Weissberg

BACKGROUND

Appellants’ Opening Brief Judging by appellants’ dramatic opening brief one might mistake this case for one of surpassing importance on the limits of state power to intrude into the affairs of its citizens, and specifically its married citizens. The brief opens this way: “The State promulgates laws to regulate the formation of a marriage, the validity of a marriage, and the termination of a marriage. The State has no interest in the marriage once it has been established and so long as it remains intact, expressing this lack of interest as an inviolate right of privacy enshrined in Article 1, section 1 of the California Constitution. “The only permissible intrusion by the state into the ongoing marriage is one that is compelled by the State’s interests manifest as a concern for the State, for example, such as the protection of the ‘public purse’ (e.g., Fam. Code §§ 4300 and 4303, Pen. Code § 270a) or an offense to the state, for example, such as inter-spousal violence. (e.g. Pen. Code §§ 273.8 - 273.88.) “The State takes no interest in the internal and intimate marital affairs of its citizens absent an interest by the State to offset the codified Right of Privacy. That…