Split California court rejects gay marriage
Split California court rejects gay marriage
By Gary Barlow
Copyright by The Chicago Free Press
October 11, 2006
A divided California Court of Appeal ruled Oct. 5 that a California law banning gays and lesbians from marrying is legal, disappointing 12 gay and lesbian couples who immediately said they would appeal the decision.
“Today’s decision was disappointing, but we have always known this case ultimately will be decided by the California Supreme Court,” said attorney Shannon Minter, of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who argued the case.
The court ruled 2-1 that the California Legislature was within its rights in restricting marriage to straight couples, with Justice William McGuinness writing for the majority, “It is rational for the Legislature to preserve the opposite-sex definition of marriage, which has existed throughout history.”
The majority opinion noted that California legislators have granted gay and lesbian couples many of the rights of marriage through the state’s domestic partnership laws, rejecting the argument of the plaintiffs that such a system constitutes “separate, but equal” discrimination.
“The time may come when California chooses to expand the definition of marriage to encompass same-sex unions,” the justices stated. “That change must come from democratic processes, however, not by judicial fiat.”
Justice Anthony Kline wrote a lengthy dissent that strongly criticized the majority ruling.
“Judicial opinions upholding blanket denial of the right of gay men and lesbians to enter society’s most fundamental and sacred institution are as incompatible with liberty and equality, and as inhumane, as the many opinions that upheld denial of that right to interracial couples,” Kline wrote. “Like them, such opinions will not stand the test of time.”
The ruling overturned an April 2005 San Francisco Superior Court decision striking down California’s ban on gay and lesbian marriages.
The couples who filed the challenge to the marriage ban said they remain optimistic that one day their relationships will be legally recognized as equal to those of straight couples.
“We know that history is on our side,” plaintiffs Jeanne Rizzo and Pali Cooper said in a statement. “We are disappointed by the court’s ruling, but we have faith that the law will not continue to treat us as outsiders. We simply want the same legal protections as other Californians.”
Attorneys with NCLR’s legal partners in the case, Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union, also remained optimistic.
“This decision is a pit-stop on the long road to justice, not a detour,” said Lambda’s Jennifer Pizer.
By Gary Barlow
Copyright by The Chicago Free Press
October 11, 2006
A divided California Court of Appeal ruled Oct. 5 that a California law banning gays and lesbians from marrying is legal, disappointing 12 gay and lesbian couples who immediately said they would appeal the decision.
“Today’s decision was disappointing, but we have always known this case ultimately will be decided by the California Supreme Court,” said attorney Shannon Minter, of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who argued the case.
The court ruled 2-1 that the California Legislature was within its rights in restricting marriage to straight couples, with Justice William McGuinness writing for the majority, “It is rational for the Legislature to preserve the opposite-sex definition of marriage, which has existed throughout history.”
The majority opinion noted that California legislators have granted gay and lesbian couples many of the rights of marriage through the state’s domestic partnership laws, rejecting the argument of the plaintiffs that such a system constitutes “separate, but equal” discrimination.
“The time may come when California chooses to expand the definition of marriage to encompass same-sex unions,” the justices stated. “That change must come from democratic processes, however, not by judicial fiat.”
Justice Anthony Kline wrote a lengthy dissent that strongly criticized the majority ruling.
“Judicial opinions upholding blanket denial of the right of gay men and lesbians to enter society’s most fundamental and sacred institution are as incompatible with liberty and equality, and as inhumane, as the many opinions that upheld denial of that right to interracial couples,” Kline wrote. “Like them, such opinions will not stand the test of time.”
The ruling overturned an April 2005 San Francisco Superior Court decision striking down California’s ban on gay and lesbian marriages.
The couples who filed the challenge to the marriage ban said they remain optimistic that one day their relationships will be legally recognized as equal to those of straight couples.
“We know that history is on our side,” plaintiffs Jeanne Rizzo and Pali Cooper said in a statement. “We are disappointed by the court’s ruling, but we have faith that the law will not continue to treat us as outsiders. We simply want the same legal protections as other Californians.”
Attorneys with NCLR’s legal partners in the case, Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union, also remained optimistic.
“This decision is a pit-stop on the long road to justice, not a detour,” said Lambda’s Jennifer Pizer.
posted by Carlos T Mock @ 3:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home