in Massachusetts,&lt;br /&gt;16 and that was in 2003, as I recall.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. All right. And let me ask you, you were shown and you&lt;br /&gt;18 discussed at some length your Santa Clara Law Review article&lt;br /&gt;19 that you did before you completed your PhD.&lt;br /&gt;20 And since you completed your PhD and have written&lt;br /&gt;21 your book, Direct Democracy In The Courts, can you explain the&lt;br /&gt;22 evolution of your thinking on this subject?&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: Object to the form of the question, your&lt;br /&gt;24 Honor.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: I beg your pardon?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2704&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. BOIES: I object to the form. It's just an&lt;br /&gt;2 objection as to form.&lt;br /&gt;3 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Can you explain the evolution of your thinking on the&lt;br /&gt;5 initiative process?&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Since when?&lt;br /&gt;7 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Since the time you wrote the Santa Clara Law Review&lt;br /&gt;9 article in 2001 when you were a graduate student.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. So in 2001, we've had a lot of discussion of articles I&lt;br /&gt;11 wrote a decade ago.&lt;br /&gt;12 Again, I pursued what I thought was a Madisonian&lt;br /&gt;13 critique of the initiative process and its comparative&lt;br /&gt;14 institutional disadvantages compared to representative&lt;br /&gt;15 government, and those articles are very clear on that&lt;br /&gt;16 comparison.&lt;br /&gt;17 And at the time I thought that the -- the best way to&lt;br /&gt;18 think about this problem was to think of the courts as being an&lt;br /&gt;19 important institutional check on pure democracy. So that was&lt;br /&gt;20 my approach to this problem up through about 2001, 2002.&lt;br /&gt;21 I decided to continue pursuing this area of research&lt;br /&gt;22 over the -- after I finished my time as a graduate student.&lt;br /&gt;23 And I took a year-long research leave at U.C. Berkeley. And&lt;br /&gt;24 this was in the period shortly after the Goodridge decision.&lt;br /&gt;25 And the paper I wrote for the A.P.S.A. in 2005 started to show&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2705&lt;br /&gt;1 my -- the shift in my thinking about this. It becomes fully&lt;br /&gt;2 developed in my book, which was published a year ago or less&lt;br /&gt;3 than a year ago and that is that I have a more favorable view&lt;br /&gt;4 of the initiative process after having reviewed the entire&lt;br /&gt;5 100-plus years of this process, dating back to the very&lt;br /&gt;6 beginning of the 20th century. I see it as a way in which the&lt;br /&gt;7 people can express and -- express popular sovereignty in a&lt;br /&gt;8 constitutional system.&lt;br /&gt;9 The other thing that I -- that shaped my thinking&lt;br /&gt;10 about this -- again, going back to the origins of the&lt;br /&gt;11 initiative process -- is that many of the arguments, early&lt;br /&gt;12 arguments for direct democracy, especially presented by&lt;br /&gt;13 Theodore Roosevelt during that period, was that it could&lt;br /&gt;14 provide a check on judicial activism are. This was the Lochner&lt;br /&gt;15 era and a lot of progressives thought that courts were&lt;br /&gt;16 expanding rights beyond what the people wanted, and so that&lt;br /&gt;17 direct democracy could exercise an institutional check on&lt;br /&gt;18 courts and when there is a contestation over the proper scope&lt;br /&gt;19 of rights.&lt;br /&gt;20 And so this becomes the basis for my book Direct&lt;br /&gt;21 Democracy In The Courts, which is that there are two competing&lt;br /&gt;22 forces in the American constitutional system that diverge from&lt;br /&gt;23 what I consider the Madisonian ideal. The Madisonian ideal is&lt;br /&gt;24 that popular sovereignty and minority rights are harmonized&lt;br /&gt;25 within the legislative process.&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2706&lt;br /&gt;1 My early research showed that in my view, direct&lt;br /&gt;2 democracy could pull decisions out of the legislative process.&lt;br /&gt;3 My later analysis looked at ways that the courts could pull the&lt;br /&gt;4 decision-making process away from the people.&lt;br /&gt;5 And so the way I now look at the marriage controversy&lt;br /&gt;6 is that it's one of these conflicts over the scope of rights&lt;br /&gt;7 and the ability of the people to have an input into the&lt;br /&gt;8 definition of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;9 Ideally, from my perspective, this would happen&lt;br /&gt;10 through legislatures. We have an initiative process in this&lt;br /&gt;11 country that allows the people to vote directly, and I don't&lt;br /&gt;12 have a problem with that.&lt;br /&gt;13 I noted that we had some discussion yesterday about&lt;br /&gt;14 state DOMAs and where did they come from. Eleven of them came&lt;br /&gt;15 from citizen petition, but the majority of them came from&lt;br /&gt;16 legislatures.&lt;br /&gt;17 So if we are concerned about Defense of Marriage&lt;br /&gt;18 Amendments coming -- you know, bypassing representative&lt;br /&gt;19 government, that's not the case in the majority of states where&lt;br /&gt;20 they have been adopted. In the United States you have a&lt;br /&gt;21 consensus between representative government and direct&lt;br /&gt;22 democracy in establishing this definition of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;23 In my view, and this came out of my analysis of the&lt;br /&gt;24 Goodridge decision and later In Re Marriage cases in&lt;br /&gt;25 California, taking that decision out of the hands of the people&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2707&lt;br /&gt;1 in general is an example of the courts taking too strong a&lt;br /&gt;2 position on this issue, this fundamental issue of social policy&lt;br /&gt;3 in the country.&lt;br /&gt;4 And so I think of it differently than the Court's&lt;br /&gt;5 exercising a check on the majority imposing their will on the&lt;br /&gt;6 minority.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. All right. Now, how, if at all, has your thinking about&lt;br /&gt;8 Proposition 22 evolved since the time you wrote your 2001 Santa&lt;br /&gt;9 Clara Law Review article?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Again, this was before I had done this project that I just&lt;br /&gt;11 described of comparing direct democracy and judicial review in&lt;br /&gt;12 the form of judicial activism. And so I was still thinking in&lt;br /&gt;13 terms of the problem of majorities and minorities.&lt;br /&gt;14 And, again, I would say that many of these&lt;br /&gt;15 initiatives we described affecting gays and lesbians I would&lt;br /&gt;16 still put in that category. Proposition 6 would be one of&lt;br /&gt;17 those where the majority was imposing, you know, anti --&lt;br /&gt;18 discrimination against school teachers who happened to be gay&lt;br /&gt;19 and lesbian.&lt;br /&gt;20 And I decided after a long time thinking about this&lt;br /&gt;21 that marriage was a different situation and that the people&lt;br /&gt;22 should be able to have input on the definition of marriage and&lt;br /&gt;23 that it wasn't necessarily invidious discrimination against the&lt;br /&gt;24 minority group. I think it's perfectly fine if the consensus&lt;br /&gt;25 builds in the country for there to be legal recognition of&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2708&lt;br /&gt;1 same-sex marriage, but that's different then having it imposed&lt;br /&gt;2 by the Court.&lt;br /&gt;3 Finally, with respect to Prop 22. At that point I&lt;br /&gt;4 viewed gays and lesbians in California as being what I&lt;br /&gt;5 considered a vulnerable minority. And if you look at the&lt;br /&gt;6 context of 22, there's more evidence for that. There was -- I&lt;br /&gt;7 think the No On 22 campaign raised -- or was able to spend&lt;br /&gt;8 maybe $4 million to fight that initiative compared to&lt;br /&gt;9 $43 million in 2008. The amount of coalition allies they had&lt;br /&gt;10 in 2000 was very different than they had this 2008.&lt;br /&gt;11 So I may have misread the situation in 2000 with Prop&lt;br /&gt;12 22, but I definitely have a different view of it today.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. If we leave aside the marriage referendum and initiatives&lt;br /&gt;14 that you have examined, how have the political goals of gays&lt;br /&gt;15 and lesbians fared in the initiative process in the last couple&lt;br /&gt;16 of decades leaving aside the marriage issue?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Okay. There have been very few initiatives in the --&lt;br /&gt;18 across the United States that affect gays and lesbians, if you&lt;br /&gt;19 set aside the marriage initiatives. And so it can't be said&lt;br /&gt;20 that the initiative process is stripping away rights.&lt;br /&gt;21 Now, there's -- you know, there's a few examples. If&lt;br /&gt;22 we go back to the 1990's, Amendment 2 in Colorado would be&lt;br /&gt;23 something that I would look at as, you know, an initiative that&lt;br /&gt;24 was very sweeping and broad and eliminated the opportunity for&lt;br /&gt;25 gays and lesbians across the board to achieve rights through&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2709&lt;br /&gt;1 the political process or through ballot measures. And so that&lt;br /&gt;2 would be something that I would still think would be in the&lt;br /&gt;3 category of an initiative that would adversely affect gays and&lt;br /&gt;4 lesbians.&lt;br /&gt;5 But aside from that, there are very few that I can&lt;br /&gt;6 think of that would be -- that would fall into that category of&lt;br /&gt;7 negatively affecting gays and lesbians.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Now, do you recall that Mr. Boies also showed you an&lt;br /&gt;9 amicus brief that William Eskridge had co-authored in the In&lt;br /&gt;10 Re Marriage cases?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And do you recall that this -- relevant sentences he read&lt;br /&gt;13 to you said.&lt;br /&gt;14 "The proponents of Proposition 8 centrally&lt;br /&gt;15 maintained that state recognition of same-sex&lt;br /&gt;16 marriage would require schools to teach&lt;br /&gt;17 vulnerable children that gay marriage is just&lt;br /&gt;18 as good as traditional marriage."&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes. I believe I recall that was a sentence in that&lt;br /&gt;20 amicus brief, yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And the next sentence, do you recall, said.&lt;br /&gt;22 "That claim has no basis and its acceptance&lt;br /&gt;23 by some voters probably made the difference&lt;br /&gt;24 between the gay minorities having the same&lt;br /&gt;25 marriage rights as the straight majority and&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2710&lt;br /&gt;1 having no marriage rights at all."&lt;br /&gt;2 Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: Your Honor, I would like to now&lt;br /&gt;5 publish as a demonstrative PX-20, which is already in evidence&lt;br /&gt;6 and it's one of the official ads of the campaign.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;8 (Videotape played in open court.)&lt;br /&gt;9 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. All right. Now, Professor, you were asked questions about&lt;br /&gt;11 anti-gay stereotype.&lt;br /&gt;12 Leaving aside anti-gay stereotypes, what political&lt;br /&gt;13 themes were articulated in that ad?&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: Objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: It is beyond the scope.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. THOMPSON: Well, your Honor, he was asked about&lt;br /&gt;17 the messaging and he was asked whether the messaging --&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: That question is clearly beyond the&lt;br /&gt;19 scope.&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Well, do you think that that ad is confined to the&lt;br /&gt;22 proposition that schools would teach vulnerable children that&lt;br /&gt;23 gay marriage is just as good as traditional marriage; the very&lt;br /&gt;24 thing that Professor Eskridge said probably made the&lt;br /&gt;25 difference?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2711&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I object. Both on terms&lt;br /&gt;2 of -- I object both on terms of scope and he has no expertise&lt;br /&gt;3 in interpreting ads.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: I'm just reading from the portion of&lt;br /&gt;5 the amicus brief that he was cross examined about extensively,&lt;br /&gt;6 about whether -- the central maintaining message.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Objection overruled.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. THOMPSON: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I'm sorry. You are going to have to restate the question.&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. So leaving aside --&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. THOMPSON: Actually, could the court reporter&lt;br /&gt;13 read it back so we don't have another objection?&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: He's not the only one who's forgotten the&lt;br /&gt;15 question.&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. THOMPSON: Yes, I apologize, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: That happens, counsel.&lt;br /&gt;18 (Whereupon the record was read&lt;br /&gt;19 as requested.)&lt;br /&gt;20 A. My answer is no.&lt;br /&gt;21 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And why is that?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Well, there were -- I might have to go back and look at it&lt;br /&gt;24 again, to refresh my memory.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. I'm sorry. Why don't we just play it again?&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2712&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That would be helpful.&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I object. We are not going&lt;br /&gt;3 to play this ad a second time.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. THOMPSON: We are almost done, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: I thought you were on the right track,&lt;br /&gt;6 Mr. Thompson.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. THOMPSON: I apologize.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: You were focusing on the Eskridge article&lt;br /&gt;9 since that was placed before the witness during his&lt;br /&gt;10 cross-examination.&lt;br /&gt;11 So if you are going to proceed that way, that's fine.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. THOMPSON: Okay. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;13 BY MR. THOMPSON:&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Okay. Given your familiarity with the campaign materials,&lt;br /&gt;15 what were some of the issues, other than children being taught&lt;br /&gt;16 in schools that gay marriage is just as good as traditional&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Okay. I'm recalling the ad a little bit, and I -- one of&lt;br /&gt;19 the things is you have a law professor there talking about the&lt;br /&gt;20 imposition by judges of a decision in this issue that would&lt;br /&gt;21 prevent the people from being able to, through democratic&lt;br /&gt;22 processes, determine this issue.&lt;br /&gt;23 And I think there's also a theme in there of&lt;br /&gt;24 tradition, traditional marriage, which is, I think, a&lt;br /&gt;25 different -- different certainly than, you know, what was&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2713&lt;br /&gt;1 suggested by Professor Eskridge. So there is really two&lt;br /&gt;2 themes.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. THOMPSON: Very well, your Honor. We have no&lt;br /&gt;4 further questions.&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: Are you saying that it is never&lt;br /&gt;6 appropriate for the judiciary to intervene in the initiative&lt;br /&gt;7 process?&lt;br /&gt;8 THE WITNESS: No, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: When is it appropriate?&lt;br /&gt;10 THE WITNESS: In my view, it's appropriate when an&lt;br /&gt;11 initiative or just like any other statute enacted by a&lt;br /&gt;12 legislature violates in this case the federal constitution.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: And who is to make that determination?&lt;br /&gt;14 THE WITNESS: That's ultimately a question for the&lt;br /&gt;15 courts to decide. The context of -- this is a the first time&lt;br /&gt;16 we are really getting this aired in the federal courts. There&lt;br /&gt;17 was an issue in the state courts as to the interpretation of&lt;br /&gt;18 state constitutions.&lt;br /&gt;19 And -- should I explain what I mean --&lt;br /&gt;20 THE COURT: Well, you made an interesting comment&lt;br /&gt;21 that the initiative process provides a check on a Lochner era&lt;br /&gt;22 judicial activism. And, yet, you have just said that it is&lt;br /&gt;23 appropriate for the courts to intervene in the initiative&lt;br /&gt;24 process in some circumstances.&lt;br /&gt;25 And what I'm trying to tease out is what are the&lt;br /&gt;MILLER - REDIRECT EXAMINATION / THOMPSON 2714&lt;br /&gt;1 circumstances in which you think it is appropriate?&lt;br /&gt;2 THE WITNESS: Where there is a well-grounded&lt;br /&gt;3 constitutional principle that is violated by the initiative,&lt;br /&gt;4 and that's my view on it.&lt;br /&gt;5 And the Eskridge article -- the Eskridge/Cain brief&lt;br /&gt;6 dealt with state constitutional law, which is somewhat&lt;br /&gt;7 different. It's more flexible. There's opportunities for the&lt;br /&gt;8 voters to amend constitutions.&lt;br /&gt;9 And so that's where you have the interplay between&lt;br /&gt;10 popular majorities and courts, which is somewhat different than&lt;br /&gt;11 the relationship between the initiative process and federal&lt;br /&gt;12 constitutional law.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: So where there is that well-grounded&lt;br /&gt;14 constitutional principle at stake, the initiative process in&lt;br /&gt;15 your view should, consistent with political theory, be checked?&lt;br /&gt;16 THE WITNESS: In the same way that state legislatures&lt;br /&gt;17 or Congress should be checked.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: Very well. Thank you for your testimony,&lt;br /&gt;19 sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 And, counsel, we are going to take a break for&lt;br /&gt;21 luncheon. I'm going to hear a motion to suppress while you are&lt;br /&gt;22 having luncheon, and it probably will mean that we won't be&lt;br /&gt;23 back until 1:15 or thereabouts. Is that agreeable?&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. THOMPSON: Yes, it is.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: All right. See you then.&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2715&lt;br /&gt;1 (Witness excused.)&lt;br /&gt;2 (Whereupon at 11:58 a.m. proceedings&lt;br /&gt;3 were adjourned for noon recess.)&lt;br /&gt;4&lt;br /&gt;5&lt;br /&gt;6&lt;br /&gt;7&lt;br /&gt;8&lt;br /&gt;9&lt;br /&gt;10&lt;br /&gt;11&lt;br /&gt;12&lt;br /&gt;13&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;15&lt;br /&gt;16&lt;br /&gt;17&lt;br /&gt;18&lt;br /&gt;19&lt;br /&gt;20&lt;br /&gt;21&lt;br /&gt;22&lt;br /&gt;23&lt;br /&gt;24&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2716&lt;br /&gt;1 P R O C E E D I N G S&lt;br /&gt;2 JANUARY 26, 2010 1:11 P.M.&lt;br /&gt;3&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Very well. Mr. Cooper, please call your&lt;br /&gt;5 next witness.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. COOPER: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. We call&lt;br /&gt;7 David Blankenhorn, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;8 And we have a binder to hand out. May I approach the&lt;br /&gt;9 witness with it?&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: You may, indeed.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE CLERK: Raise your right hand, please.&lt;br /&gt;12 DAVID BLANKENHORN,&lt;br /&gt;13 called as a witness for the Defendants herein, having been&lt;br /&gt;14 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:&lt;br /&gt;15 THE WITNESS: I do.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE CLERK: Thank you. State your name.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE WITNESS: David Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;18 THE CLERK: And spell your last name, please.&lt;br /&gt;19 THE WITNESS: B-l-a-n-k-e-n-h-o-r-n.&lt;br /&gt;20 THE CLERK: And your first name.&lt;br /&gt;21 THE WITNESS: David.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE CLERK: Spell it out, please.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE WITNESS: D-a-v-i-d.&lt;br /&gt;24 THE CLERK: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2717&lt;br /&gt;1 DIRECT EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;2 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Hi.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, I would like you to turn to tab 1 in the&lt;br /&gt;6 binder that's in front of you.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. COOPER: And, Your Honor, this is the declaration&lt;br /&gt;8 of Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;9 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And I'd like you to turn back to -- actually, it's not a&lt;br /&gt;11 numbered page, but it's right behind page 25. And is that your&lt;br /&gt;12 CV, Mr. Blankenhorn?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. COOPER: Okay. Your Honor, behind tab A in the&lt;br /&gt;15 binder we have created a new exhibit that is just&lt;br /&gt;16 Mr. Blankenhorn's CV. It's exhibit DIX2693. And we would move&lt;br /&gt;17 that into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;19 THE COURT: Very well. DIX2693 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Defendants' Exhibit 2693 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;21 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, would you please briefly describe your&lt;br /&gt;23 educational background for the Court.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I graduated from high school in Salem, Virginia, in 1973.&lt;br /&gt;25 I graduated from college from Harvard College, in 1977, with a&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2718&lt;br /&gt;1 degree in social studies. And I graduated in 1979, with an&lt;br /&gt;2 M.A. in history from the University of Warwick in Coventry,&lt;br /&gt;3 England.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And did you receive any honors?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. As an undergraduate, I received the honor of magna cum&lt;br /&gt;6 laude, and it's with -- my M.A. degree, they called it "with&lt;br /&gt;7 distinction."&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: I didn't hear what you said.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE WITNESS: It was called "with distinction," M.A.&lt;br /&gt;10 with distinction.&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And did you receive any fellowships?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I received the John Knox fellowship as an undergraduate&lt;br /&gt;14 to -- for a year of study abroad.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And were you on that fellowship at the University of&lt;br /&gt;16 Warwick?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. After your graduation from the University of Warwick, what&lt;br /&gt;19 did you do then?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I served two years in the VISTA program, Volunteers In&lt;br /&gt;21 Service to America, where I worked as a community organizer in&lt;br /&gt;22 several communities in Boston, Massachusetts. And, then, for&lt;br /&gt;23 the next four years, I worked as a -- after VISTA, I continued&lt;br /&gt;24 my work as a community organizer in several different&lt;br /&gt;25 communities in Massachusetts and in Virginia.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2719&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Okay. And what -- what did your work in these&lt;br /&gt;2 neighborhoods entail?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Well, it was working -- working and living in low-income&lt;br /&gt;4 communities, where there were a lot of challenges. And our job&lt;br /&gt;5 as organizers were to create grassroots organizations in those&lt;br /&gt;6 communities to increase their voice in the political system and&lt;br /&gt;7 to advocate for reforms that they thought were important.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. You mentioned challenges. What did you mean by&lt;br /&gt;9 "challenges" in those communities?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Well, you -- you see a lot of the problems firsthand when&lt;br /&gt;11 you live and work in, you know, in poor communities where there&lt;br /&gt;12 are lots of issues that need addressed.&lt;br /&gt;13 And I think, for me, seeing the weakening of the --&lt;br /&gt;14 seeing the weakened state of community and family institutions&lt;br /&gt;15 in those communities in some ways was -- especially the role&lt;br /&gt;16 of -- especially how children were living without their&lt;br /&gt;17 fathers, it caused me to be particularly interested in that&lt;br /&gt;18 issue and to -- then led me to my next round of work.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Okay. And what was that?