Vaughn Walker is My Hero
Not gonna lie, I'm totally crushing right now.
We have some cases pending before him right now, actually, and one of my co-workers clerked for him back in the day. We had really high hopes for this decision, and I have to say this opinion rocks.
The evidence at trial shows that marriage in the United States traditionally has not been open to same-sex couples.
The evidence suggests many reasons for this tradition of exclusion; including gender roles mandated through coverture,
social disapproval of same-sex relationships, and the reality tht the vast majority of people are heterosexual and have
had no reason to challenge the restriction. The evidence shows that the movement of marriage away from a gendered institution
and toward an institution free from state-mandated gender roles reflects an evolution in the understanding of
gender rather than a change in marriage. The evidence did not show any historical purpose for excluding same-sex couples from
marriage, as states have never required spouses to have an ability or willingness to procreate in order to marry. Rather, the
exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed.
Read the rest here. Oh Ninth Circuit, please don't fuck this up.
We have some cases pending before him right now, actually, and one of my co-workers clerked for him back in the day. We had really high hopes for this decision, and I have to say this opinion rocks.
The evidence at trial shows that marriage in the United States traditionally has not been open to same-sex couples.
The evidence suggests many reasons for this tradition of exclusion; including gender roles mandated through coverture,
social disapproval of same-sex relationships, and the reality tht the vast majority of people are heterosexual and have
had no reason to challenge the restriction. The evidence shows that the movement of marriage away from a gendered institution
and toward an institution free from state-mandated gender roles reflects an evolution in the understanding of
gender rather than a change in marriage. The evidence did not show any historical purpose for excluding same-sex couples from
marriage, as states have never required spouses to have an ability or willingness to procreate in order to marry. Rather, the
exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed.
Read the rest here. Oh Ninth Circuit, please don't fuck this up.