With the ink barely dry on the California Supreme Court's decision upholding a ban on same-sex marriages, proponents are already preparing new political and legal efforts to overturn the ban.

But at least some pollsters and legal experts think those efforts may be too soon to have a good chance to succeed.

"I think the pro-side would have a significant challenge in 2010," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll. "I think it would be less of a challenge in 2012."

DiCamillo's observation was echoed by Mark Baldassare, director of research at the Public Policy Institute of California.

"It would seem that waiting two years would give them (supporters of same-sex marriage) a better potential electorate," Baldassare said.

The two pollsters' comments came in the wake of Tuesday's ruling by the state Supreme Court upholding the validity of Proposition 8, which voters approved last November by a 52.3-47.7 margin.

The measure amended the California Constitution to restrict the institution of marriage to a union between a man and woman.

Following the court's 6-1 ruling, gay marriage supporters vowed to take the issue before voters again next year.

Equality California, or EQCA, which bills itself as the state's largest gay rights group, polled its members about going to the ballot either in next year's statewide election, which will feature a governor's race, or waiting until the 2012 presidential election.

The group said 69 percent of its members favored a return to the ballot in 2010.

EQCA leaders said among the reasons for trying again so soon were capitalizing on momentum from last year, having an easier time raising campaign money and potentially cutting down the wait to legally marry for thousands of gay and lesbian Californians.

Another group, the Courage Campaign, was scheduled to begin airing a pro-gay marriage television ad Wednesday night.

But veteran pollsters DiCamillo and Baldassare pointed out that gay marriage proponents face several obstacles in pushing for another showdown next year.

One is that voter sentiment appears to have moved very little since last November.

A PPIC poll taken in mid-March of likely voters found that 44 percent favored allowing gays and lesbian couples to marry, while 49 percent opposed it.

A Field Poll taken a week later found 48 percent in favor of same-sex marriages and 47 percent opposed. The Field survey measured the opinions of registered voters, whether or not they said they were likely to vote.

"We don't have any evidence that the dynamics have changed since last year," said Baldassare. "There just hasn't been much movement on this issue."

DiCamillo said the Field Poll in March found the idea of same-sex marriage polled significantly better among younger voters, who tend to turn out in greater numbers in presidential elections.

"You had nearly 5 million more (California) voters in the last presidential election than in the last gubernatorial election," he said, "and those 5 million that get added tend to be the younger segments … . Without them, I think the same-sex marriage proponents have a much tougher battle."

Baldassare said that waiting until 2012 might also help proponents build a more committed base.

The March PPIC poll found that of those who said they opposed same-sex marriage, 65 percent viewed the Supreme Court's then-pending decision as "very important," while only 51 percent of gay marriage proponents thought it was "very important."

DiCamillo also pointed out that the "try, try again" adage doesn't necessarily translate to the political arena.

For example, proponents of a law to require parental notification before a minor girl could receive an abortion have tried three times to convince voters since 2005. They lost 52-48 last year; 54.2-45.8 in 2006 and 52.8-47.2 in 2005.

While gay marriage champions are pursuing political victory in the wake of Tuesday's state Supreme Court ruling, they are also chasing a legal remedy.

A strange-bedfellows duo of top constitutional lawyers filed suit in federal court Wednesday to overturn Proposition 8 on the grounds it violates the U.S. Constitution's equal-protection clause.

Speaking at a Los Angeles press conference, attorneys Theodore B. Olson and David Boies said the suit, filed on behalf of two gay California couples, seeks an injunction to stay the law while the case proceeds.

Olson, a former U.S. solicitor general, represented former President George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, which decided the 2000 presidential election. Boies represented Bush's Democratic challenger, Al Gore.

The case "is not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican," Olson said. "This case is about the equal rights guaranteed to every American under the United States Constitution."

The two lawyers said the suit was analogous to a 1967 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Virginia law that banned marriage between members of different races.

But at least one legal scholar thinks that like the new political challenge, the lawsuit may also be premature.

Marc Spindelman, a professor at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law, said the 1967 ruling came as the United States had been clearly shifting away from racially discriminatory laws, on both political and legal levels.

"It's not clear yet that we have arrived at a moment in our country's history where the emerging consensus, unequivocally, is in favor of same-sex marriage," Spindelman said. "This suit may just be a little too soon."

Editor's Note: Sacbee.com is disabling comments on this story in favor of hosting a discussion of this issue in our forums. Please join us.

Call Steve Wiegand, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 321-1076.