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Well, I started -- with some colleagues, I started an&lt;br /&gt;21 organization called -- this is -- we're now up to 1987.&lt;br /&gt;22 I started an organization called Institute for&lt;br /&gt;23 American Values, which is a nonpartisan think tank, that it&lt;br /&gt;24 works on -- their primary focus is on issues of marriage,&lt;br /&gt;25 family, and child well-being.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2720&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And what -- what is your position in the Institute for&lt;br /&gt;2 American Values?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I'm the president.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And could you explain the type of work that -- that the&lt;br /&gt;5 Institute does?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Well, we commission research, usually by putting together&lt;br /&gt;7 teams of scholars that would work on projects for one, two,&lt;br /&gt;8 three or -- years, or more. Then we would release the findings&lt;br /&gt;9 of that work.&lt;br /&gt;10 We hold conferences and we -- I would say, perhaps,&lt;br /&gt;11 our signature product is what we call "Report to the Nation."&lt;br /&gt;12 And that's where an interdisciplinary team of scholars tries to&lt;br /&gt;13 tackle what we consider to be an important issue, working very&lt;br /&gt;14 intensively for a fair period of time. And then they jointly&lt;br /&gt;15 release these -- these findings and these recommendations.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Are you one of the -- what are the subject matters that&lt;br /&gt;17 the Institute focuses on?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Well, as I mentioned, the main subjects would be&lt;br /&gt;19 fatherhood, marriage, family structure, child well-being.&lt;br /&gt;20 In recent years, we have added several other issues&lt;br /&gt;21 to our agenda. But that has -- was -- has always been our&lt;br /&gt;22 primary area of concentration.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And does the Institute produce any regular publication?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. We produce an annual report called "The State of Our&lt;br /&gt;25 Unions," which is a report on the state of marriage in America.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2721&lt;br /&gt;1 And we produce a periodic report. We're working on the third&lt;br /&gt;2 edition now, called "Why Marriage Matters: Conclusions from&lt;br /&gt;3 the Social Sciences."&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And that latter report, what does it address, seek to&lt;br /&gt;5 address?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. We've got -- we pulled together about 15 scholars from&lt;br /&gt;7 different fields in the social sciences and from different&lt;br /&gt;8 points of view on the political spectrum, and had them work&lt;br /&gt;9 together very carefully to come up with a consensus statement&lt;br /&gt;10 on what they felt were the social -- the principal social&lt;br /&gt;11 science findings regarding marriage as an institution.&lt;br /&gt;12 And we've published the two editions now. We renew&lt;br /&gt;13 them as more research becomes available. And now we are&lt;br /&gt;14 working on the third edition.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, are you personally involved in the&lt;br /&gt;16 Institute's research and publications in its other work?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Yes, sir. Either, in some cases, as a principal writer or&lt;br /&gt;18 investigator, and in other cases more as the -- in the capacity&lt;br /&gt;19 of iden- -- identifying the teams of scholars and working with&lt;br /&gt;20 them to refine the topic, and then working with -- with them in&lt;br /&gt;21 a non-leadership capacity as they do their work and as they&lt;br /&gt;22 then release the results of their work.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And is there a subject matter or field that you devote&lt;br /&gt;24 your personal efforts to in connection with that -- with --&lt;br /&gt;25 with your personal involvement in those projects?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2722&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Marriage, fatherhood, family structure.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, have you authored any books?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes, sir. I authored -- relevant to this topic, I&lt;br /&gt;4 authored a book in 1995, called Fatherless America. That was a&lt;br /&gt;5 study or a book about the consequences of having approximately&lt;br /&gt;6 35 percent of U.S. children living apart from their fathers.&lt;br /&gt;7 And it pointed to -- I argued that this was a serious social&lt;br /&gt;8 problem.&lt;br /&gt;9 And then in 2006, I published a book called -- 2007,&lt;br /&gt;10 rather, published a book called The Future of Marriage, that&lt;br /&gt;11 just looks at what is happening to marriage today, and how we&lt;br /&gt;12 might take steps to -- to strengthen it in the future.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay. I want to explore a little further both of those --&lt;br /&gt;14 both of those books.&lt;br /&gt;15 Let's start with the Fatherless America. Describe&lt;br /&gt;16 the research you undertook in connection with writing that&lt;br /&gt;17 book.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I did interviews with fathers in six different cities&lt;br /&gt;19 around the country, and used the transcripts of those&lt;br /&gt;20 interviews as bases for writing portions of the book.&lt;br /&gt;21 And I conducted a literature review of the&lt;br /&gt;22 scholarship at that time, on the role of fathers in the lives&lt;br /&gt;23 of children. That was a basis.&lt;br /&gt;24 And, thirdly, I convened scholarly conferences or&lt;br /&gt;25 gatherings where commissioned papers were produced. And we&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2723&lt;br /&gt;1 would discuss these papers on different aspects of fatherhood&lt;br /&gt;2 and father absence. And those discussions and working with the&lt;br /&gt;3 scholars in that way also furthered my -- my thinking about the&lt;br /&gt;4 topic.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And did your book, Fatherless America, receive any&lt;br /&gt;6 commentary? Or what kind of reaction did it receive when it&lt;br /&gt;7 was published?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I think it's fair to say that it was widely and generally&lt;br /&gt;9 respectfully reviewed, in the New York Times, and Washington&lt;br /&gt;10 Post, Book World, and L.A. Times, Chicago Tribune, Wall Street&lt;br /&gt;11 Journal, Newsweek, U.S. News &amp; World Report. It was featured&lt;br /&gt;12 on the CBS Evening News. It was -- it was -- it was widely&lt;br /&gt;13 reviewed.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And did it occasion any appearances, on your part, in&lt;br /&gt;15 connection with discussion of the book?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. It led to quite a bit of public speaking at university and&lt;br /&gt;17 civic groups, and elsewhere.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And I think you said it was reviewed. A Dr. Michael Lamb&lt;br /&gt;19 has testified in this case. Did he review your book?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, he reviewed it in one of the professional journals.&lt;br /&gt;21 And he disagreed with some of its findings, but said some&lt;br /&gt;22 respectful things about it as well.&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. COOPER: Well, and, in fact, I'd like to publish&lt;br /&gt;24 to the screen, Your Honor, if I may, Demonstrative number 1.&lt;br /&gt;25 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2724&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Now, on the screen, Mr. Blankenhorn, is this the -- is&lt;br /&gt;3 this among the things that Mr. lamb said?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. This is among the nicer things he said, yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, may I inquire whether the&lt;br /&gt;7 review is in evidence?&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. COOPER: I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. DUSSEAULT: It is.&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: It rings a bell, I must say.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. THOMPSON: I believe I used it with Dr. Lamb,&lt;br /&gt;12 Your Honor, and moved it into evidence. We can check.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: I think we have seen this before. I&lt;br /&gt;14 could be mistaken, of course.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. THOMPSON: We have seen it, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: All right. Mr. Thompson and I have seen&lt;br /&gt;17 it before.&lt;br /&gt;18 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. COOPER: And, Your Honor, I believe&lt;br /&gt;20 Mr. Blankenhorn's book, Fatherless America, is in evidence. I&lt;br /&gt;21 think there may have been some confusion about its exhibit&lt;br /&gt;22 number, but I believe it's in evidence.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE COURT: The witness's book or the Lamb article?&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: The witness's book, Fatherless America.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: And that's exhibit number?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2725&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, it's defense Exhibit 103.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. COOPER: DIX103.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;5 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Now, I'd like to turn to the other book you mentioned, The&lt;br /&gt;7 Future of Marriage. Would you turn to tab 2 of your book -- I&lt;br /&gt;8 mean, of your witness binder here.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And would you describe what you find there?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Well, that's a picture of the cover of the book, The&lt;br /&gt;12 Future of Marriage.&lt;br /&gt;13 And, as I said, it was from 2007, and talks about&lt;br /&gt;14 what is happening to marriage, and what the consequences of&lt;br /&gt;15 these trends are. And it makes recommendations on how we&lt;br /&gt;16 might, as a society, seek to strengthen the institution.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And could you describe how you researched and prepared&lt;br /&gt;18 to -- to author this book?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I spent some concentrated period of time, with some&lt;br /&gt;20 guidance from some colleagues, trying to immerse myself and&lt;br /&gt;21 become familiar, a literature review, conduct a literature&lt;br /&gt;22 review of the anthropological literature related to fatherhood&lt;br /&gt;23 as -- sorry, marriages as a cross-cultural institution.&lt;br /&gt;24 And I conducted a series of consultations with an&lt;br /&gt;25 interdisciplinary group of scholars, three of them in different&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2726&lt;br /&gt;1 parts of the country, to discuss the issue.&lt;br /&gt;2 And then I just also consulted my own accumulated&lt;br /&gt;3 body of having read and written and spoken about this issue for&lt;br /&gt;4 about the past 20 years.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And this book, The Future of Marriage, did it receive&lt;br /&gt;6 commentary when it was published, as well?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. It did. It was not as widely reviewed as Fatherless&lt;br /&gt;8 America, but it did receive some attention from reviewers.&lt;br /&gt;9 And it also caused me to be invited to do quite a bit&lt;br /&gt;10 of public speaking and to engage in conversation with -- in the&lt;br /&gt;11 book, I argue that we should not adopt same-sex marriage, and&lt;br /&gt;12 so the book caused me to be invited to participate in lots --&lt;br /&gt;13 quite a number of conversations with proponents of adopting&lt;br /&gt;14 same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;15 And I think, in a way, that might have been the most&lt;br /&gt;16 interesting and important outcome, in terms of the public&lt;br /&gt;17 impact or public -- you know, the results of the book.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. I would like to publish now Demonstrative number 2, with&lt;br /&gt;19 respect to the commentary on your book.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. COOPER: And, Your Honor, for the record, if the&lt;br /&gt;22 Court please, I'll just read that Mr. Dale Carpenter, Professor&lt;br /&gt;23 Dale Carpenter, a University of Minnesota law professor, said&lt;br /&gt;24 of the book:&lt;br /&gt;25 "Probably the best single book yet written&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2727&lt;br /&gt;1 opposing gay marriage. Blankenhorn is a&lt;br /&gt;2 serious scholar and thinker."&lt;br /&gt;3 And then Professor Francis Fukuyama had this to say:&lt;br /&gt;4 "David Blankenhorn enormously deepens the&lt;br /&gt;5 current debate on same-sex marriage by&lt;br /&gt;6 recovering the historical understanding of&lt;br /&gt;7 marriage as a public institution designed to&lt;br /&gt;8 promote and foster procreation and the&lt;br /&gt;9 raising of children, an understanding based&lt;br /&gt;10 not on religious conviction but on&lt;br /&gt;11 observation of how our species has resolved&lt;br /&gt;12 over time. It is a thoughtful and important&lt;br /&gt;13 addition to the contemporary debate."&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Are these among the comments that your book generated?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. These are -- these mean something important to me because&lt;br /&gt;17 Fukuyama is an internationally-respected scholar, author of&lt;br /&gt;18 many books.&lt;br /&gt;19 Professor Carpenter is a prominent law professor who&lt;br /&gt;20 is a very active proponent of gay marriage. So when he says&lt;br /&gt;21 it's the best book against, he might have been dampening his&lt;br /&gt;22 praise a little bit, from his point of view. But it was a very&lt;br /&gt;23 generous thing for him to say.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to introduce&lt;br /&gt;25 Mr. Blankenhorn's book, The Future of Marriage. It is marked&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2728&lt;br /&gt;1 as DIX956.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: Hearing no objection.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: 956 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;6 (Defendants' Exhibit 956 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. COOPER: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;8 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. I'd also now like to publish to the screen Demonstrative&lt;br /&gt;10 number 3, and in that connection ask you if you have edited any&lt;br /&gt;11 books on subject matters relevant to your testimony today?&lt;br /&gt;12 (Document displayed)&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir. Well, I thought there were four. The Black&lt;br /&gt;14 Fathers in Contemporary American Society, which I co-edited&lt;br /&gt;15 with Obie Clayton and Ron Mincy, who were two prominent&lt;br /&gt;16 African American sociology professors.&lt;br /&gt;17 The Book of Marriage, which I co-edited with Dana&lt;br /&gt;18 Mack, who worked with me at the Institute at the time.&lt;br /&gt;19 Promises to Keep and Rebuilding the Nest, are both groups of&lt;br /&gt;20 essays which I co-edited, and each essay -- each of these books&lt;br /&gt;21 is a compilation of scholarly essays examining the status and&lt;br /&gt;22 future of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Have the books that you have written or edited been&lt;br /&gt;24 reviewed in any peer-reviewed academic journals?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Well, I counted up recently, and there were over 50&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2729&lt;br /&gt;1 citations in peer-reviewed academic journals. And I believe&lt;br /&gt;2 there were reviews in seven -- book reviews in seven journals,&lt;br /&gt;3 including the Journal of Marriage and the Family, and social --&lt;br /&gt;4 Family Relations, and those -- journal of Family Relations&lt;br /&gt;5 being -- Journal of Marriage and the Family being the most&lt;br /&gt;6 prominent journal in the field of -- when it comes to sociology&lt;br /&gt;7 of the family.&lt;br /&gt;8 So, yes, there were some -- a number of reviews, and&lt;br /&gt;9 also a number of citations in peer-reviewed journals.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And I just to be clear, if I understood your testimony&lt;br /&gt;11 correctly, your book has been actually reviewed, and you say&lt;br /&gt;12 seven times. But it's been cited over 50 times in&lt;br /&gt;13 peer-reviewed journals?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes. Seven -- seven reviews, and I think about 53&lt;br /&gt;15 citations of the works in peer-reviewed journals.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And has your scholarship ever been cited in any reported&lt;br /&gt;17 judicial opinions?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It's been cited five times in court cases, including by&lt;br /&gt;19 the California Supreme Court and by the Massachusetts Supreme&lt;br /&gt;20 Judicial Court.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And were those citations in the same-sex marriage cases in&lt;br /&gt;22 those?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Both of the latter two were with respect to the same-sex&lt;br /&gt;24 marriage cases, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. I see on your CV you are a member of the National&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2730&lt;br /&gt;1 Commission on America's Urban Families. Could you describe&lt;br /&gt;2 that commission, please.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. That commission was appointed by President George Bush,&lt;br /&gt;4 the 41st president, in 1992, to examine the state of America's&lt;br /&gt;5 urban families and to issue a report to the President.&lt;br /&gt;6 I was one of about seven members. The chairman of&lt;br /&gt;7 that committee was then Governor John Ashcroft, of Missouri.&lt;br /&gt;8 The vice-chairwoman was former mayor, Annette Strauss, from&lt;br /&gt;9 Dallas. And we met six or seven times, when we issued our&lt;br /&gt;10 report in January of '03 -- of '93, excuse me.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Have you ever served in any other advisory role to federal&lt;br /&gt;12 governmental officials?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I was asked during the -- President Clinton's&lt;br /&gt;14 Administration, I was asked by Vice President Al Gore to work&lt;br /&gt;15 with him in a program called Family Reunion, which was focused&lt;br /&gt;16 on family issues. And it was a conference that the vice&lt;br /&gt;17 president sponsored and chaired in Nashville, Tennessee, each&lt;br /&gt;18 summer during that period of time.&lt;br /&gt;19 And I was asked -- I was one of a number of people to&lt;br /&gt;20 be asked by him to meet with him, to help him develop the&lt;br /&gt;21 agenda, and to participate in that conference. The theme at&lt;br /&gt;22 the conference that year was "fatherhood."&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And the National Fatherhood Initiative is listed on your&lt;br /&gt;24 CV. What is that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. That is a group that was founded by me and several other&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2731&lt;br /&gt;1 people in 1995, I believe was the first time we had a meeting.&lt;br /&gt;2 '96, perhaps.&lt;br /&gt;3 It's to raise consciousness and to really, I guess,&lt;br /&gt;4 inform public opinion about the importance of active, involved&lt;br /&gt;5 fathers in the lives of children. I was the founding chairman.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Earlier in your testimony you mentioned that you had done&lt;br /&gt;7 some speaking. Have you delivered lectures in academic&lt;br /&gt;8 settings?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, I have. Quite often over the years, yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And have these been on the subject matters that we're&lt;br /&gt;11 discussing now?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Marriage, fatherhood, family structure.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And have you been invited to participate in debates or&lt;br /&gt;14 panel discussions on the subject specifically of marriage&lt;br /&gt;15 and/or same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes. I'd say quite a few times, I've had a chance to meet&lt;br /&gt;17 and engage in conversation on this issue with some of the&lt;br /&gt;18 leading proponents of same-sex marriage, Evan Wolfson, Andrew&lt;br /&gt;19 Sullivan, Jonathan Rauch, others.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. So you've engaged in debates with them over the years, on&lt;br /&gt;21 this subject matter?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes, sir. We -- we try to call them conversations now,&lt;br /&gt;23 but, yes, that's the -- that's the issue.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And have you provided legislative testimony in these&lt;br /&gt;25 areas?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2732&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Uhm, I believe I've testified either -- I've testified&lt;br /&gt;2 three times before either a congressional committee or a state&lt;br /&gt;3 legislative committee, on subjects of marriage and fatherhood.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to tender&lt;br /&gt;6 Mr. Blankenhorn as an expert on the subject of marriage,&lt;br /&gt;7 fatherhood, and family structures.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Very well. Voir dire?&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;10 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;11 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Hello.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. We haven't met, but my name is David Boies, and I&lt;br /&gt;15 represent the plaintiffs.&lt;br /&gt;16 You got a master's degree, and that degree was in&lt;br /&gt;17 history; is that right?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yes, sir. Comparative labor history.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And you did a thesis for that master's?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And what was that thesis in?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Labor history.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Was it a particular subject?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir. It was a study of two cabinetmakers' unions in&lt;br /&gt;25 19th century Britain. And it was published in a peer-reviewed&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2733&lt;br /&gt;1 academic book several years after I wrote it.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Now, "peer-reviewed," you just said. What is your&lt;br /&gt;3 understanding of what a peer-reviewed publication is?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. It's a publication that prior to it being published is&lt;br /&gt;5 reviewed by competent persons to give -- to give their views on&lt;br /&gt;6 whether or not -- first, whether or not the article should be&lt;br /&gt;7 published. And then, if it should, whether it requires&lt;br /&gt;8 revisions.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Now, other than the thesis that you wrote on cabinetmakers&lt;br /&gt;10 in Britain, have you ever had a peer-reviewed publication?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And what was that?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Well, I co-edited a book with Obie Clayton and Ron Mincy,&lt;br /&gt;14 called Black Fathers in Contemporary American Society, that was&lt;br /&gt;15 published by Russell Sage Press. That was a peer-reviewed&lt;br /&gt;16 publication.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Anything else?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. No, sir. To the best of my memory, that's it.&lt;br /&gt;19 Except it might be of interest to note that in my own&lt;br /&gt;20 organization, where over the past 20 years many of my pieces of&lt;br /&gt;21 work have been published, we have, to the best of our ability,&lt;br /&gt;22 instituted our own peer-review process. And we've been very&lt;br /&gt;23 scrupulous about carrying that out because of our high regard&lt;br /&gt;24 for the entire process.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. But you do understand that "peer-reviewed," as is normally&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2734&lt;br /&gt;1 used --&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I am using it as it's normally used.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. "Peer-reviewed," as it is normally used does not refer to&lt;br /&gt;4 something that you do internally. It's done by somebody&lt;br /&gt;5 independent, correct?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. All of our peer reviews are done by external people that&lt;br /&gt;7 have no connection to the Institute or the work that we're&lt;br /&gt;8 doing.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And are you saying that those independent people&lt;br /&gt;10 peer-reviewed your work?