Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Makeuptalk.com forums

Help Support Makeuptalk.com forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

internetchick

Beauty Blogger
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
12,159
Reaction score
105
Quote:
CNN) -- A federal judge in California on Wednesday struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that voter-approved Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution -- handing supporters of gay rights a major victory in a case that both sides say is sure to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The 136-page opinion, issued by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco, is an initial step in what will likely be a lengthy fight over California's Proposition 8, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

At stake in the trial was whether California's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay couples' rights to equal protection and due process, as protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The high-profile case is being watched closely by both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage, as many say it is destined to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, the case could result in a landmark decision on whether people in the United States are allowed to marry people of the same sex.

Same-sex marriage is currently legal in five U.S. states and in the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey. The five states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa and New Hampshire.

"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," Walker, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his opinion.

"Race restrictions on marital partners were once common in most states but are now seen as archaic, shameful or even bizarre," he added. "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals."

In a separate order, Walker also granted supporters of Proposition 8 a temporary stay, which stops his decision from taking immediate effect. They had argued, prior to his ruling, that same-sex marriages would be performed soon after his decision and could be complicated by rulings and appeals farther down the legal road.

Walker gave both sides in the case until Friday to submit their responses to the order.

Elated supporters of same-sex marriage gathered to celebrate the judge's opinion in the Castro district of San Francisco. After speeches and songs, they began a march to city hall. People waved rainbow flags and U.S. flags, and carried signs that read, "We all deserve the freedom to marry," and "Separate is Unequal." Similar rallies unfolded in cities across California -- including Los Angeles and San Diego.

"For our entire lives, our government and the law have treated us as unequal. This decision to ensure that our constitutional rights are as protected as everyone else's makes us incredibly proud of our country," said Kristin Perry, a plaintiff.

Perry and Sandy Stier, along with Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami, are the two couples at the heart of the case, which if appealed would go next to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals before possibly heading to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Opponents of same-sex marriage have said their best bet lies with higher courts and vowed to appeal the federal judge's ruling.

In a national survey, conducted by Gallup in May, 53 percent of respondents said same-sex marriages should not be recognized by law, while 44 percent said they should.

Proposition 8 is part of a long line of seesaw rulings, court cases, debates and protests over the controversial issue of same-sex marriage. It passed in California with some 52 percent of the vote in November 2008.

"Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial," said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman."

Source
 
that's no right I'm not gay but have friends that are...I support it or I don't have a problem with it but that's stupid to do that now

 
I think that is great news..it is already legal in CT to do so..it should be the same everywhere IMO

 
Originally Posted by Ari1202 /img/forum/go_quote.gif that's no right I'm not gay but have friends that are...I support it or I don't have a problem with it but that's stupid to do that now What?
kopfkratz.gif

Anyways this is great!

 
Originally Posted by Johnnie /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's great! It will be appealed. I have a feeling *sigh* I hope they do. If it goes to the Supreme Court, then they can set a precedent making all states recognize gay marriages.
 
It is great that the judge overturned the ban. But I'm skeptical that it will last for long.

I feel very bad for anyone that can't get married, just because of their sexual preference.

I'm so use to Canada having marriage for all adults. The US needs to get with the program and have marriage available to all gay Americans, in every state.

 
One of the issues I keep hearing about this is that the only reason the judge overturned it is because he, himself, is openly gay.

I just remember one of my friends saying a while back, that if so many people felt so strongly about preserving the sanctity of marriage that they should also ban divorces. (I mean, a divorce certainly does a more succinct job of destroying a marriage than two same-sex partners in love, wouldn't you think?) Wonder how well that'd go in court?
tongue.gif


 
I do not believe the only reason he overturned it is because he is gay. Does his being gay factor in his decision? Probably some, but how much no one knows but him. There are a ton of issues with the ban, and I believe that a straight judge would have made the same decision.

Quote:
Walker himself hasn't addressed the speculation, and he did not respond to a request for comment by The Associated Press on Thursday. Lawyers in the case, including those defending the ban, say the judge's sexuality - gay or straight - was not an issue at trial and will not be a factor on appeal. http://www.komonews.com/news/national/100119349.html
Source


http://www.komonews.com/news/national/100119349.html
 
Originally Posted by internetchick /img/forum/go_quote.gif Does his being gay factor in his decision? Not necessarily, but it does bring up an item for the opponents to bicker about.
I think that a gay couple who wants to get married until death do us part has a stronger right to be married than a straight couple who will divorce in a few years.

 
Back
Top