California Marriages struck down
- Thread starter Rhys
- Start date
Etoile
Mod, 2003-2015
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2000
- Posts
- 17,049
Sadly, it is true.
The ones in my mind right now are Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin, who were the first to receive a marriage certificate in San Francisco. It was so appropriate, such a perfect declaration of their longtime love...and now it's been trashed.
The ones in my mind right now are Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin, who were the first to receive a marriage certificate in San Francisco. It was so appropriate, such a perfect declaration of their longtime love...and now it's been trashed.
69forever
Incorrigible
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
- Posts
- 28,777
California high court overturns San Francisco’s gay marriages
4,000 same-sex licenses ruled invalid
By Staff Reporter
CHRISTIAN EXAMINER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — The California Supreme Court, in a major setback to gay activists, ruled Aug. 12 that the mayor of San Francisco usurped his authority by issuing marriage licenses to 4,000 gay couples last spring.
As part of its 5-2 decision, the court also nullified the licenses, which were granted before a court injunction was issued blocking the practice pending court review.
“We hold only that in the absence of a judicial determination that such statutory provisions are unconstitutional, local executive officials lacked authority to issue marriage licenses to solemnize marriages of, or register certificates of marriage for same-sex couples, and marriages conducted between same-sex couples in violation of the applicable statutes are void and of no legal effect,” the ruling said.
The court did not, however, tackle the larger issue of whether the state’s law prohibiting gay marriages, enacted by California voters through Proposition 22, is legal under the California constitution. The proposition states that marriage in California is defined as only between one man and one woman. The constitutional issue is also being challenged in separate court cases. That decision could be several years away.
Gavin Newsome, San Francisco’s mayor, began issuing the licenses two days before Valentine’s Day. The action drew thousands from across the state and nation, and prompted similar action in other cities outside of California. The next day, Liberty Counsel, representing Sacramento-based California Campaign for Families, filed suit to stop the action.
Mat Staver, president and general council for Liberty, said he believes Newsom’s decision to ignore California law helped spawn a backlash that has erupted in pockets across the country.
“We should thank Mayor Gavin Newsom for jolting the majority of Americans out of their apathy and energizing the pro-traditional marriage movement,” Staver said in a news release. “Mayor Newsom revealed the radical nature of the same-sex marriage agenda. Newsom’s action escalated the time frame of the same-sex marriage agenda, causing it to move too fast, too soon. The majority of Americans support traditional marriage, and that’s why there are 13 states going to the polls to amend their constitutions.”
Staver said that despite failure of the Federal Marriage Amendment in Congress this summer, pro-family advocates are prepared to continue battle over the issue.
“The pro-marriage movement is determined to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment and is resolved to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Staver said. “Instead of helping his cause, Mayor Newsom has set back the same-sex marriage agenda and laid the foundation for the pro-marriage movement to once and for all win this battle to preserve traditional marriage.”
The House of Representatives is expected to consider the Marriage Protection Amendment during the week of Sept. 20 and various conservative groups are already lobbying behind the scenes.
The issue of gay marriage and civil unions has become a lightning-rod issue of the 2004 election season and California has been on the national radar of activists on both sides of the issue.
“This is a sweeping defeat for all those seeking to use the courts to redefine marriage,” Pat Trueman, senior legal counsel for the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said in a news release.
"If they can't win in California, arguably one of the most liberal jurisdictions, they will have difficulty everywhere else they try. The court's precedent is now a major stumbling block for all those who want to redefine marriage."
Gay rights advocates lamented the ruling, but vowed to continue with the fight. Those supporting the marriages included Equality California, Lambda Legal, American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and the National Center For Lesbian Rights.
"This is a painful and difficult day for the thousands of couples whose love, commitment and desire to protect their families was placed on hold," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "While their families are not yet treated equally, their courageous public declarations have shown the world the harm caused by marriage discrimination and will result in our ultimately obtaining the freedom to marry."
Geoffrey Kors, executive director of Equality California, which has sponsored pro-gay legislation and pursued litigation on behalf of its members, called same-sex marriage bans discriminatory.
"Denying one group of people a government issued license for the sole purpose of discriminating against them and their children flies in the face of everything that has made California great," Kors said in a news release.
“These 4000 families, and hundreds of thousands of other families headed by same-sex couples, deserve nothing less than equality and we are confident that the courts and the legislature will remedy this injustice.”
But Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, said the issue boiled down to holding elected officials accountable for their actions.
“Today’s ruling reinforces once again that when one rogue mayor or any other elected officials ignores the rule of law, they will be held accountable,” he said.