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Okay. Now, I thought I had two pieces of peer-reviewed&lt;br /&gt;13 publications.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I thought that the import of your question was to exempt&lt;br /&gt;15 from our consideration things that were published by my own&lt;br /&gt;16 organization, for reasons that you're implying.&lt;br /&gt;17 And I'm happy to stipulate that let's bracket that&lt;br /&gt;18 and just say that, apart from anything that was published by my&lt;br /&gt;19 own organization, where you could question, if you wish, the&lt;br /&gt;20 integrity of the peer-review process -- although, I think, if&lt;br /&gt;21 you were familiar with it you would not question it; but as an&lt;br /&gt;22 outsider you may question it -- let's bracket that for a moment&lt;br /&gt;23 and just say everybody else. We're looking at two publications&lt;br /&gt;24 only.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And those two publications didn't have anything to do with&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2735&lt;br /&gt;1 same-sex marriage or the effects of same-sex marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. In other words, I'm correct?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. You're correct. They did not.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Okay. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;6 Now, you have never taught a course in any college or&lt;br /&gt;7 university on marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And you have never taught a course in any college or&lt;br /&gt;10 university on fatherhood, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And you've never taught a course in any college or&lt;br /&gt;13 university on family structure?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And do you understand that the fields of psychology and&lt;br /&gt;16 sociology and anthropology are relevant to the subjects of&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage and fatherhood and family structure?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. That is my understanding, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And you've never gotten any kind of degree in psychology,&lt;br /&gt;20 correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Or in psychiatry?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Or in sociology?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2736&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Or in anthropology?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. I think we could go through the whole list because I've&lt;br /&gt;3 enumerated for you all the degrees I have.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. And you've never taught any course in any college and&lt;br /&gt;5 university --&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I have never been employed by a university or a college to&lt;br /&gt;7 teach --&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. In any capacity?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. -- in any way, ever.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you said you had testified three times. Were any of&lt;br /&gt;11 those three times relating to the effects of same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. In preparation for your testimony, did you undertake any&lt;br /&gt;14 scientific study of what the effects of permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;15 marriage had been in any jurisdiction in which same-sex&lt;br /&gt;16 marriage had been permitted?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Specifically in preparation for my testimony, did I&lt;br /&gt;18 undertake such study? The answer to that would be, no, sir, I&lt;br /&gt;19 did not.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Okay. Independent of the preparation for your testimony,&lt;br /&gt;21 have you conducted any scientific study as to what the effects&lt;br /&gt;22 of permitting same-sex marriage were in any of the&lt;br /&gt;23 jurisdictions where same-sex marriage was permitted?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, I have undertaken a study of that question in the&lt;br /&gt;25 best way I know how. Whether or not it would meet your&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2737&lt;br /&gt;1 definition of "scientific" is probably something we might have&lt;br /&gt;2 to explore. I would be happy to tell you what I did.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Let me explore it. You are saying that you undertook a&lt;br /&gt;4 attempt to study what the effects were of permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;5 marriage in various jurisdictions where same-sex marriage was&lt;br /&gt;6 permitted; is that your --&lt;br /&gt;7 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I want to say what I did do, though, if I may be&lt;br /&gt;10 permitted.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Let me be sure I've got answers to my questions first,&lt;br /&gt;12 though, okay, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I thought you were asking me did I undertake independent&lt;br /&gt;14 of this preparation from testimony, I thought your question&lt;br /&gt;15 was: Did I undertake any effort to understand the likely&lt;br /&gt;16 consequences of adopting same-sex marriage? And I wish to tell&lt;br /&gt;17 you that I did.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. No. I'm sure you would like to answer questions that I'm&lt;br /&gt;19 not asking, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;21 And you'll have a chance to do that with your&lt;br /&gt;22 counsel. I would like you to listen to the question I'm asking&lt;br /&gt;23 you, okay, because I think your question kind of slided over a&lt;br /&gt;24 couple of words.&lt;br /&gt;25 My question was whether you had conducted any study,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2738&lt;br /&gt;1 in connection with your expert work or otherwise, of the&lt;br /&gt;2 effects of permitting same-sex marriage in the countries where&lt;br /&gt;3 same-sex marriage was permitted? That begins with a yes or no&lt;br /&gt;4 answer.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I don't think I'm able to answer that question yes or no,&lt;br /&gt;6 if those are my only two choices.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Well, the question is whether you have attempted to study&lt;br /&gt;8 the effects of same-sex marriage in the jurisdictions where&lt;br /&gt;9 they have been permitted. You have either attempted to do that&lt;br /&gt;10 or not attempted to do that. It may very well have been that&lt;br /&gt;11 you attempted to do something entirely different or even&lt;br /&gt;12 related to it. But I'm not asking you about that. Do you&lt;br /&gt;13 understand?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. May I tell you what I did do?&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. I would like you to answer my question, sir. Now, do you&lt;br /&gt;16 understand what my question is?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. No, sir, because --&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. If you don't understand my question, anytime you don't&lt;br /&gt;19 understand my question, please let me know.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I'm letting you know now.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Let me try to be as clear as I can.&lt;br /&gt;22 You are aware that there are some jurisdictions that&lt;br /&gt;23 have permitted same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I am so aware.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Okay. Now, have you studied any of those jurisdictions to&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2739&lt;br /&gt;1 try to determine what the effect of permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;2 marriage in those jurisdictions has been, subsequent to the&lt;br /&gt;3 time that same-sex marriage was adopted?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. The answer to your question is: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. If by --&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. As long as you answer yes, then I can begin to ask more&lt;br /&gt;8 questions.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I'm just afraid that you won't accept my definition of&lt;br /&gt;10 "study." And I don't want to try to say something that is --&lt;br /&gt;11 is -- that it doesn't meet your definition of a study.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Well, I will explore that. I will explore that. But I&lt;br /&gt;13 would like to do it in an orderly way.&lt;br /&gt;14 And the first thing I'd like to do is, I'd like you&lt;br /&gt;15 to identify which jurisdictions you have, in your&lt;br /&gt;16 interpretation of the word "studied," studied.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I've tried to pay some attention to the evolution of&lt;br /&gt;18 the -- of this phenomenon of same-sex marriage in the&lt;br /&gt;19 Scandinavian countries. And I have tried to pay some attention&lt;br /&gt;20 to the impact of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.&lt;br /&gt;21 But what I was trying to say before is that, I have&lt;br /&gt;22 not engaged in a scientific study where I find data and -- and&lt;br /&gt;23 write up an article that would be published of that nature. I&lt;br /&gt;24 have not done those things. That's what I was trying to say.&lt;br /&gt;25 I have not done those things.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION / BOIES 2740&lt;br /&gt;1 I have just read articles and had conversations with&lt;br /&gt;2 people, and tried to be an informed person about it. But that&lt;br /&gt;3 is really the extent of it.&lt;br /&gt;4 I haven't developed a methodology or a set of expert,&lt;br /&gt;5 you know, findings about the topic that you're -- I have not&lt;br /&gt;6 done that, the topic that you're asking me to address.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. BOIES: Okay. Your Honor, I would object.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: The objection is that the witness is not&lt;br /&gt;9 qualified to opine on the subject of marriage, fatherhood, and&lt;br /&gt;10 family structure, correct?&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: Yes. And in particular -- and in&lt;br /&gt;12 particular, with respect to the effect of same-sex marriage,&lt;br /&gt;13 which is what he is being proffered to do within those general&lt;br /&gt;14 subjects.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: Mr. Cooper, any further foundation for&lt;br /&gt;16 the opinion testimony that the witness is prepared to offer?&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I think if the Court will&lt;br /&gt;18 permit the witness to testify, the Court will observe and hear&lt;br /&gt;19 the foundation for his judgments, and can certainly reserve&lt;br /&gt;20 judgment. But --&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Well, I understand. And I may very well&lt;br /&gt;22 do that. But the question is whether you want to lay any&lt;br /&gt;23 further foundation for his expertise.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: In these subjects of marriage, family&lt;br /&gt;25 structure, and fatherhood?&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2741&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Yes, and same-sex marriage, as&lt;br /&gt;2 Mr. Boies --&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. COOPER: And same-sex marriage. No, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;4 THE COURT: Okay. Well, the testimony is, of course,&lt;br /&gt;5 governed by the rules of evidence concerning opinion testimony.&lt;br /&gt;6 And the cases that the Supreme Court has laid down to&lt;br /&gt;7 guide the Court in admitting such testimony, obviously, the&lt;br /&gt;8 standards are somewhat different in the physical sciences than&lt;br /&gt;9 they are in the social sciences.&lt;br /&gt;10 Relevant to the social sciences, as I understand the&lt;br /&gt;11 standards that have been adopted by the Supreme Court and by&lt;br /&gt;12 the Courts of Appeal, the Court looks to whether the work that&lt;br /&gt;13 the witness has done meets the standards of intellectual rigor,&lt;br /&gt;14 using criteria much like those that have been developed in the&lt;br /&gt;15 Daubert case and the Daubert line of cases; whether the&lt;br /&gt;16 proffered testimony is based upon the expert's special skills,&lt;br /&gt;17 and his special skills as opposed to the insights of an&lt;br /&gt;18 intelligent layperson; and whether the proffered testimony will&lt;br /&gt;19 assist the trier of fact to understand or determine a fact&lt;br /&gt;20 which is in issue in the case.&lt;br /&gt;21 With respect to Mr. Blankenhorn's qualifications,&lt;br /&gt;22 were this a jury trial, I think the question might be a close&lt;br /&gt;23 one.&lt;br /&gt;24 But this being a court trial, I'm going to permit the&lt;br /&gt;25 witness to testify; and, as Mr. Cooper has suggested, to weigh&lt;br /&gt;PROCEEDINGS 2742&lt;br /&gt;1 that testimony in light of the witness's qualifications, his&lt;br /&gt;2 background, training, and experience, and the reasons that he&lt;br /&gt;3 offers for his opinions.&lt;br /&gt;4 So you may proceed.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;6 DIRECT EXAMINATION RESUMED&lt;br /&gt;7 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, what is marriage?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Marriage is a socially-approved sexual relationship&lt;br /&gt;10 between a man and a woman.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And on what do you base that opinion?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I base that on the broad consensus findings of the&lt;br /&gt;13 scholars, principally from the field of anthropology, but&lt;br /&gt;14 others as well, who have carefully sought to investigate this&lt;br /&gt;15 question in the modern era.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And what does marriage do?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Marriage does a number of things, but the most important&lt;br /&gt;18 thing it does is regulate filiation. It establishes who are&lt;br /&gt;19 the child's legal and social parents.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And on what do you base that opinion?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. The same body of evidence, the -- the views that have been&lt;br /&gt;22 drawn from scholarly investigations, principally from the field&lt;br /&gt;23 of anthropology, but elsewhere as well, spanning across the --&lt;br /&gt;24 the modern era of scholarship.&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to publish to&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2743&lt;br /&gt;1 the screen Demonstrative number 4, and now present the&lt;br /&gt;2 witness's testimony and his expert opinions which have been&lt;br /&gt;3 disclosed, of course, to the -- to the plaintiffs.&lt;br /&gt;4 (Document displayed)&lt;br /&gt;5 And for purposes of the record, Your Honor, I would&lt;br /&gt;6 like to read into the record proposition number one, and then&lt;br /&gt;7 ask the witness questions about that.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: Objection. Leading, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. COOPER: Beg your pardon?&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: It's a leading objection. I think it's a&lt;br /&gt;11 well-taken objection. Maybe you could just jump right into the&lt;br /&gt;12 subject.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. COOPER: Well, Your Honor, I would be happy to do&lt;br /&gt;14 that. Although, I have to say that the plaintiffs led their&lt;br /&gt;15 witnesses throughout the course of the presentation of their&lt;br /&gt;16 case. And on the one occasion when we objected to it, we&lt;br /&gt;17 recognized that it moved the pace of the --&lt;br /&gt;18 THE COURT: It does move things along. I will let&lt;br /&gt;19 you do some leading.&lt;br /&gt;20 But rather than simply reading from the demonstrative&lt;br /&gt;21 and then asking the witness whether he agrees with this or&lt;br /&gt;22 doesn't agree with it, and so forth, it might be helpful if you&lt;br /&gt;23 were to take him through in a somewhat more traditional manner.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: Very well, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2744&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, what is the primary purpose of marriage&lt;br /&gt;3 in human groups?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. We're embodied as male and female. That's the basic&lt;br /&gt;5 division in the species. We -- we reproduce sexually. We&lt;br /&gt;6 don't -- you know, that's -- that's how -- how we reproduce.&lt;br /&gt;7 And the -- marriage is the social institution that rests upon&lt;br /&gt;8 those very primary biological facts.&lt;br /&gt;9 In fact, the famous anthropologist, recently deceased&lt;br /&gt;10 but very famous anthropologist, Claude Levi-Strauss, once&lt;br /&gt;11 described marriage as a social institution with a biological&lt;br /&gt;12 foundation. And this is really what he was referring to.&lt;br /&gt;13 He was saying that in -- across societies, that we&lt;br /&gt;14 have an interest in having it be, insofar as we can make it so,&lt;br /&gt;15 that the man and the woman who -- whose sexual union makes the&lt;br /&gt;16 child, who are the biological creators of the child, that those&lt;br /&gt;17 same two individuals are also the social and legal parents of&lt;br /&gt;18 the child.&lt;br /&gt;19 And there is only one institution in the world that&lt;br /&gt;20 performs the task of bringing together the three dimensions of&lt;br /&gt;21 parenthood: The biological, the social -- that's the caring&lt;br /&gt;22 for the child -- and the legal. That institution is -- is&lt;br /&gt;23 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;24 It -- it -- it -- we think of it, in a way -- if you&lt;br /&gt;25 don't mind the poetry, we think of it as a gift that we give to&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2745&lt;br /&gt;1 children. We say: You as a child are being given this gift of&lt;br /&gt;2 being able to know and be known by the two people who brought&lt;br /&gt;3 you into this world.&lt;br /&gt;4 So this question -- this word "filiation," or the&lt;br /&gt;5 word "affiliation," who is the child affiliated with, that,&lt;br /&gt;6 according to the scholars, has been the primary cross-cultural&lt;br /&gt;7 purpose of the institution. If it wasn't -- if that need was&lt;br /&gt;8 not there, we -- we likely would not have the institution at&lt;br /&gt;9 all.&lt;br /&gt;10 So marriage does numerous things. There are numerous&lt;br /&gt;11 dimensions to it, of course. And it changes historically, and&lt;br /&gt;12 it evolves over time, and there's great diversity.&lt;br /&gt;13 But the wonderful finding, from the scholars who&lt;br /&gt;14 looked at it, is that it always is primarily organized&lt;br /&gt;15 everywhere, around the globe, to achieve this goal of giving&lt;br /&gt;16 the child -- of uniting the biological, social, and legal&lt;br /&gt;17 dimensions of parenthood, in fixing that, because we know how&lt;br /&gt;18 important this is for children.&lt;br /&gt;19 That's really -- that's really the main rationale for&lt;br /&gt;20 why we have the institution.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. What is the significance of the fact that marriage is a&lt;br /&gt;22 cross-cultural, as you put it, institution and exists&lt;br /&gt;23 everywhere?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. The fact that it exists everywhere or at least nearly&lt;br /&gt;25 everywhere, I think, suggests just how important the need must&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2746&lt;br /&gt;1 be. Because marriage can look very different in different&lt;br /&gt;2 places and different times. But what's so astonishing about&lt;br /&gt;3 this is that it's always doing this thing. East, west, north,&lt;br /&gt;4 south, a thousand years ago, today, it's doing this thing.&lt;br /&gt;5 So this thing must be pretty important. It must be&lt;br /&gt;6 pretty fundamental. It must be at the -- at the very species&lt;br /&gt;7 level, critical to our -- to the society's success. It's not&lt;br /&gt;8 just one thing among many, and so forth.&lt;br /&gt;9 Because of its universality in the midst of&lt;br /&gt;10 diversity, I think that's a good piece of evidence to suggest&lt;br /&gt;11 the absolutely fundamentally important nature of the need that&lt;br /&gt;12 is being addressed singularly by this institution.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. When you said earlier "this thing," I just want to be&lt;br /&gt;14 clear, what do you mean when you say marriage addresses "this&lt;br /&gt;15 thing"?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. The need for the child to know and be known by the two&lt;br /&gt;17 people, to make it as likely as we can, that the biological&lt;br /&gt;18 parents are also the social and legal parents. That's what I&lt;br /&gt;19 mean by the thing.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, I'd like you to turn to tab 3 in your&lt;br /&gt;21 binder. And would you please identify that document.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. This is from a book by Suzanne Frayser, called Varieties&lt;br /&gt;23 of Sexual Experience." And she is a quite prominent&lt;br /&gt;24 anthropologist.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And now I would like to invite your attention to page 248,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2747&lt;br /&gt;1 which is the only page excerpted behind the tab there. And&lt;br /&gt;2 it's the -- and, specifically, to the second full paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;3 And if you will, please, Mr. Blankenhorn, would you read --&lt;br /&gt;4 read the first three sentences, as I count them.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;6 "My own definition of marriage derives from a&lt;br /&gt;7 review of the careful attempts to define it&lt;br /&gt;8 made by other social scientists, for example,&lt;br /&gt;9 Gough and Goodenough, as well as from my&lt;br /&gt;10 analysis of ethnographic reports of marriage&lt;br /&gt;11 in a variety of societies. I have found that&lt;br /&gt;12 I can most consistently and usefully identify&lt;br /&gt;13 marriage in cross-cultural context by using&lt;br /&gt;14 the following definition: Marriage is a&lt;br /&gt;15 relationship within which a group socially&lt;br /&gt;16 approves and encourages sexual intercourse&lt;br /&gt;17 and the birth of children."&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Is this among the scholars that you've previously cited&lt;br /&gt;19 and on which you rely for your opinion in this subject matter?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. This, because of her expertise and also because of its&lt;br /&gt;21 consistency with many, many others.&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to introduce&lt;br /&gt;23 plaintiffs' -- this is a Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1626, into&lt;br /&gt;24 evidence.&lt;br /&gt;25 THE COURT: 1626?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2748&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. COOPER: That's -- that's what I see here.&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. BOIES: Plaintiffs Exhibit 1626 has additional&lt;br /&gt;3 pages.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. COOPER: And I am happy to have additional pages&lt;br /&gt;5 placed in the record.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. BOIES: I don't know how many pages. But&lt;br /&gt;7 whatever 1626 is, we have no objection to it.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: There is no objection. All right. 1626&lt;br /&gt;9 is in.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1626 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: A lot more than one page. I know that.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: All right.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. COOPER: I just have one excerpted here in the&lt;br /&gt;14 binder.&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And would you please now turn to the document behind tab&lt;br /&gt;17 4, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. It's A History of Marriage Systems, by Robina Quale, who&lt;br /&gt;19 is a historian.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Okay. And would you turn your attention, please, to page&lt;br /&gt;21 2 of the pages that are excerpted there. And, in particular, I&lt;br /&gt;22 invite your attention to the fourth paragraph on that page.&lt;br /&gt;23 If you read the two sentences that begin that&lt;br /&gt;24 paragraph, if you would, please.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2749&lt;br /&gt;1 "Marriage, as the socially recognized linking&lt;br /&gt;2 of a specific man to a specific woman and her&lt;br /&gt;3 offspring can be found in all societies.&lt;br /&gt;4 Through marriage, children can be assured of&lt;br /&gt;5 being born to both a man and a woman who will&lt;br /&gt;6 care for them as they mature."&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Is this among the works on which you relied to form your&lt;br /&gt;8 expert opinion?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to move this&lt;br /&gt;11 into evidence. This is DIX79.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Very well. DIX79 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Defendants' Exhibit 79 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Now, turn to document behind tab 5.