Judge Overturns California's Same Sex Marriage Ban
California's ban on same sex marriage failed its first major legal challenge in a landmark federal court case Wednesday when a district judge ruled that the ban violated the U.S. Constitution.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling comes in response to a lawsuit brought by two same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco. The suit claimed the ban was an unlawful infringement on the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.
"The contrary evidence proponents presented is not credible," Walker ruled. "Indeed, proponents presented no reliable evidence that allowing same-sex couples to marry will have any negative effects on society or on the institution of marriage."
"The process of allowing same-sex couples to marry is straightforward, and no evidence suggests that the state needs any significant lead time to integrate same-sex couples into marriage."
"Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians," Walker continued. "The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples."
Proposition 8, which outlawed gay marriages in California five months after the state Supreme Court legalized them, passed with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008. The vote followed the most expensive campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.
However, Walker ruled that "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite- sex couples are superior to same-sex couples."
He said that "because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."
Attorneys on both sides have said an appeal was certain if Walker did not rule in their favor. The case will go to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals then the Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it.
Anticipating such a scenario, the lawyers representing Protect Marriage, the coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored Proposition 8 in 2008, filed a legal brief Tuesday asking Walker to stay his decision if he overturns the ban, thereby barring same-sex couples from marrying while an appeal was pending.
"Same-sex marriages would be licensed under a cloud of uncertainty, and should proponents succeed on appeal, any such marriages would be invalid," the Protect Marriage lawyers wrote.
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who worked with the legal team fighting the ban, said he was grateful to Walker for making the ruling.
"Today's ruling strikes a resonant chord against discrimination that should not only withstand appeal, but change hearts and minds," he said. "I'm extremely grateful to Judge Walker for a thorough and well reasoned decision that powerfully affirms the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection."
Walker presided over a 13-day trial earlier this year that was the first in a federal court to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married without violating the constitutional guarantee of equality.
Supporters argued the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.
Opponents said that tradition or fears of harm to heterosexual unions were legally insufficient grounds to discriminate against gay couples.
The ruling puts Walker at the forefront of the gay marriage debate. The longtime federal judge was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
In an unusual move, the original defendants, California Attorney General Jerry Brown and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, refused to support Proposition 8 in court.
"Judge Walker had the great responsibility of deciding whether Proposition 8 violates the Constitution of the United States," Schwarzenegger said in statement following the ruling. "He heard in-depth arguments from both sides on fundamental questions of due process, equal protection and freedom from discrimination. There are strong feelings on both sides of this issue, and I am glad that all viewpoints were respected throughout the proceedings. We should also recognize that there will continue to be different points of view in the wake of this decision."
Currently, same-sex couples can only legally wed in Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.
© 2004-2010 LSN, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
.
Sent from my iPod
No comments:
Post a Comment