Gay Marriage, Jaye Memo and Judge Ruling

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday March 14, 2005 · 12:44 PM PST

2005/03/14 · 12:44

A judge ruled Monday that California can no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman, a legal milestone that if upheld on appeal would pave the way for the nation's most populous state to follow Massachusetts in allowing same-sex couples to wed.

In an opinion that had been awaited because of San Francisco's historical role as a gay rights battleground, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

"It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

Friday, Eric Jaye (Newsom's political consultant), published an important piece in the subscription-only Hotline.

A Democratic Strategy on Gay Marriage

Update [2005-3-14 16:4:15 by Bob Brigham]: From the comments, you can now read the full decision (pdf) that is listed as a Tentative Decision and numbers 27 pages.

Update [2005-3-14 16:52:43 by Bob Brigham]: The AP's Lisa Leff now has a story:

The judge wrote that the state's historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.

"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.

Kramer ruled in lawsuits brought by the city of San Francisco and a dozen same-sex couples last March. The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.

The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.[...]

In a hearing in December, Senior Assistant Attorney General Louis Mauro acknowledged that California is "a leader in affording rights" to same-sex couples. But he maintained that the state has a defensible reason for upholding the existing definition of marriage as part of an important tradition.

"State law says there is a fundamental right to marry," he told Kramer. "We concede that. State law also says marriage is a contract between a man and a woman."

But a deputy city attorney, Therese Stewart, criticized "the so-called tradition argument," saying the meaning of marriage has evolved over time. As examples, she cited now-overturned bans on marriage by interracial couples, or laws that treated wives as a husband's property.

This content was created by a Daily Kos Community member.

Make YOUR voice heard!

Comments are closed on this story.