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. This is from the very distinguished sociologist Kingsley&lt;br /&gt;18 Davis, whose book he edited, is called Contemporary Marriage.&lt;br /&gt;19 And this is from his introductory chapter to that book.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. And if you'll turn to page 5, please.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. In the second full paragraph on that page, would you&lt;br /&gt;23 please read the first two sentences.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;25 "Granted that the unique trait of what is&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2750&lt;br /&gt;1 commonly called marriage is social&lt;br /&gt;2 recognition and approval, one must still ask,&lt;br /&gt;3 approval of what? The answer is that it is&lt;br /&gt;4 approval of a couple's engaging in sexual&lt;br /&gt;5 intercourse and bearing and rearing&lt;br /&gt;6 offspring."&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And have you relied on this work in forming your opinion?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to introduce&lt;br /&gt;10 this exhibit, as well -- it's DIX50 -- into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Defendants' Exhibit 50 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Proceed, now, to tab 6, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. This is from the 1951 -- which is the sixth and final&lt;br /&gt;17 edition of a book -- a publication called Notes and Queries on&lt;br /&gt;18 Anthropology. It's put out by the Anthropological Institute of&lt;br /&gt;19 Great Britain, which is widely considered to be the most&lt;br /&gt;20 respected group of anthropologists in the world.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And if you'll turn to page 71 of that document, and the&lt;br /&gt;22 first full paragraph if you'll read that sentence, please.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I meant to say that another thing that's interesting about&lt;br /&gt;24 this book, despite its kind of banal title, is that this is a&lt;br /&gt;25 dictionary and a field worker's training guide. These are&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2751&lt;br /&gt;1 concepts that are used from senior anthropologists to train&lt;br /&gt;2 young anthropologists as they go into the field for their work.&lt;br /&gt;3 And a lot of it is providing definitions. And here&lt;br /&gt;4 is what they say on marriage, quote:&lt;br /&gt;5 "The family in this sense is based on&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage, which is defined as a union between&lt;br /&gt;7 a man and a woman such that children born by&lt;br /&gt;8 the woman are recognized as the legitimate&lt;br /&gt;9 offspring of both partners."&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you relied on this, as well?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. This is probably the most famous definition of marriage in&lt;br /&gt;12 the history of anthropology. Yes, I did.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. COOPER: And, Your Honor, I would like to move&lt;br /&gt;14 this exhibit, which is DIX73, as well, into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Very well. 73 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Defendants' Exhibit 73 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;18 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And if we could proceed to the document behind tab 7.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. It's a book called Human Family Systems, by Pierre&lt;br /&gt;21 van den Berghe, published in 1979. He's an anthropologist.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. And who is Mr. van den Berghe?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. He's an anthropologist.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay. Will you turn your attention to page 46 of that&lt;br /&gt;25 document. And at the bottom of the page, the last paragraph,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2752&lt;br /&gt;1 read the four sentences there, beginning that paragraph, into&lt;br /&gt;2 the record.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;4 "Here I shall argue that, while all this is&lt;br /&gt;5 true, marriage is nevertheless the cultural&lt;br /&gt;6 codification of a biological program.&lt;br /&gt;7 Marriage is the socially-sanctioned pair-bond&lt;br /&gt;8 for the avowed social purpose of&lt;br /&gt;9 procreation."&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And you relied on this source, as well?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to move this&lt;br /&gt;13 document, marked as DIX89, into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: 89, DIX89 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;16 (Defendants' Exhibit 89 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;17 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Now, the document behind tab 8, if you'll describe that,&lt;br /&gt;19 please.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. This is from a book called Sex, Culture and Myth,&lt;br /&gt;21 published in 1962 by Bronislaw Malinowski. Malinowski is, I&lt;br /&gt;22 think, widely and fairly viewed as the father of kinship&lt;br /&gt;23 studies in anthropology.&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Of what, sir?&lt;br /&gt;25 THE WITNESS: The father of kinship studies, the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2753&lt;br /&gt;1 study of kinship.&lt;br /&gt;2 THE COURT: Kinship.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE WITNESS: Kinship, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;4 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And if you'll turn to page 11 of that document. The first&lt;br /&gt;6 lines on the page.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;8 "We are thus led at all stages of our&lt;br /&gt;9 argument to the conclusion that the&lt;br /&gt;10 institution of marriage is primarily&lt;br /&gt;11 determined by the needs of the offspring, by&lt;br /&gt;12 the dependence of the children upon the&lt;br /&gt;13 parents."&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And you relied on this authority, as well, in forming your&lt;br /&gt;15 opinions?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. I made a pretty close study of Malinowski because of his&lt;br /&gt;17 importance in the field. So, yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to introduce,&lt;br /&gt;19 as well, this document, which is DIX66, into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;20 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Very well. 66 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;22 (Defendants' Exhibit 66 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;23 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. If you'll turn now to tab 9 -- I beg your pardon. Tab 9&lt;br /&gt;25 has been left empty. Let's skip to tab 10.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2754&lt;br /&gt;1 A. This is a 1985 book called The View From Afar, by the&lt;br /&gt;2 anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. I think you mentioned him earlier in your testimony?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. He is one of the giants in the field.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And on page 40 and 41, if you'll turn to those pages.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. At the bottom of the page, on 40, if you'll read the&lt;br /&gt;8 passage that begins, "The family."&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 "The family - based on a union, more or less&lt;br /&gt;11 durable, but socially approved, of two&lt;br /&gt;12 individuals of opposite sexes who establish a&lt;br /&gt;13 household and bear and raise children -&lt;br /&gt;14 appears to be a practically universal&lt;br /&gt;15 phenomenon, present in every type of&lt;br /&gt;16 society."&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. And you relied on this authority, as well?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I would like to move into&lt;br /&gt;20 evidence this document marked DIX63.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: 63 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;23 (Defendants' Exhibit 63 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;24 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Now, are these the only authorities on which you have&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2755&lt;br /&gt;1 studied in -- in your examination of the issue of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;2 A. No. These are what I view as representative -- I'm not&lt;br /&gt;3 saying that every other person who's every written about this&lt;br /&gt;4 agrees with what these people are saying. But I view these as&lt;br /&gt;5 representative of what the leading people in the field have&lt;br /&gt;6 concluded about the meaning of marriage, what marriage is. I&lt;br /&gt;7 view these as representative.&lt;br /&gt;8 And I don't know how many we've discussed today, five&lt;br /&gt;9 or six. But you could multiply by ten and you could get 50 or&lt;br /&gt;10 60 distinguished people saying, in effect, this exact same&lt;br /&gt;11 thing.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And what conclusion do you draw from your review of these&lt;br /&gt;13 and other similar authorities in these fields?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. My conclusion is that they are correct, that this is what&lt;br /&gt;15 marriage is, and that this is its primary role and contribution&lt;br /&gt;16 to society.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Is there an opposing view? Is there an alternative view&lt;br /&gt;18 of marriage's purpose?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, there is. And this view is significant. And this&lt;br /&gt;20 opposing view is, I think it's fair to say, also of&lt;br /&gt;21 significantly more recent vintage and more recent prevalence.&lt;br /&gt;22 But it is certainly a well-developed and opposing point of view&lt;br /&gt;23 about what marriage is.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And what is that?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. This view is that marriage is fundamentally a private&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2756&lt;br /&gt;1 adult commitment.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And on that subject, would you please turn to the document&lt;br /&gt;3 behind tab 11 of your binder.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes. This is from a report called "Beyond Conjugality:&lt;br /&gt;5 Recognizing and supporting close personal adult relationships."&lt;br /&gt;6 And it was published by the Law Commission of Canada,&lt;br /&gt;7 a distinguished group of Canadian legal professionals, in 2001.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And what was the purpose of the -- of the publication of&lt;br /&gt;9 this document?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. To offer -- to make analyses and to offer recommendations&lt;br /&gt;11 regarding marriage and family law in Canada.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And was this in connection with Canada's adoption of&lt;br /&gt;13 same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Well, I would not say that this report was primarily&lt;br /&gt;15 concerned with that topic, but it was certainly concerned with&lt;br /&gt;16 that topic. That was one of the issues that the report&lt;br /&gt;17 addresses.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Would you turn your attention to Roman -- page Roman&lt;br /&gt;19 xviii.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I've got it.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And on the -- what appears to be the first full paragraph&lt;br /&gt;22 there, or the fist indented paragraph in the middle of the&lt;br /&gt;23 page, would you please read the material that begins with the&lt;br /&gt;24 second sentence.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2757&lt;br /&gt;1 "The state's objectives and underlying&lt;br /&gt;2 contemporary regulation" --&lt;br /&gt;3 I'm sorry. I misspoke. I'm going to start again.&lt;br /&gt;4 "The state's objectives underlying&lt;br /&gt;5 contemporary regulation of marriage relate&lt;br /&gt;6 essentially to the facilitation of private&lt;br /&gt;7 ordering, providing an orderly framework in&lt;br /&gt;8 which people can express their commitment to&lt;br /&gt;9 each other, receive public recognition and&lt;br /&gt;10 support, and voluntarily assume a range of&lt;br /&gt;11 legal rights and obligations."&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And does this statement reflect the view you've described&lt;br /&gt;13 previously as the private adult commitment view of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Yes, sir. And I believe it's significant because it was&lt;br /&gt;15 developed in somewhat precise language by a group of prominent&lt;br /&gt;16 lawyers who -- who were pretty, I think, determined to say what&lt;br /&gt;17 they actually meant.&lt;br /&gt;18 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Now, turn to tab -- that's not always the case with&lt;br /&gt;20 lawyers.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I didn't know that would get a laugh.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. If you would turn to the document behind tab 12, please.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. This is from an article in the --&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. BOIES: Excuse me, Your Honor, was this&lt;br /&gt;25 introduced?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2758&lt;br /&gt;1 MR. COOPER: I did not introduce it. I'm happy to do&lt;br /&gt;2 so.&lt;br /&gt;3 MR. BOIES: I think so, since it was read from.&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. COOPER: Sure. This, Your Honor, is --&lt;br /&gt;5 THE COURT: It's DIX93.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. COOPER: Yes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 THE COURT: Is there an objection?&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. BOIES: No objection.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: All right. And you are offering 93.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. COOPER: Yes, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: All right. 93 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Defendants' Exhibit 93 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;13 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. I'm sorry, the document behind tab 12, again.&lt;br /&gt;15 A. This is from an article by Professor Crispin Sartwell,&lt;br /&gt;16 whose -- teaches at Dickinson College. And it's an article&lt;br /&gt;17 that appeared in the -- I believe, the Philadelphia Inquirer.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And if you'll read the -- the -- from the first paragraph&lt;br /&gt;19 there, in the second sentence.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;21 "Marriage is sometimes referred to as an&lt;br /&gt;22 institution, but that's an odd application of&lt;br /&gt;23 the term. The Department of Defense is an&lt;br /&gt;24 institution. The University of California is&lt;br /&gt;25 an institution. A marriage is a private&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2759&lt;br /&gt;1 arrangement between parties committed to&lt;br /&gt;2 love."&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And you relied on this, as well, for your opinion on this&lt;br /&gt;4 subject?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Yes, sir. My understanding of this is that it's a more&lt;br /&gt;6 colloquial way of restating exactly the views offered by the&lt;br /&gt;7 Law Commission of Canada, as to the purpose of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;8 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, this is DIX84, and we would&lt;br /&gt;9 offer it now into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. BOIES: No objection.&lt;br /&gt;11 THE COURT: Very well. 84 is in.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Defendants' Exhibit 84 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;13 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. If you'll now turn to the document behind tab 13 of your&lt;br /&gt;15 binder.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. This is from a book called The Case for Same-Sex Marriage.&lt;br /&gt;17 It was written by Professor William Eskridge, whose views were&lt;br /&gt;18 discussed earlier today. He's a law professor from Yale&lt;br /&gt;19 University.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Is he one of the individuals you mentioned that you have&lt;br /&gt;21 been invited to debate on this subject of same --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Would you turn please to page 11 of that. And,&lt;br /&gt;24 essentially, in the middle of the first -- of the first full&lt;br /&gt;25 paragraph, beginning with "In today's society," would you read&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2760&lt;br /&gt;1 that, please.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;3 "In today's society, the importance of&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage is relational and not&lt;br /&gt;5 procreational."&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And are there other authorities that you have studied that&lt;br /&gt;7 articulate this adult-centric view of marriage, as you've&lt;br /&gt;8 described it?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. The view that marriage is fundamentally a private adult&lt;br /&gt;10 commitment, yes, sir, there are very, very many examples of&lt;br /&gt;11 this conclusion being proffered in the public discussion and in&lt;br /&gt;12 the academic discussion. And these are merely a very few of&lt;br /&gt;13 many, many possible representative examples of this -- of this&lt;br /&gt;14 proposition.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And do you believe that this adult-centered view of&lt;br /&gt;16 marriage is an accurate view of the institution of marriage&lt;br /&gt;17 today and in the past?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. No, sir, I do not believe it's accurate. I believe that&lt;br /&gt;19 the affective private dimensions of marriage are often, and&lt;br /&gt;20 including in our own society a dimension of marriage, even an&lt;br /&gt;21 important dimension of marriage. But I do not believe that it&lt;br /&gt;22 has ever been the -- I do not believe that in the -- in the&lt;br /&gt;23 history of societies, it has been understood to be the sum and&lt;br /&gt;24 substance of marriage, the -- the heart and soul, the core, the&lt;br /&gt;25 fundamental thing itself could be encapsulated with this idea&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2761&lt;br /&gt;1 that marriage is a fundamentally a private adult commitment. I&lt;br /&gt;2 do not believe that's consistent with -- with the human record.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. I think you used the words "the private affective&lt;br /&gt;4 dimension of marriage." What did that mean?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. It just means the tender feelings that the spouses have&lt;br /&gt;6 for one another, the feelings of love and regard and&lt;br /&gt;7 solicitude, and emotional commitments that the -- and&lt;br /&gt;8 feelings -- feelings of commitment and obligation and love,&lt;br /&gt;9 that the spouses feel to one another. That would be -- that's&lt;br /&gt;10 the -- I'm using the term "affective dimension of marriage."&lt;br /&gt;11 And that dimension, in many societies, of course,&lt;br /&gt;12 it's very negligeable. There are many societies where most&lt;br /&gt;13 marriages are arranged or they've governed by kin groups.&lt;br /&gt;14 In some societies, the affective dimension is not --&lt;br /&gt;15 is a very negligeable dimension of the institution. But in&lt;br /&gt;16 ours, of course, that is not true.&lt;br /&gt;17 In our western tradition in the United States, the&lt;br /&gt;18 affective dimension is an important dimension and one that we&lt;br /&gt;19 celebrate on Valentine's Day and so forth.&lt;br /&gt;20 But it is never -- the idea that that is what&lt;br /&gt;21 marriage is, that's how we understand the institution, is, I&lt;br /&gt;22 think, first of all, what these analysts are saying. And I&lt;br /&gt;23 think they are -- are incorrect. As a matter of our history&lt;br /&gt;24 and our lives, I think they are incorrect in that assertion.&lt;br /&gt;25 They may as a -- as a question of what they wish would happen&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2762&lt;br /&gt;1 in the future, that's one question. But if we look at actual&lt;br /&gt;2 lived experience of marriage in human groups, this is not an&lt;br /&gt;3 accurate analysis, in my view.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, I'd like to ask you a few questions about why&lt;br /&gt;5 marriage regulates filiation as you put it.&lt;br /&gt;6 MR. COOPER: And I would like to publish to the&lt;br /&gt;7 screen, Your Honor, Demonstrative number 7.&lt;br /&gt;8 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;9 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, was -- what role has religion played in&lt;br /&gt;11 defining the traditional institution of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. If we start with the question of the customary man-woman&lt;br /&gt;13 nature of the marital institution, the idea that marriage&lt;br /&gt;14 brings together the man and the woman, I think the record is&lt;br /&gt;15 completely clear that this concept which we know now, or as I&lt;br /&gt;16 am saying, is a universal or nearly universal presence in human&lt;br /&gt;17 societies, this feature of marriage simply is not the creation&lt;br /&gt;18 of religion. It is not something that religion invented. It&lt;br /&gt;19 does not depend upon religion for its rationale or its --&lt;br /&gt;20 its -- people having allegiance to it.&lt;br /&gt;21 Its evolution in our species cannot be explained with&lt;br /&gt;22 reference to religion. And that fact is borne out by us&lt;br /&gt;23 realizing that marriage is a natural human institution. That&lt;br /&gt;24 is, it concerns itself with natural facts, not supernatural&lt;br /&gt;25 facts.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2763&lt;br /&gt;1 And it exists in societies that have monotheistic&lt;br /&gt;2 belief-based religions, societies that believe in what we in&lt;br /&gt;3 the west might call magic or witchcraft. You know, the variety&lt;br /&gt;4 of beliefs about the supernatural in the human experience is&lt;br /&gt;5 breathtakingly diverse. And yet in all of these societies, the&lt;br /&gt;6 man and the woman form something called marriage.&lt;br /&gt;7 And it simply is erroneous to imagine that this&lt;br /&gt;8 foundational aspect of the institution is the artifact of a&lt;br /&gt;9 particular religious doctrine or a religion generally.&lt;br /&gt;10 And I further believe that what I have just said is&lt;br /&gt;11 noncontroversial amongst scholars. I simply do not think that&lt;br /&gt;12 this is a controversial statement among people who have looked&lt;br /&gt;13 at this.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. You don't -- you -- you don't disagree, do you, that&lt;br /&gt;15 marriage is sacred to many religions, modern religions?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Well, of course. I mean, marriage -- religion is a very&lt;br /&gt;17 powerful influence in human affairs in all areas of life. And&lt;br /&gt;18 marriage is no exception.&lt;br /&gt;19 And so, for example, in so many societies we see that&lt;br /&gt;20 individuals who marry, they believe that that promise is, in&lt;br /&gt;21 part, a sacred promise. They believe that they are promising&lt;br /&gt;22 something to God or to a higher power, in addition to the&lt;br /&gt;23 promise to the spouse.&lt;br /&gt;24 And many people have a religious -- you know, they --&lt;br /&gt;25 the marriage ceremony occurs in a church or a synagogue or a&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2764&lt;br /&gt;1 mosque. And so, of course, in -- and sometimes religious&lt;br /&gt;2 officials are also agents of the state, in actually legally&lt;br /&gt;3 performing the -- the marriage -- legally performing the&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;5 So there is -- in these and many other ways -- oh,&lt;br /&gt;6 and many people draw from religion the -- the -- the&lt;br /&gt;7 inspiration to live up to the calling of the marital vocation,&lt;br /&gt;8 and so forth.&lt;br /&gt;9 So with these and other ways there is a strong sense,&lt;br /&gt;10 certainly in our nation, and I would say generally across the&lt;br /&gt;11 world, there is a -- this interconnection or this, I guess you&lt;br /&gt;12 might say, this strong influence of religion on this dimension&lt;br /&gt;13 of life.&lt;br /&gt;14 You might call marriage, in so many societies, a&lt;br /&gt;15 religiously-informed institution in some ways. But I'm trying&lt;br /&gt;16 to make the distinction between that and saying that the thing&lt;br /&gt;17 itself, the marriage institution itself, particularly its&lt;br /&gt;18 man-woman basis, which is universal -- I'm -- I'm -- I'm trying&lt;br /&gt;19 to be very clear, that this does not derive from religious&lt;br /&gt;20 doctrine. It does not derive from the concept of religion. It&lt;br /&gt;21 does not derive from any ideas about the supernatural.&lt;br /&gt;22 It is what scholars call a natural institution. It&lt;br /&gt;23 derives from facts of our embodiment and reproduction that do&lt;br /&gt;24 not call upon supernatural beliefs for their coherence.