Same-sex marriage
dealt setbacks
in NY, Georgia
By Daniel Trotta,
Reuters from the Web, July 6, 2006
| |
 |
| |
Same-sex marriage delt setbacls in NY, Georgia |
NEW YORK -- The highest courts in New
York and Georgia dealt setbacks to supporters of same-sex marriage on Thursday,
reigniting a national debate likely to continue through the November
congressional election campaign.
The New York Court of Appeals upheld a state law that bans same-sex marriage and
said the Legislature should decide whether to allow gays to marry.
Meanwhile, Georgia's Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling that found
the state's 2004 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
The higher court thus upholds a law recognizing marriage as only the union of a
man and a woman.
Gay rights advocates vowed to take their fight to the New York statehouse, the
next arena in their state-by-state campaign for marriage rights.
They also took heart in one judge's dissent in the New York court's 4 to 2
ruling as Chief Judge Judith Kaye said: "I am confident that future
generations will look back on today's decision as an unfortunate misstep."
Similar state courts are due to rule soon on same-sex marriage cases in New
Jersey, California and Washington state.
Massachusetts is the only state to permit gays to marry, while Vermont and
Connecticut allow same-sex couples the rights and benefits of marriage under the
name civil unions.
At the federal level, the Republican-led Congress is considering an amendment to
the U.S. Constitution that would define marriage as between a man and a woman,
but analysts say it lacks the votes to pass.
'AN INSULT'
In the New York case, 44 gay and lesbian couples -- including Dan O'Donnell, a
state lawmaker and the brother of entertainer Rosie O'Donnell -- had sought to
overturn a 97-year-old state law that defines marriage as between a man and
woman.
They claimed it violated the state's constitution because it amounted to sex
discrimination, but the court majority found it was a matter for the legislative
branch to decide.
"The right to marry is unquestionably a fundamental right. The right to
marry someone of the same sex, however, is not 'deeply rooted'; it has not even
been asserted until relatively recent times," Judge Robert Smith wrote in his
opinion.
One lawyer for the couples called the decision "extremely disappointing, even
tragic" while another advocate called it "an insult."
"We believe we will get enough votes to pass a marriage statute in the
Legislature," said Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties
Union who argued on behalf of the couples.
Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force,
said the ruling was "an insult, shocking, stunning."
"This is the New York Court of Appeals, not the Alabama Supreme Court," he said
in a reference to the southern state's past reluctance to grant equal rights to
blacks.
In the Georgia case, at issue was whether the wording of a voter-approved ban on
same-sex marriage referred to two separate issues or just one. Georgia's
constitution requires that amendments must deal with only one subject matter.
The trial court found that the law referred to two separate issues -- gay
marriage and civil union -- but the Supreme Court struck down that
interpretation, upholding the ban.
(Emphasis Added)
(Additional reporting by Holly McKenna)
|
