of what entitlement is on the table for same-sex couples as for opposite-sex couples. so the range of options that we have with those claims are, usually people frame it as 0 to 50. it's either no states or all 50 states. but there are actually three options in the middle. and i think that the court is most likely to do one of those threes. there are two ways to get to one state, a just california solution, we can talk about either of those. and there's an eight-state solution that says, there are currently eight states, will be nine when colorado does civil unions may 1st, but eight states that have everything but marriage. the argument there is, if you are giving all the rights and benefits and burdens of marriage to individuals but withholding only the word marriage, that's essentially a branding issue. it's a concern you'll tarnish the brand if you let gay people into the constitution. and that tarnishment claim is really is second class citizenship claim, so they could flip those and double the number of jurisdictions that have same-sex marriage. >> that would mean the states where same-sex marriage exists already would continue to have that, but it would not force