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Do you believe that the customary man-woman definition of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2765&lt;br /&gt;1 marriage is attributable in some fashion or some way to&lt;br /&gt;2 anti-homosexual prejudices or hostility?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I do not. I believe that homophobia is a real presence in&lt;br /&gt;4 our society and, I'm pretty confident, in many, many other&lt;br /&gt;5 societies around the world. And I regret and deplore it, and&lt;br /&gt;6 wish it to go away.&lt;br /&gt;7 As I have sought to look at the reasons for the&lt;br /&gt;8 evolution of marriage in human societies, as I've sought to&lt;br /&gt;9 understand and wrestle with the evidence about why marriage&lt;br /&gt;10 evolved in the first place, how it became institutionalized&lt;br /&gt;11 through law and custom, how it became universal in its reach&lt;br /&gt;12 and impact, and how those custodians of the institution over&lt;br /&gt;13 time, across time and around the world, have sought with words,&lt;br /&gt;14 both written and oral, to state the reasons for the&lt;br /&gt;15 institution, the purposes of the institution, the goals of the&lt;br /&gt;16 institution, what the thing was trying to do and why it&lt;br /&gt;17 mattered so much, I am not able to find any evidence that&lt;br /&gt;18 animus toward gay and lesbian people or that hatefulness toward&lt;br /&gt;19 homosexuality -- homosexual persons, I am not able to find&lt;br /&gt;20 evidence that that was a central component of how they&lt;br /&gt;21 understood their activities, how they understood their&lt;br /&gt;22 commitment to the marital institution, why they justified their&lt;br /&gt;23 participation in the marital institution, or why they&lt;br /&gt;24 established the laws and customs surrounding the institution&lt;br /&gt;25 that they did.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2766&lt;br /&gt;1 Now, I am not saying that no such evidence exists.&lt;br /&gt;2 And if evidence -- such evidence exists, I would welcome -- I&lt;br /&gt;3 would -- I want to know it. But I'm telling you that I have&lt;br /&gt;4 looked for it, and I cannot find it.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Well, to return now, then, to your earlier testimony that&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage is designed, I think as you put it, to regulate&lt;br /&gt;7 filiation, why does it matter whether the child is raised by&lt;br /&gt;8 his or her own biological parents?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Well, it matters for two large clusters of reasons. And&lt;br /&gt;10 I'll just go into this, very briefly.&lt;br /&gt;11 But the first one somewhat accords with our&lt;br /&gt;12 commonsense understanding of things. But the scholars have&lt;br /&gt;13 given it a name called "kin altruism." And it really means,&lt;br /&gt;14 you know, you care a lot about who you are related to. You&lt;br /&gt;15 care about your relatives. You care about who your parents&lt;br /&gt;16 are, who your child is.&lt;br /&gt;17 And you would be -- they have measured this with&lt;br /&gt;18 great precision. You typically sacrifice more for people to&lt;br /&gt;19 whom you are related. You typically extend yourself, whether&lt;br /&gt;20 it's risking your life or loaning money or inconveniencing&lt;br /&gt;21 yourself, on their behalf.&lt;br /&gt;22 They have really looked at this fairly carefully.&lt;br /&gt;23 And this notion of kin altruism means that in humans because we&lt;br /&gt;24 seem to be -- we seem to care a lot about where we came from&lt;br /&gt;25 physically, and we seem to care a lot about the people to whom&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2767&lt;br /&gt;1 we are related, particularly closely related.&lt;br /&gt;2 So that if you have a -- a child to be cared for, if&lt;br /&gt;3 you had your druthers and you would -- for this reason you&lt;br /&gt;4 would want, if you wanted what was best for the child, you&lt;br /&gt;5 would want that child -- other things being equal, of course,&lt;br /&gt;6 you would want that child to be cared for by the two&lt;br /&gt;7 individuals who are most closely related to the child. And&lt;br /&gt;8 that would be the child's mother and the child's father. And,&lt;br /&gt;9 of course, that's how we humans have organized ourselves for&lt;br /&gt;10 millennia now.&lt;br /&gt;11 The second body of evidence on this concerns child&lt;br /&gt;12 outcome studies. And here we shift, now, to the field,&lt;br /&gt;13 principally of sociology. And we are not looking at&lt;br /&gt;14 motivation. We are not looking at the self-sacrificing nature&lt;br /&gt;15 of kinship. We're just looking at outcomes for the children.&lt;br /&gt;16 And, here, there is a very large body of literature.&lt;br /&gt;17 My organization has been quite involved in this kind of work,&lt;br /&gt;18 now, for 20 years. And there's many, many others, scholars and&lt;br /&gt;19 researchers, who have pursued this quite carefully. And I&lt;br /&gt;20 would say that there is a broad consensus among the scholars in&lt;br /&gt;21 this field.&lt;br /&gt;22 And I would further say that this consensus grows&lt;br /&gt;23 stronger almost every year, because of the accumulating weight&lt;br /&gt;24 of evidence that the optimal environment for children is if&lt;br /&gt;25 they are raised from birth by their own natural mother who is&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2768&lt;br /&gt;1 married to their own natural father.&lt;br /&gt;2 And, of course, one wants to say that this isn't&lt;br /&gt;3 always possible. Sometimes this family form fails. Sometimes&lt;br /&gt;4 alternative family forms different than that succeed.&lt;br /&gt;5 When we get to the level of specificity and&lt;br /&gt;6 individual cases, there is quite a bit of complexity to the&lt;br /&gt;7 situation, and the scholars have spent many years and many&lt;br /&gt;8 effort trying to tease all of this out.&lt;br /&gt;9 But if you just look at the weight of evidence and&lt;br /&gt;10 you look at the most distinguished -- well, I think, among -- I&lt;br /&gt;11 believe, the most distinguished scholars in this field, they&lt;br /&gt;12 are increasingly clear and emphatic that based on the available&lt;br /&gt;13 evidence today, it is clear that -- that the optimal outcome&lt;br /&gt;14 for children, in terms of outcomes, the optimal environment for&lt;br /&gt;15 children, in terms of outcomes, whether it be the likelihood of&lt;br /&gt;16 living in poverty, whether it be the likelihood and mental and&lt;br /&gt;17 emotional distress and suffering, whether it be juvenile&lt;br /&gt;18 delinquency, or educational achievement, or occupational&lt;br /&gt;19 success, or the likelihood of experiencing abuse and neglect,&lt;br /&gt;20 that across the range of outcome measurements, that this family&lt;br /&gt;21 form of the two biological parent, married couple home, in a&lt;br /&gt;22 stable marriage, is the best model from the child's point of&lt;br /&gt;23 view.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. In that connection, I'd like you to turn to the document&lt;br /&gt;25 behind tab 15 in your binder. Will you identify that document&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2769&lt;br /&gt;1 when you've reached it.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. This is a -- a summary in the form of a research brief, of&lt;br /&gt;3 research carried out by a group of scholars, a group of three&lt;br /&gt;4 scholars from Child Trends. This is a nonpartisan research&lt;br /&gt;5 group in Washington, D.C. And this brief, this summary of&lt;br /&gt;6 research, was published in, I believe -- I believe 2002. And&lt;br /&gt;7 it's called "Marriage from a Child's Perspective."&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Would you turn to page 6, please.&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And in the right-hand column, about halfway down the page,&lt;br /&gt;11 the paragraph beginning, "First," would you please read that&lt;br /&gt;12 for the Court.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;14 "Research clearly demonstrates that family&lt;br /&gt;15 structure matters for children. And the&lt;br /&gt;16 family structure that helps children the most&lt;br /&gt;17 is a family headed by two biological parents&lt;br /&gt;18 in a low-conflict marriage. Children in&lt;br /&gt;19 single-parent families, children born to&lt;br /&gt;20 unmarried mothers, and children in&lt;br /&gt;21 stepfamilies or cohabiting relationships face&lt;br /&gt;22 higher risks of poor outcomes than do&lt;br /&gt;23 children in intact families headed by two&lt;br /&gt;24 biological parents. Parental divorce is also&lt;br /&gt;25 linked to a range of poorer academic and&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2770&lt;br /&gt;1 behavioral outcomes among children. There&lt;br /&gt;2 is, thus, value for children in promoting&lt;br /&gt;3 strong, stable marriages between biological&lt;br /&gt;4 parents."&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And was this among the research that you have consulted&lt;br /&gt;6 and relied upon in arriving at your opinions in this matter?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Yes, because of the reputation of the Child Trends&lt;br /&gt;8 scholars, because it was a summation of work done by a number&lt;br /&gt;9 of them over time, and because, you know -- well, I'll just&lt;br /&gt;10 stop there. But, yes, it is.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, this document is already in&lt;br /&gt;12 evidence, is my understanding.&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: Very well. 26 is in.&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Turn, now, to the document behind tab 16, please.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. This is a book called Growing Up With A Single Parent.&lt;br /&gt;17 It's by Sara McLanahan and her colleague Gary Sandefur. And it&lt;br /&gt;18 was published by Harvard University Press in 1994.&lt;br /&gt;19 McLanahan is one of the most prominent family&lt;br /&gt;20 sociologists in the country. She teaches at Princeton.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Please, turn to page 1 of the document. And in the second&lt;br /&gt;22 full paragraph, the third sentence, will you read that sentence&lt;br /&gt;23 to the -- about the middle of the paragraph, please.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;25 "We have been studying this question for ten&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2771&lt;br /&gt;1 years. And our opinion -- and in our&lt;br /&gt;2 opinion, the evidence is quite clear,&lt;br /&gt;3 children who grow up in a household with only&lt;br /&gt;4 one biological parent are worse off, on&lt;br /&gt;5 average, than children who grow up in a&lt;br /&gt;6 household with both of their biological&lt;br /&gt;7 parents, regardless of the parents' race or&lt;br /&gt;8 educational background, regardless of whether&lt;br /&gt;9 the parents are married when the child is&lt;br /&gt;10 born, and regardless of whether the resident&lt;br /&gt;11 parent remarries."&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And was this document among those you have relied upon?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, this, too, is in evidence&lt;br /&gt;15 already.&lt;br /&gt;16 THE COURT: Very well.&lt;br /&gt;17 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, does the customary man-woman definition&lt;br /&gt;19 of marriage benefit only the child?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Well, it certainly benefits the child. But it also&lt;br /&gt;21 benefits the mother and the father and society as a whole.&lt;br /&gt;22 The mother because it lessens the likelihood of her&lt;br /&gt;23 having to raise the child alone and isolated. The father&lt;br /&gt;24 because it connects him to his own child and to the mother of&lt;br /&gt;25 his child, connects him to the process of generativity in a way&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2772&lt;br /&gt;1 that would be unlikely for him to achieve any other way. And&lt;br /&gt;2 society as a whole because these are the family units that are&lt;br /&gt;3 most likely to produce good outcomes for children and, thus, be&lt;br /&gt;4 the kind of seedbeds from which come good citizens and people&lt;br /&gt;5 who are, you know, more likely to be, you know, positive&lt;br /&gt;6 contributors to society.&lt;br /&gt;7 So it's a human -- a kind of human capital question.&lt;br /&gt;8 It's the highest level of investment that we can make in&lt;br /&gt;9 children, is to give them the great gift, really, of growing up&lt;br /&gt;10 in this family form.&lt;br /&gt;11 It doesn't -- it doesn't guarantee success. And&lt;br /&gt;12 growing up outside of this form certainly does not guarantee&lt;br /&gt;13 failure. But it shifts the odds in a very dramatic way, that&lt;br /&gt;14 has been very carefully documented by the scholars.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. I'd like to turn now to the concept of&lt;br /&gt;16 deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;17 MR. COOPER: I would like to publish to the screen,&lt;br /&gt;18 Your Honor, demonstrative number 8.&lt;br /&gt;19 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, could you please describe this concept of&lt;br /&gt;22 deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. It's a term that comes from sociology. It has scholars&lt;br /&gt;24 who study it. There is a literature on it. The first paper I&lt;br /&gt;25 ever worked on at the Institute was called "Marriage in&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2773&lt;br /&gt;1 America," published in 1995. And it anchored, it centered in&lt;br /&gt;2 part, on large part, on the concept of deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;3 I wish it was a prettier word to say or listen to.&lt;br /&gt;4 But what it really means is, you have an institution&lt;br /&gt;5 which can be briefly defined as a relatively stable pattern of&lt;br /&gt;6 rules and structures intended to meet social needs. This is&lt;br /&gt;7 what, in brief, we think of when we think of a social&lt;br /&gt;8 institution.&lt;br /&gt;9 Marriage is a social -- is one social institution.&lt;br /&gt;10 The concept of deinstitutionalization is when -- to speak&lt;br /&gt;11 briefly -- that institution weakens. That institution becomes&lt;br /&gt;12 frailer.&lt;br /&gt;13 Its rules become thinner or removed altogether, and,&lt;br /&gt;14 therefore, the rules that govern the institution become less&lt;br /&gt;15 comprehensible and clear and less -- therefore, less&lt;br /&gt;16 authoritative.&lt;br /&gt;17 And when its structures become less stable, less able&lt;br /&gt;18 to give robust shape to the institution, it's like a -- kind of&lt;br /&gt;19 a shrinking process. And as a result of&lt;br /&gt;20 deinstitutionalization -- you don't have to think about&lt;br /&gt;21 marriage. You could think about, you know, a baseball team or&lt;br /&gt;22 a museum, or any -- any institution. When you take away its&lt;br /&gt;23 rules and you weaken its structures, scholars say that you're&lt;br /&gt;24 seeing deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;25 And so that the people, the participants in the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2774&lt;br /&gt;1 institution or the possible participants in the institution&lt;br /&gt;2 become over time less loyal to it, less -- they understand it&lt;br /&gt;3 less. They -- they -- some of them -- they increasingly -- the&lt;br /&gt;4 institution loses esteem in the society. It loses respect. It&lt;br /&gt;5 loses its sense of being held in high regard. And the&lt;br /&gt;6 institution becomes less and less able to carry out its&lt;br /&gt;7 contributions to the society.&lt;br /&gt;8 This concept of deinstitutionalization is, I think,&lt;br /&gt;9 a -- a critical one for people who are studying the status and&lt;br /&gt;10 future of any institution.&lt;br /&gt;11 But, in particular, it has been of great value to&lt;br /&gt;12 scholars looking at -- at recent trends in marriage, because in&lt;br /&gt;13 the United States, particularly in recent decades, the last&lt;br /&gt;14 three, four, five decades, there has been a marked process of&lt;br /&gt;15 deinstitutionalization of marriage, with very numerous and&lt;br /&gt;16 serious consequences for children and for society as a whole.&lt;br /&gt;17 So it's an absolutely pivotal concept, if we want to&lt;br /&gt;18 understand where the institution is going and what&lt;br /&gt;19 opportunities we may have to -- to come to its aid.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. I think you did, just now, testify that the institution of&lt;br /&gt;21 marriage is -- has been weakened, I think, to paraphrase your&lt;br /&gt;22 testimony, by deinstitutionalization already.&lt;br /&gt;23 What are some of the manifestations of that process?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, if you look, for example, at rates of out-of-wedlock&lt;br /&gt;25 childbearing, you know, five or six decades ago only a small&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2775&lt;br /&gt;1 fraction of U.S. children were born to unmarried parents.&lt;br /&gt;2 Whereas, the most latest data tell us that today about&lt;br /&gt;3 38 percent of children in the U.S. are born to unmarried&lt;br /&gt;4 parents.&lt;br /&gt;5 So that over, say, a five-decade period, if you go&lt;br /&gt;6 back to 1960, that would be a very dramatic example. That rate&lt;br /&gt;7 of growth over a five-decade period, I think, constitutes a&lt;br /&gt;8 very dramatic example of the weakening of the marriage&lt;br /&gt;9 institution.&lt;br /&gt;10 You also would need to look at rates of divorce. The&lt;br /&gt;11 United States has probably the highest divorce rate in the&lt;br /&gt;12 world.&lt;br /&gt;13 And so, as a result, people are -- the weakening of&lt;br /&gt;14 the ideal of marital permanence suggests a lessening loyalty to&lt;br /&gt;15 the institution, and the rise of nonmarital cohabitation; the&lt;br /&gt;16 increasing mainstreaming of third-party participation in&lt;br /&gt;17 procreation and artificial assisted reproductive technologies&lt;br /&gt;18 that disturb the bond between the -- disturb the biological&lt;br /&gt;19 bond between the genitor and the child; and, last, but for our&lt;br /&gt;20 purposes certainly not least, the -- the spread of the idea and&lt;br /&gt;21 reality of same-sex marriage in the view of -- I think, the&lt;br /&gt;22 view of leading scholars, is another aspect or manifestation of&lt;br /&gt;23 this current trend of deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;24 And I meant to say just for our purposes today, you&lt;br /&gt;25 know, heterosexuals, you know, did the deinstitutionalizing. I&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2776&lt;br /&gt;1 mean, you know, if we go back and look at the trends I&lt;br /&gt;2 described, it's very clear that this -- this was not --&lt;br /&gt;3 deinstitutionalization is not something that just cropped up a&lt;br /&gt;4 few years ago whenever we began discussing the possibility of&lt;br /&gt;5 extending equal marriage rights to gay and lesbian people. It&lt;br /&gt;6 predates all that.&lt;br /&gt;7 But what I am saying is that the scholars are telling&lt;br /&gt;8 us that the process of deinstitutionalization would be&lt;br /&gt;9 furthered and accelerated significantly by adopting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Well, what impact, in your opinion, would redefining&lt;br /&gt;12 marriage to include same-sex couples have on marriage, in this&lt;br /&gt;13 deinstitutionalization process?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. It's hard to know because you're in some important ways,&lt;br /&gt;15 you know, predicting what will happen in the future.&lt;br /&gt;16 My best judgment is that if we move toward a&lt;br /&gt;17 widespread adoption of same-sex marriage, I believe the effect&lt;br /&gt;18 will be to significantly further and in some respects culminate&lt;br /&gt;19 the process of deinstitutionalization of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;20 If -- if you take an institution that for all of its&lt;br /&gt;21 long history has been understood to have defined public&lt;br /&gt;22 purposes, and through changing its definition you transfer it&lt;br /&gt;23 from the public -- you transfer it from a child-centered public&lt;br /&gt;24 institution to an adult-centered private institution, a&lt;br /&gt;25 question of private ordering among couples, you have in some&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2777&lt;br /&gt;1 ways, you know, completed -- that's a culminating trend toward&lt;br /&gt;2 the erasure of marriage's public defined contribution to&lt;br /&gt;3 society.&lt;br /&gt;4 And I think that it's likely that, you know, that --&lt;br /&gt;5 as I say, this did not trigger the trend of&lt;br /&gt;6 deinstitutionalization. Deinstitutionalization has been with&lt;br /&gt;7 us now for a while. But it's a live issue, and there are many&lt;br /&gt;8 people who would like to reverse the trend.&lt;br /&gt;9 But I think the evidence is quite compelling that if&lt;br /&gt;10 we move to a widespread adoption of same-sex marriage, we will&lt;br /&gt;11 very significantly accelerate the process of&lt;br /&gt;12 deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;13 And the consequence of that will be to weaken the&lt;br /&gt;14 role of marriage, generally, in society. And the consequences&lt;br /&gt;15 of that will be felt by everyone in the society.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. You mentioned earlier other scholars who have recognized&lt;br /&gt;17 the relationship between same-sex marriage or the prospect of&lt;br /&gt;18 it and deinstitutionalization. I want you to turn, now, to the&lt;br /&gt;19 document behind tab 17 of your binder.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And what is that, please?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. This is an article by Andrew Cherlin, who's a prominent&lt;br /&gt;23 family sociologist. He teaches at Johns Hopkins. He is a&lt;br /&gt;24 proponent of same-sex marriage. And this article is entitled,&lt;br /&gt;25 "The Deinstitutionalization of American Marriage."&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2778&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Would you turn to page 850 of that excerpt. And if you'll&lt;br /&gt;2 look in the right-hand column of the page, first full paragraph&lt;br /&gt;3 there, would you read the first sentence.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;5 "The most recent development in the&lt;br /&gt;6 deinstitutionalization of marriage is the&lt;br /&gt;7 movement to legalize same-sex marriage."&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. And does this -- is this authority among those you've&lt;br /&gt;9 relied upon to arrive at your judgment on this subject?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, this is -- this document is&lt;br /&gt;12 marked as DIX49, and I'd like to offer it into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;13 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: DIX49 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;15 (Defendants' Exhibit 49 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. COOPER: Thank you, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;17 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And if you'll continue in your binder to the document&lt;br /&gt;19 behind tab 18.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Yes. This is a article called "The Struggle for Same-Sex&lt;br /&gt;21 Marriage," written by Professor Norval Glenn, who's a prominent&lt;br /&gt;22 family sociologist from the University of Texas at Austin.&lt;br /&gt;23 This was published in 2004.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Would you turn to page 26 of that document, please. And&lt;br /&gt;25 in the right-hand column at the top of the page, if you'll read&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2779&lt;br /&gt;1 the passage beginning with the word "however," please.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. (As read)&lt;br /&gt;3 "However, acceptance of the arguments made by&lt;br /&gt;4 some advocates of same-sex marriage would&lt;br /&gt;5 bring this trend to its logical conclusion.&lt;br /&gt;6 Namely, the definition of marriage as being&lt;br /&gt;7 for the benefit of the couple who enter into&lt;br /&gt;8 it, rather than as an institution for the&lt;br /&gt;9 benefit of society, the community, or any&lt;br /&gt;10 social entity larger than the couple."&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And was this among the sources that you relied upon for&lt;br /&gt;12 your thinking on this?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;14 And I -- it may be worth noting that these two&lt;br /&gt;15 authors who have just -- I've just cited, are both prominent&lt;br /&gt;16 scholars. But they are on opposite sides of the policy&lt;br /&gt;17 question on whether we should adopt gay marriage.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And are there others who -- who have identified this --&lt;br /&gt;19 this phenomenon of deinstitutionalization of marriage in&lt;br /&gt;20 connection with same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, this document is marked&lt;br /&gt;23 DIX60. And I'd like now to offer it into evidence.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. BOIES: No objection, Your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2780&lt;br /&gt;1 THE COURT: Very well. 60 is admitted.&lt;br /&gt;2 And would you remind me just where on page 26 the&lt;br /&gt;3 witness was referring.