California supreme court overturns same-sex marriage ban
California supreme court overturns same-sex marriage ban
* Daniel Nasaw in Washington
* guardian.co.uk,
* Thursday May 15 2008
The California supreme court today ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed, a decision that is sure to resonate in the presidential campaign and congressional elections.
In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, and found that domestic partnerships are not a suitable substitute for marriage. The opinion, written by Chief Justice Ron George, cites a 1948 case overturning a ban on interracial marriage.
The court rejected arguments that marriage should be preserved for opposite-sex couples because it has been so traditionally.
"History alone is not invariably an appropriate guide for determining the meaning and scope of this fundamental constitutional guarantee," the court wrote.
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted San Francisco's month-long same-sex wedding march.
"Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," the court wrote.
The state's attorney general argued that California's domestic-partnership law afforded the same substantive rights as marriage, but the court found the separate nomenclature risks denying same-sex couples "equal dignity and respect".
In a dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Marvin Baxter wrote that only one other US state, Massachusetts, allows gay marriage, and said the court overreached its authority.
"Nothing in our constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority's startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage - an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law - is no longer valid," Baxter wrote, adding that further "sea change" in notions of marriage should occur "by democratic means".
California supreme court overturns same-sex marriage ban
* Daniel Nasaw in Washington
* guardian.co.uk,
* Thursday May 15 2008
The California supreme court today ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed, a decision that is sure to resonate in the presidential campaign and congressional elections.
In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, and found that domestic partnerships are not a suitable substitute for marriage. The opinion, written by Chief Justice Ron George, cites a 1948 case overturning a ban on interracial marriage.
The court rejected arguments that marriage should be preserved for opposite-sex couples because it has been so traditionally.
"History alone is not invariably an appropriate guide for
determining the meaning and scope of this fundamental constitutional guarantee," the court wrote.
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted San Francisco's month-long same-sex wedding march.
"Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," the court wrote.
The state's attorney general argued that California's domestic-partnership law afforded the same substantive rights as marriage, but the court found the separate nomenclature risks denying same-sex couples "equal dignity and respect".
In a dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Marvin Baxter wrote that only one other US state, Massachusetts, allows gay marriage, and said the court overreached its authority.
"Nothing in our constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority's startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage - an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law - is no longer valid," Baxter wrote, adding that further "sea change" in notions of marriage should occur "by democratic means".
* Daniel Nasaw in Washington
* guardian.co.uk,
* Thursday May 15 2008
The California supreme court today ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed, a decision that is sure to resonate in the presidential campaign and congressional elections.
In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, and found that domestic partnerships are not a suitable substitute for marriage. The opinion, written by Chief Justice Ron George, cites a 1948 case overturning a ban on interracial marriage.
The court rejected arguments that marriage should be preserved for opposite-sex couples because it has been so traditionally.
"History alone is not invariably an appropriate guide for determining the meaning and scope of this fundamental constitutional guarantee," the court wrote.
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted San Francisco's month-long same-sex wedding march.
"Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," the court wrote.
The state's attorney general argued that California's domestic-partnership law afforded the same substantive rights as marriage, but the court found the separate nomenclature risks denying same-sex couples "equal dignity and respect".
In a dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Marvin Baxter wrote that only one other US state, Massachusetts, allows gay marriage, and said the court overreached its authority.
"Nothing in our constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority's startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage - an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law - is no longer valid," Baxter wrote, adding that further "sea change" in notions of marriage should occur "by democratic means".
California supreme court overturns same-sex marriage ban
* Daniel Nasaw in Washington
* guardian.co.uk,
* Thursday May 15 2008
The California supreme court today ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed, a decision that is sure to resonate in the presidential campaign and congressional elections.
In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, and found that domestic partnerships are not a suitable substitute for marriage. The opinion, written by Chief Justice Ron George, cites a 1948 case overturning a ban on interracial marriage.
The court rejected arguments that marriage should be preserved for opposite-sex couples because it has been so traditionally.
"History alone is not invariably an appropriate guide for
determining the meaning and scope of this fundamental constitutional guarantee," the court wrote.
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted San Francisco's month-long same-sex wedding march.
"Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," the court wrote.
The state's attorney general argued that California's domestic-partnership law afforded the same substantive rights as marriage, but the court found the separate nomenclature risks denying same-sex couples "equal dignity and respect".
In a dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Marvin Baxter wrote that only one other US state, Massachusetts, allows gay marriage, and said the court overreached its authority.
"Nothing in our constitution, express or implicit, compels the majority's startling conclusion that the age-old understanding of marriage - an understanding recently confirmed by an initiative law - is no longer valid," Baxter wrote, adding that further "sea change" in notions of marriage should occur "by democratic means".