SAN FRANCISCO—Defenders of California's ban on same-sex marriage began making their case Monday, countering the plaintiffs' argument that gays and lesbians are subject to discrimination.

In federal court here, lawyers defending Proposition 8 called their first witness, political expert Kenneth Miller, who said gays are a well-funded and politically connected group.

Mr. Miller, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, said supporters of same-sex marriage raised $43 million, more than their opponents, in their unsuccessful attempt to defeat Proposition 8, which was passed by state voters in 2008. "It's exceptionally rare—there's no other social issue that's involved this kind of money," he said.

Proposition 8 supporter Mark Wassberg carries a sign during the opening day of a same-sex marriage trial in federal court in San Francisco on Jan. 11 Reuters

The professor also argued that gays in California are supported by the Democratic Party, which holds most major elected offices in the state, as well as by state unions, corporations, newspapers and many celebrities.

The U.S. District Court trial, the first federal-law challenge to a state's gay-marriage ban, is entering its third week. Lawyers representing gay couples have argued that the campaign to ban same-sex marriages was driven by prejudice against a minority group. Defenders of the ban began rebutting that argument Monday.

Legal Patchwork


The defense is expected to rest its case by midweek. Judge Vaughn Walker will then review the evidence presented and is expected to call back lawyers from both sides for closing arguments in February, before making a decision.

Whatever the ruling, the case is expected to be appealed to a U.S. appeals court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court, a process that could take more than a year.

David Boies, the lawyer representing gay couples, attempted to discredit Mr. Miller's expertise, saying that he was ill-suited to comment on the political clout of gays and lesbians. During a feisty cross-examination, Mr. Miller said the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and the federal Defense of Marriage Act were acts of "official discrimination" against gays.

"What's remarkable is how many of their expert witnesses have become witnesses for us," Mr. Boies said at a news conference after the trial ended for the day. Andrew Pugno, a defense lawyer, said he thought Mr. Miller did a good job and that Mr. Boies asked questions that were irrelevant and outside the areas of the professor's expertise.

The defense began its case after the plaintiffs rested their case in the morning. Christopher Dusseault, another lawyer representing gay couples, submitted scores of documents, video and other evidence from the Proposition 8 campaign that sought to demonstrate that same-sex marriage opponents were biased against gays.

The defense sought to disallow much of the evidence, arguing that it was irrelevant or that it couldn't be proved that such evidence was part of the campaign, but the judge allowed most of it.

Write to Stu Woo at