&lt;br /&gt;4 (Defendants' Exhibit 60 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Missed that.&lt;br /&gt;7 MR. COOPER: Very top of the page of the right-hand&lt;br /&gt;8 column, begins with the word "however" there, the second word&lt;br /&gt;9 on that column.&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. COOPER: Yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, how confident are you that redefining&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage to include same-sex marriage, same-sex couples, would&lt;br /&gt;15 further the deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. It's impossible to be completely sure about a prediction&lt;br /&gt;17 of future events. I don't think anyone can.&lt;br /&gt;18 But I do have a great deal of confidence in the&lt;br /&gt;19 likelihood of the weakening of marriage through the process of&lt;br /&gt;20 deinstitutionalization to a greater degree than would be the&lt;br /&gt;21 case otherwise, if we move toward the adoption, widespread&lt;br /&gt;22 adoption of same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;23 And, you know, if you think about it, it's really&lt;br /&gt;24 just hard to imagine how it could be otherwise.&lt;br /&gt;25 If you change the definition of the thing, it's hard&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2781&lt;br /&gt;1 to imagine how it could have no impact on the thing.&lt;br /&gt;2 (Laughter)&lt;br /&gt;3 If you change the structure of the thing, it's hard&lt;br /&gt;4 to imagine how you could not have an effect on the content of&lt;br /&gt;5 the thing.&lt;br /&gt;6 And if you decisively move an institution from the&lt;br /&gt;7 public realm to a question overwhelmingly of private ordering&lt;br /&gt;8 rather than public purpose that can be specified, it's hard to&lt;br /&gt;9 imagine a more textbook example of what scholars mean when they&lt;br /&gt;10 say "deinstitutionalization."&lt;br /&gt;11 And we do know, from evidence, that the process of&lt;br /&gt;12 deinstitutionalization has already weakened marriage, and could&lt;br /&gt;13 weaken it more in the future.&lt;br /&gt;14 So while I don't think anyone here can say that they&lt;br /&gt;15 know from scientific study based on data, that they know with&lt;br /&gt;16 absolute certainty that this will happen, I sincerely believe&lt;br /&gt;17 that this is the most -- this is a likely outcome, this is a&lt;br /&gt;18 likely result of adopting same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;19 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, I'd like to publish, now,&lt;br /&gt;20 demonstrative -- my next demonstrative, I think, is number 9.&lt;br /&gt;21 Yes. And ask the witness a series of questions -- I'm getting&lt;br /&gt;22 close to the end of the examination, Your Honor -- a series of&lt;br /&gt;23 questions about the consequences that he believes will likely&lt;br /&gt;24 flow from redefining marriage to include same-sex couples.&lt;br /&gt;25 (Document displayed.)&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2782&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And the first question I'd like to ask is this:&lt;br /&gt;3 How, in your opinion, would the further&lt;br /&gt;4 deinstitutionalization of marriage caused by the legalization&lt;br /&gt;5 of same-sex marriage manifest itself in society?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I'm sorry. Would you mind restating the question?&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. In what ways, in your opinion, will extending marriage to&lt;br /&gt;8 same-sex couples and, therefore, in your opinion&lt;br /&gt;9 deinstitutionalize further the deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage, manifest itself in society?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. As we have discussed now, I think a likely consequence is&lt;br /&gt;12 a -- an acceleration of deinstitutionalization or devaluation&lt;br /&gt;13 that would help to produce higher rates of non-participation in&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage, higher rates of fragility of one-parent homes,&lt;br /&gt;15 divorce; the general -- you know, all of the consequences that&lt;br /&gt;16 we have discussed in the last hour or so on -- of the weakening&lt;br /&gt;17 of the institution relating to divorced non-marital&lt;br /&gt;18 cohabitation or children outside of charge and so forth.&lt;br /&gt;19 My -- my fear, you know, really, and my conclusion is&lt;br /&gt;20 that this is a likely -- this is a likely outcome.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. How, in your opinion, would redefining marriage to include&lt;br /&gt;22 same-sex couples impact the traditional view that a child needs&lt;br /&gt;23 both its mother and its father?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Well, I have had some personal experience with this,&lt;br /&gt;25 because since 1995 I may have spent as much time as anybody in&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2783&lt;br /&gt;1 the country saying children need their fathers. And it seems&lt;br /&gt;2 like it ought to be a simple idea that shouldn't get you in a&lt;br /&gt;3 lot of trouble, but I can tell you it does.&lt;br /&gt;4 And one of the things that I think will happen, and I&lt;br /&gt;5 can already see it beginning to happen, is that simply saying&lt;br /&gt;6 publicly that a child needs and deserves her father will go&lt;br /&gt;7 from being what it is now, which is mildly controversial, will&lt;br /&gt;8 go to being viewed as simply inappropriate public speech, as&lt;br /&gt;9 really beyond the pale, as offensive, as divisive, as&lt;br /&gt;10 mean-spirited.&lt;br /&gt;11 And I -- I -- you know, if -- it's hard for me to see&lt;br /&gt;12 how -- if you cannot speak publicly about a value, then it's&lt;br /&gt;13 hard for me to see how that could do anything other than to&lt;br /&gt;14 weaken the value over time if you cannot say its name.&lt;br /&gt;15 And I have had personal experience with this, as well&lt;br /&gt;16 as my observation. And I may sound simplistic, but simply&lt;br /&gt;17 being able to say that children need -- a child needs its&lt;br /&gt;18 mother and father, if that becomes just impermissible in any&lt;br /&gt;19 venue, a church, a school, a civic group, a PTA meeting, I&lt;br /&gt;20 think we lose something precious.&lt;br /&gt;21 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I object and move to strike.&lt;br /&gt;22 That goes beyond even the most expansive definition of&lt;br /&gt;23 expertise even in a bench trial, I respectfully submit.&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Very well. I will overrule the&lt;br /&gt;25 objection.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2784&lt;br /&gt;1 You indicated you are getting close to the end?&lt;br /&gt;2 MR. COOPER: Your Honor, we're approaching it&lt;br /&gt;3 rapidly. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;4 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. What impact, in your opinion, Mr. Blankenhorn, would&lt;br /&gt;6 extending marriage to same-sex couples have on alternative&lt;br /&gt;7 marriage forms and family structures?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I think it would have the impact of further mainstreaming&lt;br /&gt;9 the acceptability and prevalence of these alternative family&lt;br /&gt;10 forms.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And what, in particular, do you have in your mind there?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. You know, when Canada adopted same-sex marriage several&lt;br /&gt;13 years ago, they struck the term "natural parent" from Canadian&lt;br /&gt;14 law and replaced it with the term "legal parent." And the&lt;br /&gt;15 implications of that, I think, are very profound in terms of&lt;br /&gt;16 transfer of power to the state and so forth.&lt;br /&gt;17 But it indicates that there is a growing trend for&lt;br /&gt;18 family forms in which the child will not be raised by her -- by&lt;br /&gt;19 her own biological parent.&lt;br /&gt;20 So there is the diminution, the diminished likelihood&lt;br /&gt;21 of -- there is a -- sorry, an increased likelihood of children&lt;br /&gt;22 being raised in family forms other than her own two parents,&lt;br /&gt;23 her own two natural parents.&lt;br /&gt;24 There is also the possibility, you know -- there&lt;br /&gt;25 could be the possibility of more public willingness to consider&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2785&lt;br /&gt;1 family forms, such as polygamy that involve more than two&lt;br /&gt;2 people.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. And what's the -- what's the basis of your concern about&lt;br /&gt;4 that?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I think polygamist marriages are not in the interests of&lt;br /&gt;6 women especially and, also, not really in the interests of&lt;br /&gt;7 society.&lt;br /&gt;8 There is already a standing history of this in our&lt;br /&gt;9 society and many others. The concept that marriage involves&lt;br /&gt;10 only two people is the -- probably the weakest of marriage's&lt;br /&gt;11 core rules. It's already tested significantly by polygamy and&lt;br /&gt;12 polyandry and polyamory.&lt;br /&gt;13 So I think if the rule of -- if the concept of&lt;br /&gt;14 opposites -- you know, the concept of man/woman goes, it's hard&lt;br /&gt;15 to imagine, really -- and this is already being actively, you&lt;br /&gt;16 know, reviewed by scholars in the journals and it's hard to --&lt;br /&gt;17 well, I'll just put it this way.&lt;br /&gt;18 It seems likely that over time this -- this aspect of&lt;br /&gt;19 the institution as well will come under criticism and calls for&lt;br /&gt;20 reform.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. And why would redefining marriage as an adult-centric&lt;br /&gt;22 institution, as you have put it, increase the possibility of&lt;br /&gt;23 this?&lt;br /&gt;24 THE COURT: Of what?&lt;br /&gt;25 MR. COOPER: Of polygamy being an acceptable&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2786&lt;br /&gt;1 alternative family form.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. Because the man/woman customary basis of marriage is&lt;br /&gt;3 reinforced by and is, in turn, reinforces the idea of limiting&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage to two. And if you knock out one of the pillars, the&lt;br /&gt;5 other one becomes less comprehensible and, therefore, less&lt;br /&gt;6 defensible.&lt;br /&gt;7 BY MR. COOPER:&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;9 Mr. Blankenhorn, I would now like to turn to the last&lt;br /&gt;10 subject, and that is the issue of domestic partnerships.&lt;br /&gt;11 And I would like to ask you what your position is on&lt;br /&gt;12 domestic partnerships?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I support them. I think that they could be part of a kind&lt;br /&gt;14 of a humane compromise in which, on the one hand, we protect&lt;br /&gt;15 marriage and allow it to continue to carry out its distinctive&lt;br /&gt;16 contribution to society, while at the same time extending&lt;br /&gt;17 protections and recognition to gay and lesbian couples.&lt;br /&gt;18 I don't think it's a perfect solution, but I do think&lt;br /&gt;19 it's a possibly humane compromise on this issue. And I so&lt;br /&gt;20 stated in an article that I wrote in the New York Times, I&lt;br /&gt;21 co-authored Jonathan Rauch last year.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Who is Jonathan Rauch?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. He is a visiting scholar at the Brookings Institution. He&lt;br /&gt;24 is a prominent proponent of same-sex marriage and his most&lt;br /&gt;25 recent book is called Gay Marriage: Why It's Good For Gays,&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2787&lt;br /&gt;1 Good For Straights and Good For America.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And when did you publish this article you just referenced&lt;br /&gt;3 in the New York Times?&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I think it was February of 2009.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Have you always held the view that you have just&lt;br /&gt;6 articulated?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. No. I have actually come pretty much full circle on the&lt;br /&gt;8 issue. I really -- I really hadn't thought about it very much.&lt;br /&gt;9 I was really focused on the topic of marriage and I had not&lt;br /&gt;10 given the topic of domestic partnerships much thought. I&lt;br /&gt;11 certainly hadn't given it any careful consideration until about&lt;br /&gt;12 two years ago.&lt;br /&gt;13 There was an event in Washington D.C., a debate -- we&lt;br /&gt;14 call them conversations now, but we called it then a debate --&lt;br /&gt;15 with Jonathan Rauch and he kind of publicly challenged me and&lt;br /&gt;16 called me out on this topic and said, Your thinking about&lt;br /&gt;17 domestic partnerships is immature and wrong and you have to&lt;br /&gt;18 rethink it and, you know, it's -- I have also, speaking --&lt;br /&gt;19 Jonathan said he also was evolving his position on the topic&lt;br /&gt;20 and he really challenged me in that forum to consider more&lt;br /&gt;21 carefully this idea, and I told him that I would, and I did.&lt;br /&gt;22 And that began a kind of a journey with him&lt;br /&gt;23 personally and, also, with other leaders in the push, who were&lt;br /&gt;24 pro-same-sex marriage, where I tried to devote some real --&lt;br /&gt;25 some real time to the topic and that led then to Rauch and I&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2788&lt;br /&gt;1 writing the article endorsing civil unions or domestic&lt;br /&gt;2 partnerships in the New York Times.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Why hadn't you thought carefully about the issue of&lt;br /&gt;4 domestic partnerships prior to that time?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. I didn't really think I had -- I didn't feel that I had to&lt;br /&gt;6 think about them carefully at that time.&lt;br /&gt;7 I -- I went into my first conversations about this&lt;br /&gt;8 with a kind of -- an instinctive or just a general feeling that&lt;br /&gt;9 if you set up a comparable institution to marriage, that that&lt;br /&gt;10 could have a weakening effect on marriage because --&lt;br /&gt;11 particularly if that comparable institution was open to&lt;br /&gt;12 opposite-sex couples as well, I was worried that you would have&lt;br /&gt;13 kind of a, you know, smorgasbord effect of choosing -- and I&lt;br /&gt;14 thought that that diversification would possibly weaken the&lt;br /&gt;15 marital institution.&lt;br /&gt;16 So I was -- I was very concerned that that not&lt;br /&gt;17 happen, so I was personally suspicious of endorsing domestic&lt;br /&gt;18 partnerships for that reason.&lt;br /&gt;19 And the other reason was that Rauch and the others,&lt;br /&gt;20 you know, the people that I was talking to were just very&lt;br /&gt;21 vociferous in their denunciation of civil unions and domestic&lt;br /&gt;22 partnerships. They just said it was a horrible idea; that it&lt;br /&gt;23 was discriminatory; that it was -- that this was invidious;&lt;br /&gt;24 this was demeaning, two gay and lesbian people; and this was a&lt;br /&gt;25 form of unequal treatment.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2789&lt;br /&gt;1 And I -- I accepted that view. I was strongly&lt;br /&gt;2 influenced by that view. In fact, I repeated that view. Back&lt;br /&gt;3 of the bus, you know, discriminatory and wrong and unfair.&lt;br /&gt;4 And so for those reasons, my concerns about diluting&lt;br /&gt;5 marriage by setting up this dual institutional structure and,&lt;br /&gt;6 also, the concerns about just the -- I guess you might say the&lt;br /&gt;7 un- -- the unfairness, the idea that this would be&lt;br /&gt;8 discriminatory, I embraced that -- I embraced both of those&lt;br /&gt;9 points of view, just as an initial way of thinking about the&lt;br /&gt;10 topic without having written or thought much about it, but --&lt;br /&gt;11 and it was really then in the meeting with Rauch in 2007 and&lt;br /&gt;12 then the next two years I tried to rethink it afresh. I tried&lt;br /&gt;13 to think about it deeply and carefully with Rauch and others&lt;br /&gt;14 and that led to the written article about the subject that I&lt;br /&gt;15 published with him last year.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. I take it you no longer agree with the views that you had&lt;br /&gt;17 on the subject before?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I still worry that domestic partnerships could -- could&lt;br /&gt;19 possibly have a weakening effect on the marital institution,&lt;br /&gt;20 but I think that it's something we should do anyway because of&lt;br /&gt;21 other issues involved, and I have satisfied myself on this&lt;br /&gt;22 question of fairness. That's been the big issue for me, you&lt;br /&gt;23 know, personally. The issue of, is it unjust to have a&lt;br /&gt;24 domestic partnership program? That's been really the core&lt;br /&gt;25 journey and exploration that I have undergone on that issue.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2790&lt;br /&gt;1 So I -- my thinking on it now is that the core&lt;br /&gt;2 principle that we can hold out for our understanding is that&lt;br /&gt;3 marriage as a social institution is larger than the sum of its&lt;br /&gt;4 legal incidents.&lt;br /&gt;5 When we say the word "marriage," it's a big&lt;br /&gt;6 institution that performs a very large contribution to society&lt;br /&gt;7 and it's much bigger, much more powerful and potent as a role&lt;br /&gt;8 in society than merely or only the enumeration of its legal&lt;br /&gt;9 incidents. Marriage predates law. Marriage is not a creature&lt;br /&gt;10 of law in the same way that other things are.&lt;br /&gt;11 The law did not create marriage. We look to law to&lt;br /&gt;12 recognize and support marriage and to give it support, but we&lt;br /&gt;13 do not simply understand the institution only with reference to&lt;br /&gt;14 its legal incidents.&lt;br /&gt;15 So if you look at the legal -- the legal incidents of&lt;br /&gt;16 domestic partnerships and then look at the legal incidents of&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage, the fact that those legal incidents are comparable&lt;br /&gt;18 does not mean that we are looking at the same institution, the&lt;br /&gt;19 content of it.&lt;br /&gt;20 The marital institution is differently purposed, is&lt;br /&gt;21 specifically purposed. As I have tried to say today, probably&lt;br /&gt;22 more times than you want to hear, the purpose of it is to bring&lt;br /&gt;23 together the biological male and the biological female, to&lt;br /&gt;24 bring together the two genitors of the child, to make it as&lt;br /&gt;25 likely as possible that they are also the social and legal&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2791&lt;br /&gt;1 parents of the child. That's the loadstar. That's the&lt;br /&gt;2 distinctive contribution. There are others, but that's the&lt;br /&gt;3 distinctive and core contribution of the institution of&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage.&lt;br /&gt;5 The domestic partnership institution is a differently&lt;br /&gt;6 purposed institution with respect to this bringing together --&lt;br /&gt;7 with respect to parenthood, particularly with respect to&lt;br /&gt;8 parenthood.&lt;br /&gt;9 The parenting process in the -- this loadstar notion&lt;br /&gt;10 that animates the marital institution is not the same that is&lt;br /&gt;11 operative in the domestic partnership institution.&lt;br /&gt;12 It is discriminatory and un- -- and morally wrong in&lt;br /&gt;13 my view, morally wrong to refuse to call two things that are&lt;br /&gt;14 the same by the same name. That was my -- that was my -- that&lt;br /&gt;15 was my -- that was what the big thing I had to grapple with in&lt;br /&gt;16 my own mind to be able to look myself in the mirror.&lt;br /&gt;17 And what I worked out with Rauch and others -- I'm&lt;br /&gt;18 not saying he is responsible for my views. I'm saying that the&lt;br /&gt;19 process I'm describing of developing this proposal with Rauch,&lt;br /&gt;20 I had to be sure myself, personally, ethnically, that this&lt;br /&gt;21 issue of is this discrimination to have an institution purposed&lt;br /&gt;22 in this way as a domestic partnership institution. That was&lt;br /&gt;23 the thing that I had to work out, and I have worked that out to&lt;br /&gt;24 my satisfaction.&lt;br /&gt;25 And it -- it means a lot to me personally, but I feel&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - DIRECT EXAMINATION / COOPER 2792&lt;br /&gt;1 that I have been able to understand this in a way that then&lt;br /&gt;2 allows me as an advocate for customary marriage to say we can&lt;br /&gt;3 have a compromise here. We don't all get everything we want,&lt;br /&gt;4 but we all have a humane compromise on this issue.&lt;br /&gt;5 MR. COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Maybe we better take a very brief recess&lt;br /&gt;7 for ten minutes and then we will resume with the&lt;br /&gt;8 cross-examination of this witness.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;10 MR. COOPER: Thank you, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;11 (Whereupon there was a recess in the proceedings&lt;br /&gt;12 from 3:23 p.m. until 3:31 p.m.)&lt;br /&gt;13 THE COURT: New binders?&lt;br /&gt;14 MR. BOIES: Not quite yet, your Honor, but soon.&lt;br /&gt;15 THE COURT: I beg your pardon?&lt;br /&gt;16 MR. BOIES: Not quite yet, but soon. I'm going to&lt;br /&gt;17 begin by asking some questions from the defendants' binders.&lt;br /&gt;18 CROSS EXAMINATION&lt;br /&gt;19 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Good afternoon.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Would you turn to tab 16 in your binder?&lt;br /&gt;23 (Witness complied.)&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And this was one of the documents that you indicated that&lt;br /&gt;25 you had relied on, is that correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2793&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. And Mr. Cooper directed your attention on the first page&lt;br /&gt;3 to a quotation where it said:&lt;br /&gt;4 "Children who grow up in a household with&lt;br /&gt;5 only one biological person are worse off on&lt;br /&gt;6 average than children who grow up in a&lt;br /&gt;7 household with both of their biological&lt;br /&gt;8 parents."&lt;br /&gt;9 Do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Now, there are a number of questions that I want to ask&lt;br /&gt;12 you about that, but did you understand the authors here to be&lt;br /&gt;13 asserting that the fact that there was only one biological&lt;br /&gt;14 parent was causally related to the fact that the children were&lt;br /&gt;15 less well off?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Yes, sir. That was my understanding -- is my&lt;br /&gt;17 understanding.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. That is your understanding?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, did you read this entire chapter?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I read the entire book.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Let me see if you remember reading the very next page, the&lt;br /&gt;23 first full paragraph.&lt;br /&gt;24 "But are single motherhood and father&lt;br /&gt;25 absence, therefore, the root cause of child&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2794&lt;br /&gt;1 poverty, school failure and juvenile&lt;br /&gt;2 delinquency? Our findings lead us to say no.&lt;br /&gt;3 While living with just one parent increases&lt;br /&gt;4 the risk of each of these negative outcomes,&lt;br /&gt;5 it is not the only or even the major cause of&lt;br /&gt;6 them."&lt;br /&gt;7 Do you recall reading that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Now, you referred a number of times in your of testimony&lt;br /&gt;10 to biological parents; do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. And you were not meaning to imply, were you, that&lt;br /&gt;13 biological parents were any better parents than adoptive&lt;br /&gt;14 parents?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. In fact, the studies show that all other things being&lt;br /&gt;17 equal, two adoptive parents raising a child from birth will do&lt;br /&gt;18 as well as two biological parents raising a child from birth,&lt;br /&gt;19 correct?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. No, sir, that's incorrect.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Well, sir --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. May I say another word on that, please?&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. You will have an opportunity on redirect.&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Okay. It was a clarifying thing and actually supports&lt;br /&gt;25 something you just said.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2795&lt;br /&gt;1 The studies show that adoptive parents, because of&lt;br /&gt;2 the rigorous screening process that they undertake before&lt;br /&gt;3 becoming adoptive parents, actually on some outcomes outstrip&lt;br /&gt;4 the biological parents in terms of providing protective care&lt;br /&gt;5 for their children.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Yes, I was going to come to that, and I appreciate your&lt;br /&gt;7 getting there.&lt;br /&gt;8 In addition, your Institute for American Values&lt;br /&gt;9 publishes something called The Marriage Index, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. And let me ask that you be handed Plaintiffs' Exhibit&lt;br /&gt;12 2880. I didn't have this in the volume because I didn't know&lt;br /&gt;13 it was going to come up.