This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Tuesday, March 26, 2013.

I'm Caleb Brown.

The Supreme Court today heard oral arguments on a legal challenge to California's

Prop 8 that prohibited same-sex marriage, including

marriages already in progress.

Roger Pallon, Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Cato Institute, says several arguments

made in favor of Prop 8, most notably recently by the Wall Street Journal, are deeply confused.

Well, we're just about two hours as we tape beyond the oral argument in the first of the same sex marriage cases.

And it appears from all the reports that are coming out of the court

that the court is focused on the standing issue much more than on the merits of the

Prop 8 California case.

Specifically, the people who have brought the defense of Prop 8?

That's right.

This is a case that was brought by people

who promoted Prop 8, which defined marriage

in California as between a man and a woman only.

So what would be their issue with not having standing?

Well, if this case is decided on the ground that the plaintiffs did not have standing, then it's an open question as

to what the result will be.

It could be that the Ninth Circuit opinion is left standing, which was a little narrower than the district court opinion.

It could be the district court opinion is left standing, or the justices could actually go to the merits sufficiently to throw both cases out.

This is very much an open question at this point.

...