Excellent story. Although it comes off as slightly partisan -- it's Mother Jones, after all -- this is a fair and thorough assessment of Olson's motives in bringing Proposition 8 to the Supreme Court.
When the lawsuit was announced Wednesday, some at the press conference raised these concerns and asked whether the lawsuit might be premature, a question that prompted one of the more mind-boggling scenes in civil rights history. In response, Olson—Ted Olson!—argued that justice delayed is justice denied. This put him to the left of the ACLU on one of the nation’s most contentious social issues of the day. He acknowledged that some may disagree about the timing of the suit. But he explained that when gay people came to him and said that their constitutional rights were being violated, that they wanted to be married and have the same rights as other Californians, he could not, as a lawyer, say, “Why don’t you just wait another 10 years, 15 years?”
Olson was put on the spot about his association with conservative organizations, and he insisted that he had never been a part of any organization that he considered anti-gay, which is sort of disingenuous considering that he worked for both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who were both anti-gay in their policies—especially Reagan, who studiously refused to address the AIDS epidemic for years as thousands of gay men died. Still, a review of the public record does indicate that Olson has not joined the right’s anti-gay efforts.
I'm still not quite sure whether this will help or hurt the movement to overturn Prop 8. But this article helped clarify some things for me. I'm beginning to think that Olson may be sincere. The idea that he's doing this to sabotage the movement seems absurd to me -- an unsophisticated line of thought fit for YouTube conspiracy theorists. If anything, I could see Olson's audacity as a good thing. I've been amazed at how sterile the fight for gay marriage is in California.