&lt;br /&gt;14 (Discussion held off the record.)&lt;br /&gt;15 MR. BOIES: I'm informed we were more perceptive than&lt;br /&gt;16 I thought. It's in witness binder one, which we will hand out.&lt;br /&gt;17 (Whereupon, binder was tendered&lt;br /&gt;18 to the Court and the witness.)&lt;br /&gt;19 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, this is a document you recognize, is that correct,&lt;br /&gt;21 sir?&lt;br /&gt;22 MR. COOPER: I'm sorry. I --&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: 2880.&lt;br /&gt;24 MR. COOPER: 2880. Thank you.&lt;br /&gt;25&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2796&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. 2880.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I'm sorry. I just --&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. It should be in numerical order.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Oh, here it is.&lt;br /&gt;6 Yes, sir, I have it.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. And you recognize that?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, I would offer Plaintiffs'&lt;br /&gt;10 Exhibit 2880?&lt;br /&gt;11 MR. COOPER: No objection, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Very well. 2880 is in.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2880 received in evidence.)&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And when your Institute For American Values does its&lt;br /&gt;16 analyses, it treats adoptive parents and biological parents&lt;br /&gt;17 together, correct?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I did not do the research for this particular study, but&lt;br /&gt;19 it is -- I would not at all be surprised if for the purposes of&lt;br /&gt;20 this report we followed what is a common practice among&lt;br /&gt;21 scholars in the field and lumped those two categories together&lt;br /&gt;22 for the purposes of this study.&lt;br /&gt;23 If you want to compare outcomes for children who are&lt;br /&gt;24 adopted to outcomes to children in other family forms, you&lt;br /&gt;25 really have to do a study on that specific issue, and that is&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2797&lt;br /&gt;1 not what this was.&lt;br /&gt;2 But the answer to your question is, I wouldn't be at&lt;br /&gt;3 all surprised if we did not follow the customary -- a very&lt;br /&gt;4 common custom among researchers who, for a number of reasons,&lt;br /&gt;5 including practical, very practical ones, often tend to include&lt;br /&gt;6 in the -- they clump them together in the way that you've said.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Let me be sure I understand what you are saying.&lt;br /&gt;8 Ordinarily researchers include adoptive parents in&lt;br /&gt;9 the same category as biological parents; is that what you said?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. Let me try it again.&lt;br /&gt;12 In the research that you are familiar with, do&lt;br /&gt;13 researchers ordinarily include both biological parents and&lt;br /&gt;14 adoptive parents in the same category?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. It depends on the question they are seeking to answer.&lt;br /&gt;16 The -- it depends on what they are studying.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Well --&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I'm sorry. That's really the determinative factor.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Let me jump right to the bottom line, okay, sir?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Good.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Are you aware of any studies -- and let's just talk about&lt;br /&gt;22 gay and lesbian couples. Let's just jump right to the bottom&lt;br /&gt;23 line.&lt;br /&gt;24 Are you aware of any studies showing that children&lt;br /&gt;25 raised from birth by a gay or lesbian couple have worse&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2798&lt;br /&gt;1 outcomes than children raised from birth by two biological&lt;br /&gt;2 parents?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;5 A. Would it be okay for me to say additional --&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. It would not be okay for you to volunteer anything. I&lt;br /&gt;7 heard your -- the speech that ended, and I'm really trying to&lt;br /&gt;8 move along; okay, sir? You will have a chance to make speeches&lt;br /&gt;9 when your counsel is asking you questions.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Let me follow up on a question that your counsel did ask,&lt;br /&gt;12 which was about domestic partnerships, and I want to be sure I&lt;br /&gt;13 have your testimony.&lt;br /&gt;14 You thought a lot about domestic partnerships in&lt;br /&gt;15 recent years, correct?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. My testimony was that I had not thought very much at all&lt;br /&gt;17 about them and had given really no serious consideration to&lt;br /&gt;18 them until I was kind of publicly challenged to do so in 2007&lt;br /&gt;19 in an exchange with Jonathan Rauch and that, as you -- I'm sure&lt;br /&gt;20 you heard me say this whole thing. That's what happened.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Does that mean that the answer is that since 2007, you&lt;br /&gt;22 have given a lot of thought to it?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay. And is it your view that domestic partnerships&lt;br /&gt;25 contribute to the deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2799&lt;br /&gt;1 And I would like you to begin with a "yes," "no," or&lt;br /&gt;2 "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Mr. Boies, I know the answer to your question.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Well, then --&lt;br /&gt;5 A. But I cannot answer it if the only choices you are going&lt;br /&gt;6 to give me are the choices between the words "yes" and "no."&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. No, it wasn't only between "yes" or "no."&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Well, you gave me three. You gave me, "I don't know,"&lt;br /&gt;9 "yes" or "no."&lt;br /&gt;10 I do know, but I cannot give you an accurate answer&lt;br /&gt;11 to the question if the only words I'm allowed to choose from&lt;br /&gt;12 are "yes" and "no."&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Listen to the question, okay?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. I have heard of word of it.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Okay. What is the question?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. You asked me if I had a view on this subject. You asked&lt;br /&gt;17 me if -- you were asking me to state my opinion on this.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Well, what I asked you was whether it was your view that&lt;br /&gt;19 domestic partnerships contributed to the deinstitutionalization&lt;br /&gt;20 of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. My answer to your question is that I believe that they&lt;br /&gt;22 could do so.&lt;br /&gt;23 And an additional part of my answer is I believe that&lt;br /&gt;24 that risk is --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. I didn't ask you whether the risk was worth it or not.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2800&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Then I won't tell you.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I asked you whether you had a view --&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I do.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. (Continuing) -- as to whether domestic partnerships&lt;br /&gt;5 increased the deinstitutionalization of marriage, and you said&lt;br /&gt;6 they could.&lt;br /&gt;7 That's what you told me, right?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. I said I thought it was possible or likely that they&lt;br /&gt;9 would.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Okay. Now, "possible" and "likely" are two different&lt;br /&gt;11 standards.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Well, maybe we could rewind the tape and find out what I&lt;br /&gt;13 actually said. I think I maybe used the word that it was&lt;br /&gt;14 "possible," but I can't recall the exact word that I used a&lt;br /&gt;15 moment ago.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Well, let's try to get what your view is, regardless of&lt;br /&gt;17 what you said before.&lt;br /&gt;18 In your view, do domestic partnerships increase the&lt;br /&gt;19 deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I believe that it's possible that they could do so.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Now, when you say it's possible, obviously,&lt;br /&gt;22 anything is possible. Do you believe that it is likely that&lt;br /&gt;23 they do so?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I believe that those domestic partnerships --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Sir, I have got to ask you, I mean, this is going to move&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2801&lt;br /&gt;1 along a lot faster if you at least begin with a "yes," "no," or&lt;br /&gt;2 "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I cannot do that on this, because the -- there are&lt;br /&gt;4 different domestic partnerships. I have to be able to say what&lt;br /&gt;5 kind of domestic partnerships we are talking about.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Mr. Blankenhorn, counsel is entitled to&lt;br /&gt;7 an answer to his question.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE WITNESS: May I ask a --&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: That's how this process works. There is&lt;br /&gt;10 a question and then there's an answer. The answer has to&lt;br /&gt;11 respond to the question.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE WITNESS: Does he mean domestic partnerships that&lt;br /&gt;13 are open to opposite sex couples or not?&lt;br /&gt;14 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Let me take them one at a time, okay. And I may take it&lt;br /&gt;16 one in three times.&lt;br /&gt;17 First, do you believe that domestic partnerships that&lt;br /&gt;18 are open to opposite-sex couples increase the&lt;br /&gt;19 deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. I believe that they would be likely to do so.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Do you believe that domestic partnerships that are&lt;br /&gt;22 not open to opposite-sex couples will increase the&lt;br /&gt;23 deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. I believe they would be dramatically less likely to do so.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Nevertheless, I want to know whether you think they would&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2802&lt;br /&gt;1 be likely to do so or not. Even though they may be less&lt;br /&gt;2 likely, would they nevertheless be less likely to do so?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I don't know.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Do you believe that domestic partnerships that are open to&lt;br /&gt;5 different-sex couples only when one of the participants is over&lt;br /&gt;6 62, which happens to be the law in California as I understand&lt;br /&gt;7 it, increases the deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. My answer is the same as I just said. I believe they&lt;br /&gt;9 would be significantly less likely to do so.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Now, you believe that gays and lesbians today are raising&lt;br /&gt;11 children, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Of course, yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And, in fact, hundreds of thousands of children are being&lt;br /&gt;14 raised by gay and lesbian couples, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. I don't know how many.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Did you ever try to find out?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I did.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And were you able to make an approximation?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. I was -- yes, sir, I was.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. What was that approximation?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I can't recall.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Can you recall approximately?&lt;br /&gt;23 A. No, sir.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. Okay. And you recognize that in some cases the gays and&lt;br /&gt;25 lesbians are raising a child that is the biological child of&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2803&lt;br /&gt;1 one of the parents and in some cases they are raising adopted&lt;br /&gt;2 children, correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Those would be two -- two of -- of course, they would&lt;br /&gt;4 be -- those would be examples of -- those would be examples of&lt;br /&gt;5 children in gay and lesbian homes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. And you believe that permitting gay and lesbian couples to&lt;br /&gt;7 marry would significantly advantage the gays and lesbians&lt;br /&gt;8 themselves and the children that they are raising, correct,&lt;br /&gt;9 sir?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. When you say "advantage," do you mean improve the&lt;br /&gt;11 well-being of?&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. My answer to your question is that I believe that adopting&lt;br /&gt;14 same-sex marriage would be likely to improve the well-being of&lt;br /&gt;15 gay and lesbian households and their children.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. Now, in binder number one, we have a copy of your book,&lt;br /&gt;17 Future of Marriage. I think that is Defendant's Exhibit 956.&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I do not have a copy with me here, if you are addressing&lt;br /&gt;19 your question to me.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. No, I think --&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: It's in the binder, I believe,&lt;br /&gt;22 Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;23 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. It's in the binder. The binder we handed up to you. In&lt;br /&gt;25 other words, the --&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2804&lt;br /&gt;1 A. The binder you handed me?&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Yes. The binder that your counsel handed you only had the&lt;br /&gt;3 cover page.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. We have handed you a binder that, unless we have screwed&lt;br /&gt;6 it up in some way, ought to have the entire book in it.&lt;br /&gt;7 A. Okay. Well, if you tell me the number, I will track it&lt;br /&gt;8 down.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. 956, Defendants' 956.&lt;br /&gt;10 This is an excerpt. It's not the entire book, but it&lt;br /&gt;11 is more pages than just the top page.&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Got it.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. A pretty short excerpt.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Well, it is -- it's not the whole book, but it's longer&lt;br /&gt;16 than just the cover page.&lt;br /&gt;17 Would you turn to page two of the book?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. And the last two sentences. And for context you may want&lt;br /&gt;20 to read earlier in the paragraph. You will see that your&lt;br /&gt;21 writing there on the issue of same-sex marriage is this&lt;br /&gt;22 profound principle of equal dignity, the heart of the matter?&lt;br /&gt;23 "After all, part of the reason why the&lt;br /&gt;24 principle is so revolutionary is that it can&lt;br /&gt;25 grow and deepen over time. Groups that had&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2805&lt;br /&gt;1 long been considered effectively outside its&lt;br /&gt;2 moral reach, African-Americans, women, people&lt;br /&gt;3 of certain colors or languages or religions,&lt;br /&gt;4 can over time and often as a result of great&lt;br /&gt;5 struggle, enter into its protective sphere."&lt;br /&gt;6 And then you get to the two sentences that I want to&lt;br /&gt;7 particularly direct your attention to. You say:&lt;br /&gt;8 "I believe that today the principle of equal&lt;br /&gt;9 human dignity must apply to gay and lesbian&lt;br /&gt;10 persons."&lt;br /&gt;11 Do you see that?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. And the "I" there is you, correct?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. And you say:&lt;br /&gt;16 "In that sense insofar as we are a nation&lt;br /&gt;17 founded on this principle, we would be more,&lt;br /&gt;18 emphasize more, American on the day we&lt;br /&gt;19 permitted same-sex marriage than we were on&lt;br /&gt;20 the day before."&lt;br /&gt;21 And you wrote those words, did you not, sir?&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I wrote those words.&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. And you believed them then, correct?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And you believe them now, correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2806&lt;br /&gt;1 A. That's correct.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Now, let me direct your attention to some of the scholars&lt;br /&gt;3 that you say you relied on.&lt;br /&gt;4 And Mr. Cooper took you through a number of&lt;br /&gt;5 publications by a number of scholars and you indicated that you&lt;br /&gt;6 had relied on what they had written; do you recall that?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. I do recall.&lt;br /&gt;8 Q. Now, were any of the scholars that you and Mr. Cooper&lt;br /&gt;9 identified scholars who have asserted that permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage would cause a reduction in heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;11 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. If you don't understand the question, I will try to make&lt;br /&gt;13 it clear.&lt;br /&gt;14 A. No, I do understand it. And I'm -- may I say it back to&lt;br /&gt;15 you and see if I have got it?&lt;br /&gt;16 I think you are asking me, did any of the scholars&lt;br /&gt;17 that I have cited, do they believe that adopting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;18 marriage would lower the marriage rate among heterosexuals?&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Almost. And I -- I just want to clarify one thing.&lt;br /&gt;20 You said "believe" and I said "asserted." And I'm&lt;br /&gt;21 not asking you to try to probe their minds. I'm simply asking&lt;br /&gt;22 what they have said and written.&lt;br /&gt;23 Do you understand the difference, what I'm saying?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. And what I'm asking you is, whether any of the scholars&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2807&lt;br /&gt;1 that you have relied on have asserted that permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;2 marriage would result in a lower rate of heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. I -- I think the safest answer would, for me, to say I&lt;br /&gt;4 don't know.&lt;br /&gt;5 But if you'll also permit me, I think -- I believe&lt;br /&gt;6 the answer is yes, some of them have.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. In that case what I will now do is ask you which ones?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Well, I thought you might. That's why I was kind of&lt;br /&gt;9 careful in walking into it, but...&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. It comes from those discussions.&lt;br /&gt;11 A. Yes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;12 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;13 A. Professor Norval Glenn in his article called the&lt;br /&gt;14 Struggle For Same-Sex Marriage I have not reread that article&lt;br /&gt;15 in some time, but I know he is a long-time -- I have read many&lt;br /&gt;16 things of his and he is a -- I know him and I believe that he&lt;br /&gt;17 has voiced reservations about same-sex marriage along the lines&lt;br /&gt;18 of this statement that I read from, in the article; that is,&lt;br /&gt;19 that he is saying that if --&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Sir?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. Yes.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. I -- I need to have you focus relatively precisely, if I&lt;br /&gt;23 can, on my question.&lt;br /&gt;24 You did read a -- or Mr. Cooper read to you a portion&lt;br /&gt;25 from Mr. Glenn's article where he was talking about the&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2808&lt;br /&gt;1 deinstitutionalization of marriage, and I do remember that,&lt;br /&gt;2 okay?&lt;br /&gt;3 My question is different, okay? My question is&lt;br /&gt;4 whether Mr. Glenn or any scholar that you relied on has&lt;br /&gt;5 asserted that permitting same-sex marriage will result in a&lt;br /&gt;6 lower rate of heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. The problem here -- I'm not trying to be evasive, but you&lt;br /&gt;8 must let me just say my answer, which is that if they are&lt;br /&gt;9 arguing --&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. No, no, sir. I don't have to do this. All that's going&lt;br /&gt;11 to happen is you're going to say something, then I'm going to&lt;br /&gt;12 have to follow up. Okay?&lt;br /&gt;13 What I'm trying to do is -- this is a very simple&lt;br /&gt;14 question, all right?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. It is not simple to me.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. All right. Well, let me try to make it simple.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. If you are using.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Let me try to make it simple.&lt;br /&gt;19 A. (Continuing) -- the exact form of the words --&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. If you are trying to --&lt;br /&gt;21 THE COURT: Let's not argue with one another. Let's&lt;br /&gt;22 just have a question and an answer.&lt;br /&gt;23 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;24 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Let me try to make the question as simple as I can.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2809&lt;br /&gt;1 Have any of the scholars that you have said you&lt;br /&gt;2 relied on said in words or in substance, okay, this permitting&lt;br /&gt;3 same-sex marriage will cause a reduction in heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;5 That's "yes," "no," or "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I know the answer. I cannot answer you accurately if the&lt;br /&gt;7 only words I'm allowed to choose from is "yes" or "no." I can&lt;br /&gt;8 give you my answer very briefly in one sentence.&lt;br /&gt;9 THE COURT: If you know the answer, why don't you&lt;br /&gt;10 share it with us?&lt;br /&gt;11 THE WITNESS: I would be happy to, but he is only&lt;br /&gt;12 permitting me to give "yes" and "no," and I cannot do that and&lt;br /&gt;13 be accurate.&lt;br /&gt;14 THE COURT: He is giving you three choices, "yes,"&lt;br /&gt;15 "no," "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;16 THE WITNESS: But I do know. I do know the answer.&lt;br /&gt;17 THE COURT: Then is it "yes" or is it "no"?&lt;br /&gt;18 THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I can answer the question,&lt;br /&gt;19 but I cannot give an accurate answer if the only two choices I&lt;br /&gt;20 have are "yes" and "no."&lt;br /&gt;21 I -- if you give me a sentence, I can answer it. One&lt;br /&gt;22 sentence is all I'm asking for.&lt;br /&gt;23 THE COURT: All right. Let's take a sentence. One&lt;br /&gt;24 sentence.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Can you ask me the question again, please.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2810&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Yes, yes.&lt;br /&gt;3 Have any of the scholars who you say you relied on&lt;br /&gt;4 asserted, written, that they believe that permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;5 marriage will result in a reduction in the heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;6 marriage rate?&lt;br /&gt;7 A. My answer is that I believe that some of the scholars I&lt;br /&gt;8 have cited have asserted that permitting same-sex marriage&lt;br /&gt;9 would contribute to the deinstitutionalization of marriage, one&lt;br /&gt;10 of the answer -- one of the manifestations of which would be a&lt;br /&gt;11 lower marriage rate among heterosexuals.&lt;br /&gt;12 But I do not have sure knowledge that in the exact&lt;br /&gt;13 form of words you are asking me for they have made the direct&lt;br /&gt;14 assertion that permitting same-sex marriage would directly&lt;br /&gt;15 lower the marriage rate among heterosexuals.&lt;br /&gt;16 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. Mr. Blankenthorn?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Horn.&lt;br /&gt;19 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;20 A. That wasn't so long.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Questions and answers.&lt;br /&gt;22 THE COURT: If I were to take that as an "I don't&lt;br /&gt;23 know" would that be fair?&lt;br /&gt;24 THE WITNESS: With respect, your Honor, I would&lt;br /&gt;25 disagree with you.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2811&lt;br /&gt;1 I know exactly my answer to this question, and I have&lt;br /&gt;2 just stated it. And I would be happy to restate it.