Judge: Georgia Gay
Marriage Ban
Violates State
Constitution
By AP from
FOXNews.com on the Web. May 16, 2006
ATLANTA — A judge has struck
down Georgia's ban on same-sex marriages, saying the measure that was
overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2004 violated the state constitution's
single-subject rule for ballot questions.
"Procedural safeguards such as the single-subject rule rarely enjoy public
support," Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell wrote.
"But, ultimately it is those safeguards that preserve our liberties, because
they ensure that the actions of government are constrained by the rule of law."
Activists had long awaited Russell's ruling in their court challenge, which was
originally filed in November 2004, soon after the constitutional ban was
approved in that year's general election.
"It's a victory for voters," said Jack Senterfitt, who challenged the amendment
on behalf of gay rights organization Lambda Legal. "Ultimately it is those
safeguards that preserve our liberties. And the reason it's a victory for
voters is that it protects the right of voters to make independent decisions on
each independent issue."
Governor Sonny Perdue said he was disappointed by the decision, which he said
ran contrary to the voice of Georgia voters in defining marriage as a union
between a man and a woman.
"The people of Georgia knew exactly what they were doing when an overwhelming 76
percent voted in support of this constitutional amendment," he said. "It
is sad that a single judge has chosen to reverse this decision."
Perdue said the state is considering appealing the decision to the Georgia
Supreme Court.
In her ruling, Russell said before the state's voters can be asked to decide
whether same-sex marriages should be banned, they must first decide whether
same-sex relationships should have any legal status before the law.
"People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and
privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships
should have some place — although not marriage," she wrote. "The
single-subject rule protects the right of those people to hold both views and
reflect both judgments by their vote."
|
