August 5, 2010 in Nation/World

Judge tosses gay marriage ban

Rejection of California law cites ‘unequal treatment’
Lisa Leff And Paul Elias Associated Press
 
What’s next

Despite the ruling, gay marriage will not be allowed to resume immediately. Judge Vaughn Walker said he wants to decide whether his order should be suspended while proponents of the ban pursue their appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

SAN FRANCISCO – A federal judge overturned California’s gay marriage ban Wednesday in a landmark case that could eventually force the U.S. Supreme Court to confront the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed.

The ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker touched off a celebration outside the courthouse. Gay couples waved rainbow and American flags and erupted with cheers in the city that has long been a haven for gays.

Walker methodically rejected every argument posed by sponsors of the ban in response to a lawsuit filed by two gay couples who claimed Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban, violated their civil rights.

“Proposition 8 singles out gays and lesbians and legitimates their unequal treatment,” the judge wrote in his 136-page opinion. “Proposition 8 perpetuates the stereotype that gays and lesbians are incapable of forming long-term loving relationships and that gays and lesbians are not good parents.”

Standing in front of eight American flags at a news conference, the two couples behind the case beamed and choked up as they related their feelings of validation.

“Our courts are supposed to protect our constitutional rights,” lead plaintiff Kris Perry said as Sandy Stier, her partner of 10 years, stood at her side. “Today, they did.”

Protect Marriage, the coalition of religious and conservative groups that sponsored the ban, said it would immediately appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“In America, we should uphold and respect the right of people to make policy changes through the democratic process, especially changes that do nothing more than uphold the definition of marriage that has existed since the founding of this country and beyond,” said Jim Campbell, a lawyer on the defense team.

Despite the favorable ruling for same-sex couples, gay marriage will not be allowed to resume immediately.

Walker said he wants to decide whether his order should be suspended while the proponents of the ban pursue their appeal. He ordered both sides to submit written arguments by Friday on the issue.

The appeal would go first to the 9th Circuit, then to the U.S. Supreme Court if the high court justices agree to review it.

California’s electorate passed Proposition 8 with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008 after the most expensive political campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.

Supporters argued the ban was necessary to safeguard the traditional understanding of marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.

Walker, however, found it violated the Constitution’s due process and equal protection clauses while failing “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,” the judge wrote.

He also said proponents offered little evidence that they were motivated by anything other than animus toward gays – beginning with their campaign to pass the ban, which included claims of wanting to protect children from learning about same-sex marriage in school.

“Proposition 8 played on the fear that exposure to homosexuality would turn children into homosexuals and that parents should dread having children who are not heterosexual,” Walker wrote.

Walker heard 13 days of testimony and arguments since January during the first trial in federal court to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married.

The plaintiffs presented 18 witnesses. Academic experts testified on topics ranging from the fitness of gay parents and religious views on homosexuality to the historical meaning of marriage and the political influence of the gay rights movement.

Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson teamed up with David Boies to argue the case, bringing together the two litigators best known for representing George W. Bush and Al Gore in the disputed 2000 election.

Defense lawyers called just two witnesses, claiming they did not need to present expert testimony because the U.S. Supreme Court had never specifically upheld the right to gay marriage.

The attorneys also said gay marriage was an experiment with unknown social consequences that should be left to voters to accept or reject.

Currently, same-sex couples can only legally wed in Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.

The ruling puts Walker, a Republican, at the forefront of the gay marriage debate and marks the latest in a long line of high-profile legal decisions for the longtime federal judge.

He was appointed by Ronald Reagan, but his nomination was held up for two years in part because of opposition from gay rights activists. As a lawyer, he helped the U.S. Olympic Committee sue a gay ex-Olympian who had created an athletic competition called the Gay Olympics.


Thoughts and opinions on this story? Click here to comment >>

Get stories like this in a free daily email