&lt;br /&gt;3 THE COURT: The record is clear on what you said.&lt;br /&gt;4 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. And let me try to see if I can clarify what you meant.&lt;br /&gt;6 You have said that some of the scholars have said&lt;br /&gt;7 that permitting same-sex marriage would lead to the&lt;br /&gt;8 deinstitutionalization of marriage.&lt;br /&gt;9 You have then said that the deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;10 marriage would lead or might lead to reduced heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;11 marriage rates. You said that, right?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Okay. Now, what I am asking you is whether the linkage&lt;br /&gt;14 that says deinstitutionalization of marriage leads to lower&lt;br /&gt;15 heterosexual marriage rates is something that the scholars said&lt;br /&gt;16 or is that something that you are saying?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Scholars.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Okay. Now, what scholars have said that the&lt;br /&gt;19 deinstitutionalization of marriage will lead to lower&lt;br /&gt;20 heterosexual divorce rate? What scholars?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I think you mean to say marriage rates.&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Marriage rates.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. Would you like me to name one?&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. I would like you to name every one that you know.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Okay, I will.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2812&lt;br /&gt;1 It's going to take me a moment to compose my memory&lt;br /&gt;2 here, but let's start with --&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Let's be sure that we know the question.&lt;br /&gt;4 The question is: Which of the scholars that you have&lt;br /&gt;5 said to Mr. Cooper that you rely on are scholars who have&lt;br /&gt;6 written, one, that permitting same-sex marriage leads to the&lt;br /&gt;7 deinstitutionalization of marriage; and, two, that that&lt;br /&gt;8 deinstitutionalization of marriage leads to a lower rate of&lt;br /&gt;9 heterosexual marriage?&lt;br /&gt;10 Do you have the question clear?&lt;br /&gt;11 A. I thought you were asking me to name scholars on whom I&lt;br /&gt;12 relied to form my opinions.&lt;br /&gt;13 I did not know that you were asking me to restrict it&lt;br /&gt;14 to the few that you were enumerated in the colloquy with Mr.&lt;br /&gt;15 Cooper. I thought you were asking me, am I aware of scholars&lt;br /&gt;16 who make this claim.&lt;br /&gt;17 If you are asking me to choose among the few scholars&lt;br /&gt;18 that were involved in the earlier colloquy, my answer would be&lt;br /&gt;19 that, to the best of my knowledge, Professor Glenn has argued&lt;br /&gt;20 that permitting same-sex marriage would lead -- would likely&lt;br /&gt;21 lead to the further deinstitutionalization of marriage. I'm&lt;br /&gt;22 not saying he used those exact form of words, but I'm saying&lt;br /&gt;23 the substance of his arguments, written arguments have been&lt;br /&gt;24 such.&lt;br /&gt;25 And I'm saying that in addition to that, Professor&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2813&lt;br /&gt;1 Glenn has argued that the deinstitutionalization of marriage&lt;br /&gt;2 has a manifestation of lower participation rates of&lt;br /&gt;3 heterosexuals in marriage.&lt;br /&gt;4 I'm saying that Professor Norval Glenn is one such&lt;br /&gt;5 person among the very small number that were cited in this --&lt;br /&gt;6 that's the universe you are limiting me to. I'm saying that,&lt;br /&gt;7 to the best of my knowledge, the answer to your question is&lt;br /&gt;8 Professor Norval Glenn.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. And --&lt;br /&gt;10 A. I'll also add that he is one of the most distinguished&lt;br /&gt;11 family scholars in the nation.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Anybody other than Professor Glenn among the scholars that&lt;br /&gt;13 you told Mr. Cooper that you were relying on? Anybody else?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. In forming my views on this subject, I --&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn. Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;16 A. My views are not restricted to the few that are on this&lt;br /&gt;17 list.&lt;br /&gt;18 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, could I please?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. If you want to know who I rely on --&lt;br /&gt;20 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. This is a simple question.&lt;br /&gt;22 A. I'm happy to tell you.&lt;br /&gt;23 MR. BOIES: He identified several scholars that he&lt;br /&gt;24 said to Mr. Cooper that he relied on.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. These were illustrative only.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2814&lt;br /&gt;1 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. I will accept that it's your testimony that these were&lt;br /&gt;3 illustrative only.&lt;br /&gt;4 A. I have others that you would be pleased to know their&lt;br /&gt;5 pedigree, and I would be happy to give them to you.&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: I think Mr. Boies is asking for their&lt;br /&gt;7 names.&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Professor David Popenoe from Rutgers University would be&lt;br /&gt;9 another one.&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. Now, this is somebody who has written that the --&lt;br /&gt;12 permitting same-sex marriage leads to deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;13 marriage and that that, in turn, leads to lower heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage rates, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. Well, my -- my only hesitation in answering yes is that I&lt;br /&gt;16 have not refreshed myself on his exact writings and whether the&lt;br /&gt;17 form of words are close enough to satisfy your concerns.&lt;br /&gt;18 But it's my belief, based on an extensive&lt;br /&gt;19 acquaintance with his books and writings in recent years, that&lt;br /&gt;20 those represent the substance of his beliefs. And I -- I can't&lt;br /&gt;21 sit here right now without reference to his works to prove it&lt;br /&gt;22 in exact word formulation.&lt;br /&gt;23 So I want to issue that caveat, but I believe if he&lt;br /&gt;24 were here right now, sitting here, and you asked him, I believe&lt;br /&gt;25 he would say, Yes, those are my beliefs.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2815&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Okay. Now, Mr. Blankenhorn, I want to try to make as&lt;br /&gt;2 clear to you as I possibly can that my questions here are&lt;br /&gt;3 asking about what these people have written, not what you think&lt;br /&gt;4 they would say if we brought them in to testify; not what you&lt;br /&gt;5 think is in their heart or mind based on your conversations&lt;br /&gt;6 with them; but what they have actually written.&lt;br /&gt;7 Do you understand the difference?&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Of course, I do.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Okay. So focusing on that -- and I'm afraid I'm going to&lt;br /&gt;10 mispronounce David's last name. Could you give that to me&lt;br /&gt;11 again?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. Popenoe.&lt;br /&gt;13 Q. Popenoe. It is your testimony that Mr. Popenoe, Professor&lt;br /&gt;14 Popenoe may or may not have actually written something in which&lt;br /&gt;15 he said:&lt;br /&gt;16 A, permitting same-sex marriage leads to the&lt;br /&gt;17 deinstitutionalization of marriage;&lt;br /&gt;18 And, B, the deinstitutionalization of marriage leads&lt;br /&gt;19 to a lower rate of heterosexual marriages.&lt;br /&gt;20 Correct?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. I know that he did -- has written -- I'm trying to answer&lt;br /&gt;22 your question. You know, it's an important issue and I'm&lt;br /&gt;23 trying to give you a short but clear answer.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. But if you answered the questions that I'm actually posing&lt;br /&gt;25 --&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2816&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I am doing so to the very best of my ability. I came all&lt;br /&gt;2 the way here from New York to answer your questions absolutely&lt;br /&gt;3 to the best of my ability.&lt;br /&gt;4 And my answer is that I believe that Professor -- I&lt;br /&gt;5 know certainly that he has written that the&lt;br /&gt;6 deinstitutionalization of marriage would lead to -- would&lt;br /&gt;7 likely lead to lower rates of marriage among heterosexuals.&lt;br /&gt;8 I believe, but I am not certain, that he has written&lt;br /&gt;9 that same-sex marriage would likely contribute to&lt;br /&gt;10 deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Okay. While we were talking, I was trying to read through&lt;br /&gt;12 Norval Glenn's article which you have here.&lt;br /&gt;13 And while I haven't maybe read it as carefully as I&lt;br /&gt;14 would like, I don't see anything in here in which he talks&lt;br /&gt;15 about heterosexual marriage rates.&lt;br /&gt;16 Do you recall anything in here about heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;17 marriage rates?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. I was relying for that statement on a paper that he wrote&lt;br /&gt;19 several years ago that I was involved in. That's why I can&lt;br /&gt;20 remember it, where he was a co-author of a paper that talked&lt;br /&gt;21 extensively about deinstitutionalization and he -- and in that&lt;br /&gt;22 paper, of which he was a co-author, it specifically talked&lt;br /&gt;23 about lowering marriage rates as a likely consequence.&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. And was that paper that you just referred to one of the&lt;br /&gt;25 documents that you relied on in your expert report?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2817&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I -- I don't recall now whether it was --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Why don't you look?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Okay. Maybe I misunderstood something, but it never&lt;br /&gt;4 occurred to me that everything I would say regarding my views&lt;br /&gt;5 had to be represented in the list of documents. I have been&lt;br /&gt;6 studying this topic for more than 20 years, and I certainly am&lt;br /&gt;7 relying on many, many more things other than the few things in&lt;br /&gt;8 this report.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Your Honor --&lt;br /&gt;10 THE COURT: The question is whether or not this is&lt;br /&gt;11 reflected in your expert report.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE WITNESS: Let's -- let's -- well, it's reflected&lt;br /&gt;13 in the sense that this was a thing that influenced my thinking,&lt;br /&gt;14 but let's answer the question of whether it is listed and --&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. You listed the things that you considered and relied on,&lt;br /&gt;17 correct? That's what you were asked to do, right?&lt;br /&gt;18 A. Maybe I made a mistake, but it certainly never occurred to&lt;br /&gt;19 me that all of the views that I expressed had to be traceable&lt;br /&gt;20 to one of those documents at the end of this report. If that&lt;br /&gt;21 -- if I had understood that that was the requirement, there&lt;br /&gt;22 would have been many, many scores more documents cited. They&lt;br /&gt;23 would have gone back for 20 years of the work and study and&lt;br /&gt;24 reflection that I have done on this issue.&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Mr. Blankenthorn -- Mr. Blankenhorn.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2818&lt;br /&gt;1 A. Horn.&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. Mr. Blankenhorn, I apologize.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Let's find out if it's listed. That would solve the whole&lt;br /&gt;4 problem.&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. That would, although even regardless of whether it's&lt;br /&gt;6 listed or, not I do want to follow up on some things you just&lt;br /&gt;7 said.&lt;br /&gt;8 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;9 A. No, sir. It is not listed.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. Now, at the end of your expert report you prepared an&lt;br /&gt;11 index of materials considered, correct?&lt;br /&gt;12 A. I believe that's the list I was just looking over to see&lt;br /&gt;13 if I could find Norval Glenn's article.&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. And it wasn't there, correct?&lt;br /&gt;15 A. No, sir. I did not find it, upon reading it quickly.&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. I don't find it either.&lt;br /&gt;17 There is a Norval Glenn article, but it's a different&lt;br /&gt;18 article, correct?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Well, that's correct. It's a different article.&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Now, maybe the easiest way for me to approach this is to&lt;br /&gt;21 go through the materials that you went through with Mr. Cooper,&lt;br /&gt;22 and I will try to go through them as quickly as I can.&lt;br /&gt;23 Turn to tab three. This would be the --&lt;br /&gt;24 Q. In your book, yes, sir, in your book.&lt;br /&gt;25 A. Got it.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2819&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. And this is an excerpt from a book by Suzanne G. Frayser,&lt;br /&gt;2 correct?&lt;br /&gt;3 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. Now, does Dr. Frayser assert that permitting same-sex&lt;br /&gt;5 marriage will cause a reduction in heterosexual marriage rates?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I do not know of her having made such an assertion.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. Does Professor Frayser assert that permitting&lt;br /&gt;8 same-sex marriage will result in an increase in heterosexual&lt;br /&gt;9 divorce rates?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. In the interest of moving along, I think I can say that I&lt;br /&gt;11 do not know of any statement about same-sex marriage that&lt;br /&gt;12 Suzanne Frayser has made.&lt;br /&gt;13 I don't know of any comment that she has made on that&lt;br /&gt;14 topic.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Okay. Let's go to the next expert that you told Mr.&lt;br /&gt;16 Cooper you relied on, tab number four. Professor Quale, the&lt;br /&gt;17 book The History of Marriage Systems.&lt;br /&gt;18 Does Professor Quale assert anywhere here that&lt;br /&gt;19 permitting same-sex marriage will cause a reduction in&lt;br /&gt;20 heterosexual marriage rates?&lt;br /&gt;21 A. My answer is the same. I'm not aware of Professor Quale&lt;br /&gt;22 having in this book made any comments, one way or the other,&lt;br /&gt;23 about -- this was 1988 and it would have been highly unlikely&lt;br /&gt;24 for her, or anyone, to be writing about it.&lt;br /&gt;25 But the answer is no. I do not know of anything she&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2820&lt;br /&gt;1 has said in this book or elsewhere on the subject of same-sex&lt;br /&gt;2 marriage. I'm not aware of anything.&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. Did Professor Quale assert that deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;4 marriage, however it was caused, would result in a reduction in&lt;br /&gt;5 heterosexual marriage rates?&lt;br /&gt;6 A. No, sir. Nor was I relying upon her to talk about&lt;br /&gt;7 deinstitutionalization. She is under the section under what is&lt;br /&gt;8 marriage, not about what is same-sex marriage and not is what&lt;br /&gt;9 is the theory of deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;10 If you want to talk about sources for my views on&lt;br /&gt;11 deinstitutionalization, I can save you some time and take you&lt;br /&gt;12 right to them.&lt;br /&gt;13 But, no, she does not in this book discuss same-sex&lt;br /&gt;14 marriage and, to the best of my knowledge, she doesn't say --&lt;br /&gt;15 use the term "deinstitutionalization." She is a historian and&lt;br /&gt;16 deinstitutionalization is a term that comes from sociology.&lt;br /&gt;17 Q. So maybe we can move this along.&lt;br /&gt;18 Neither Professor Frayser nor Professor Quale nor&lt;br /&gt;19 Professor Kingsley Davis nor the Committee of the Royal&lt;br /&gt;20 Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, nor&lt;br /&gt;21 Professor van Den Berghe, nor Professor Malinowski, none of&lt;br /&gt;22 them talk about -- insofar as you were relying on them talk&lt;br /&gt;23 about same-sex marriage or talk about the&lt;br /&gt;24 deinstitutionalization of marriage, correct?&lt;br /&gt;25 A. That would not be correct.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2821&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Okay. It didn't work to speed it up.&lt;br /&gt;2 A. May I --&lt;br /&gt;3 Q. It was a compound question, but I thought --&lt;br /&gt;4 A. Mr. Boies --&lt;br /&gt;5 Q. Let me do it my way.&lt;br /&gt;6 A. I was trying to save us some time.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. I was, too. But first Professor Frayser. Professor&lt;br /&gt;8 Frayser does not deal with deinstitutionalization of marriage,&lt;br /&gt;9 does not deal with same-sex marriage at all, correct?&lt;br /&gt;10 A. Nor was I relying upon her for any of my views on those&lt;br /&gt;11 subjects. The answer is no, she doesn't.&lt;br /&gt;12 THE COURT: Or the answer is yes, she doesn't.&lt;br /&gt;13 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;14 THE WITNESS: Yes, she does not.&lt;br /&gt;15 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;16 Q. And Professor Quale, does --&lt;br /&gt;17 A. Same.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Does Professor Quale deal at all with&lt;br /&gt;19 deinstitutionalization of marriage or with same-sex marriage?&lt;br /&gt;20 A. Not to my knowledge, no, sir.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Okay. Professor Kingsley Davis, does Professor Davis deal&lt;br /&gt;22 at all with same-sex marriage or the deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;23 marriage?&lt;br /&gt;24 A. Yes, sir. Based on my memory, I am confident -- well, I&lt;br /&gt;25 would say that based on my memory of his writings, that he does&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2822&lt;br /&gt;1 speak either with specific use of the word&lt;br /&gt;2 deinstitutionalization, because he is a sociologist, or making&lt;br /&gt;3 the same argument.&lt;br /&gt;4 So my best understanding is that he does speak about&lt;br /&gt;5 that issue in his work.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay. Now, you see if you begin with a "yes," "no," or "I&lt;br /&gt;7 don't know" answer --&lt;br /&gt;8 A. Well, now we are back to the same old problem.&lt;br /&gt;9 Q. Well, but you got to the "yes" at the end of that long&lt;br /&gt;10 speech, and what I'm trying to do --&lt;br /&gt;11 A. It wasn't a very long speech.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. Well, let's not argue about that or we will be here too&lt;br /&gt;13 long, okay?&lt;br /&gt;14 A. Okay.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. What I'm trying to do is I'm just trying to -- I get to&lt;br /&gt;16 ask the questions. You get to answer them.&lt;br /&gt;17 A. That's what they tell me.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. And I get to choose what questions I ask. And my&lt;br /&gt;19 questions are designed to be precise questions so that I get a&lt;br /&gt;20 "yes" or "no" answer, or you can say "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;21 A. No, sir. I -- often the questions are not amenable to&lt;br /&gt;22 those three choices. I often know the answer that I wish to&lt;br /&gt;23 give. I can give it briefly, but I cannot give the answer&lt;br /&gt;24 sometimes if the only words I'm allowed to choose from are&lt;br /&gt;25 "yes" or "no."&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2823&lt;br /&gt;1 Q. Well, but when I ask a question like does Mr. Kingsley&lt;br /&gt;2 Davis -- does Professor Kingsley Davis address the issue of&lt;br /&gt;3 deinstitutionalization or the issue of same-sex marriage, you&lt;br /&gt;4 can answer that question "yes" or "no", can you not, sir?&lt;br /&gt;5 A. That is not the question you just asked, but the -- if you&lt;br /&gt;6 would ask it that way, the answer is yes.&lt;br /&gt;7 Q. Okay. Good. Now, does he do so in the article that you&lt;br /&gt;8 say you relied on?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. I don't know. Hah, see, I did it.&lt;br /&gt;10 (Laughter.)&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. Good for you. Yes. And if I could give you a gold star,&lt;br /&gt;12 I would.&lt;br /&gt;13 A. But that's when the answer really was "I don't know."&lt;br /&gt;14 Q. Now, does he do so in any material that you indicated that&lt;br /&gt;15 you had considered in your expert report?&lt;br /&gt;16 A. Well, see, now we are back to the problem of what's in the&lt;br /&gt;17 expert report. I have read a lot of stuff by him and I believe&lt;br /&gt;18 that he does talk about it, but I am -- let's go back and look&lt;br /&gt;19 at the list.&lt;br /&gt;20 I can tell you that I have relied upon his work in&lt;br /&gt;21 forming my views --&lt;br /&gt;22 Q. Why don't you just answer the question.&lt;br /&gt;23 A. I will have to read the list in order to tell you&lt;br /&gt;24 whether any other article is --&lt;br /&gt;25 Q. Please do so and when you finish, let me know.&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2824&lt;br /&gt;1 A. (Continuing) -- is listed here.&lt;br /&gt;2 I will.&lt;br /&gt;3 (Brief pause.)&lt;br /&gt;4 A. My quick reading shows me that there are no other cites to&lt;br /&gt;5 Davis, other than the one we are discussing.&lt;br /&gt;6 Q. Okay. Now, if you turn to tab six, the Notes and Queries&lt;br /&gt;7 on Anthropology, by the Committee of the Royal Anthropological&lt;br /&gt;8 Institute of Great Britain and Ireland?&lt;br /&gt;9 A. Yes, sir.&lt;br /&gt;10 Q. And does this publication address, as you recall, either&lt;br /&gt;11 the issue of same-sex marriage or the issue of the&lt;br /&gt;12 deinstitutionalization of marriage?&lt;br /&gt;13 A. I know for a fact that it does not discuss the issue of&lt;br /&gt;14 same-sex marriage with -- using that term same-sex marriage.&lt;br /&gt;15 It does not -- it does not.&lt;br /&gt;16 But it is my belief that it does in -- specifically&lt;br /&gt;17 or in substance discuss the process of deinstitutionalization.&lt;br /&gt;18 Q. Can you find where it does so?&lt;br /&gt;19 A. Well, I only have a few pages here. If you could give me&lt;br /&gt;20 the book, I could -- I believe I could find it for you.&lt;br /&gt;21 Q. Let me get that. Let me get that while we are going on to&lt;br /&gt;22 other questions.&lt;br /&gt;23 And the next question is at tab seven. Professor van&lt;br /&gt;24 den Berge was another expert that you said you relied on,&lt;br /&gt;25 correct?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2825&lt;br /&gt;1 A. I relied on these views about the definition of marriage,&lt;br /&gt;2 not about deinstitutionalization of same-sex marriage. I have&lt;br /&gt;3 tried to make this clear.&lt;br /&gt;4 Q. That's actually what I'm trying to make clear, also. And,&lt;br /&gt;5 in fact, one of the things I'm trying to make clear is that&lt;br /&gt;6 these people that you spent your time on direct examination&lt;br /&gt;7 testifying that you relied on don't talk about in these&lt;br /&gt;8 materials same-sex marriage or the deinstitutionalization of&lt;br /&gt;9 marriage. I'm trying to make that point.&lt;br /&gt;10 A. And I'm agreeing with you, by and large, and telling you&lt;br /&gt;11 that their area of study is marriage.&lt;br /&gt;12 Q. It's the by and large part --&lt;br /&gt;13 A. We have already found Kingsley Davis talking about&lt;br /&gt;14 deinstitutionalization and a couple of these others.&lt;br /&gt;15 Q. Wait a minute. Where did we find Kingsley Davis talking&lt;br /&gt;16 about that?&lt;br /&gt;17 A. I think wasn't my testimony before that I thought Kingsley&lt;br /&gt;18 Davis in his work was -- does discuss the process of&lt;br /&gt;19 deinstitutionalization?&lt;br /&gt;20 Q. Yes. You said you thought that was so, but it wasn't in&lt;br /&gt;21 the materials that were in your book and it wasn't in --&lt;br /&gt;22 A. Well, if we are back to that --&lt;br /&gt;23 Q. Let me finish, at least.&lt;br /&gt;24 And it wasn't in the materials that were listed in&lt;br /&gt;25 your report, correct, sir?&lt;br /&gt;BLANKENHORN - CROSS EXAMINATION / BOIES 2826&lt;br /&gt;1 A. The only article by --&lt;br /&gt;2 Q. That is a "yes" or "no" answer, sir.&lt;br /&gt;3 A. If you are asking me was --&lt;br /&gt;4 MR. BOIES: Your Honor, can I get a "yes" or "no"&lt;br /&gt;5 answer to this question?&lt;br /&gt;6 THE COURT: Do you have the question in mind?&lt;br /&gt;7 THE WITNESS: No, sir. I don't, your Honor.&lt;br /&gt;8 THE COURT: Then perhaps you could restate it.&lt;br /&gt;9 MR. BOIES: Okay, okay.&lt;br /&gt;10 BY MR. BOIES:&lt;br /&gt;11 Q. To the extent that Professor Davis addressed the issue of&lt;br /&gt;12 deinstitutionalization of marriage, he did so outside of the&lt;br /&gt;13 publication that was in your book and outside of anything that&lt;br /&gt;14 is l