***************************************************
The challenge is being met head on as an affront to equal protection. As such the intercession of the radical right is being challenged in further court proceedings as well. Politics aside the constitutional issue IS equal protection under the law.
While I lament the pain caused to same sex couples who chose to publicly and personally acknkowlege their love....I feel this fight can be won on constitutional grounds. Peace.
4,000 same-sex licenses ruled invalid
By Staff Reporter
CHRISTIAN EXAMINER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — The California Supreme Court, in a major setback to gay activists, ruled Aug. 12 that the mayor of San Francisco usurped his authority by issuing marriage licenses to 4,000 gay couples last spring.
As part of its 5-2 decision, the court also nullified the licenses, which were granted before a court injunction was issued blocking the practice pending court review.
“We hold only that in the absence of a judicial determination that such statutory provisions are unconstitutional, local executive officials lacked authority to issue marriage licenses to solemnize marriages of, or register certificates of marriage for same-sex couples, and marriages conducted between same-sex couples in violation of the applicable statutes are void and of no legal effect,” the ruling said.
The court did not, however, tackle the larger issue of whether the state’s law prohibiting gay marriages, enacted by California voters through Proposition 22, is legal under the California constitution. The proposition states that marriage in California is defined as only between one man and one woman. The constitutional issue is also being challenged in separate court cases. That decision could be several years away.
Gavin Newsome, San Francisco’s mayor, began issuing the licenses two days before Valentine’s Day. The action drew thousands from across the state and nation, and prompted similar action in other cities outside of California. The next day, Liberty Counsel, representing Sacramento-based California Campaign for Families, filed suit to stop the action.
Mat Staver, president and general council for Liberty, said he believes Newsom’s decision to ignore California law helped spawn a backlash that has erupted in pockets across the country.
“We should thank Mayor Gavin Newsom for jolting the majority of Americans out of their apathy and energizing the pro-traditional marriage movement,” Staver said in a news release. “Mayor Newsom revealed the radical nature of the same-sex marriage agenda. Newsom’s action escalated the time frame of the same-sex marriage agenda, causing it to move too fast, too soon. The majority of Americans support traditional marriage, and that’s why there are 13 states going to the polls to amend their constitutions.”
Staver said that despite failure of the Federal Marriage Amendment in Congress this summer, pro-family advocates are prepared to continue battle over the issue.
“The pro-marriage movement is determined to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment and is resolved to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Staver said. “Instead of helping his cause, Mayor Newsom has set back the same-sex marriage agenda and laid the foundation for the pro-marriage movement to once and for all win this battle to preserve traditional marriage.”
The House of Representatives is expected to consider the Marriage Protection Amendment during the week of Sept. 20 and various conservative groups are already lobbying behind the scenes.
The issue of gay marriage and civil unions has become a lightning-rod issue of the 2004 election season and California has been on the national radar of activists on both sides of the issue.
“This is a sweeping defeat for all those seeking to use the courts to redefine marriage,” Pat Trueman, senior legal counsel for the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., said in a news release.
"If they can't win in California, arguably one of the most liberal jurisdictions, they will have difficulty everywhere else they try. The court's precedent is now a major stumbling block for all those who want to redefine marriage."
Gay rights advocates lamented the ruling, but vowed to continue with the fight. Those supporting the marriages included Equality California, Lambda Legal, American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and the National Center For Lesbian Rights.
"This is a painful and difficult day for the thousands of couples whose love, commitment and desire to protect their families was placed on hold," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "While their families are not yet treated equally, their courageous public declarations have shown the world the harm caused by marriage discrimination and will result in our ultimately obtaining the freedom to marry."
Geoffrey Kors, executive director of Equality California, which has sponsored pro-gay legislation and pursued litigation on behalf of its members, called same-sex marriage bans discriminatory.
"Denying one group of people a government issued license for the sole purpose of discriminating against them and their children flies in the face of everything that has made California great," Kors said in a news release.
“These 4000 families, and hundreds of thousands of other families headed by same-sex couples, deserve nothing less than equality and we are confident that the courts and the legislature will remedy this injustice.”
But Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, said the issue boiled down to holding elected officials accountable for their actions.
“Today’s ruling reinforces once again that when one rogue mayor or any other elected officials ignores the rule of law, they will be held accountable,” he said.
***************************************************
The challenge is being met head on as an affront to equal protection. As such the intercession of the radical right is being challenged in further court proceedings as well. Politics aside the constitutional issue IS equal protection under the law.
While I lament the pain caused to same sex couples who chose to publicly and personally acknkowlege their love....I feel this fight can be won on constitutional grounds. Peace.
Similar threads
