Gay marriage, other rights at risk after U.S. Supreme Court abortn move | Rters

Contents:

• THE CONSTUTNAL ARGUMENT FOR GAY MARRIAGE
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• WILL CALIFORNIA PROTECT GAY MARRIAGE S NSTUTN?
• CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT
• THE GAY-MARRIAGE AMENDMENT: A DANGER TO THE CONSTUTN
• GAY MARRIAGE, OTHER RIGHTS AT RISK AFTER U.S. SUPREME COURT ABORTN MOVE
• GAY MARRIAGE IS NOW A CONSTUTNAL RIGHT THE UNED STAT OF AMERI
• FREQUENTLY ASKED QUTNS ABOUT THE FERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT AND GAY MARRIAGE
• GAY MARRIAGE
• BH BACKS BAN CONSTUTN ON GAY MARRIAGE

THE CONSTUTNAL ARGUMENT FOR GAY MARRIAGE

] If the legalizatn of gay marriage were acplished by statute, Congrs uld nceivably rely on s power to regulate merce. In a 2003 se that validated crimal penalti on homosexual sodomy, Jtice Anton Slia's bter dissent argued that the Court was settg the stage for exactly this rult.

Gay upl’ fundamental right to marry is protected by the due procs and equal protectn cls of the 14th Amendment, Jtice Anthony M. The same dynamic has occurred the natn’s experienc wh the rights of gays and lbians, Kennedy said, referrg to his own opns strikg down a crimal ban on homosexual sodomy, overturng a state effort to bar lol protectns for gays, and validatg a feral law barrg feral benefs for married gay upl.

Above the Law not that two of Kennedy’s prr gay-rights cisns were issued on June 26, the same date of today’s cisn fdg a nstutnal right for gays to marry.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

Roberts said the arguments on behalf of gay marriage have “unniable appeal” but the Constutn do not pel stat to perm such marriag. Texas: “The Texas statute mak homosexuals unequal the ey of the law by makg particular nduct—and only that nduct—subject to crimal sanctn... Supreme Court legalized gay marriage natnally two years 2020, Nevada beme the first state to ensure the right to same-sex marriage s state nstutn.

In January, the Public Policy Instute of California found that a whoppg 75% of likely voters support a policy allowg gay and lbians upl to marry. The se ma s way to the US Supreme Court, which dismissed an appeal 2013 over same-sex marriage on jurisdictnal grounds, lg private parti did not have standg to fend California’s voter-approved ballot measure barrg gay and lbian upl om state-sanctned wedlock. Californians will vote on a proposal to amend the state Constutn on the 2024 ballot to reaffirm gay marriage rights — a ut move that amid natnal anxiety after recent lgs by the nservative-leang U.

Although there is no current threat to the legaly of gay marriage, and Print Bin signed a bill safeguardg last year, the Democratic-domant state Legislature is seekg to remove language om California’s Constutn that still f marriage as between a man and outdated state fn has been emed unenforceable and unnstutnal thanks to feral law, but LGBTQ advocy groups are askg voters to repeal and amend the California Constutn to stead explicly state that marriage is “a fundamental right. Gav Newsom was out of state, Senate lear Toni Atks (D-San Diego) signed bills to law on his behalf as the first out gay actg ernor.

WILL CALIFORNIA PROTECT GAY MARRIAGE S NSTUTN?

Current vol advot of a nstutnal amendment banng gay marriage ought to nsir the old Che adage, “Be reful what you wish for, bee you may get . The amendment failed spectacular fashn to achieve the temperance movement’s sired rult, as is also likely to happen wh a gay marriage amendment. We saw stat before Obergefell, some stat were movg to allow gay marriage, other stat were movg to allow civil partnerships.

"In Obergefell, the urt said, 'No, we know better than you guys do, and now every state mt, mt sanctn and perm gay marriage.

Hodg, on the legaly of same-sex marriage the Uned Stat, is as breathtakg as is Fourteenth Amendment requir a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to regnize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed is, the lg that gay-marriage advot and opponents have been wag for sce April when the Court took up the se—but really, for years long before that. Remend ReadgThe Court’s opn—thored by Jtice Anthony Kennedy, a Catholic who has long been seen as the possible swg vote on gay marriage, joed by Jtic Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bar Gsburg, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor, and wh four separate dissents thored and joed by batns of Samuel Alo, John Roberts, Anton Slia, and Clarence Thomas—lists four major reasons for s cisn.

CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT

”But then, the cisn tak an tertg turn: The Court seems to flip the oft-ed reasong of same-sex marriage opponents, who claim that gay marriage is harmful to children and fai, and disptive to the longstandg orr of Amerin society. Not all straight married upl have children, and they’re certaly not required to do so by law, he reasons; the same le should apply to gay married upl. But more importantly, for those gay upl that do want to have kids—cludg the many upl who adopt or have children g the geic material of one parent—that their unns are ls than marriage unr the law creat a “more difficult and uncerta fay life.

THE GAY-MARRIAGE AMENDMENT: A DANGER TO THE CONSTUTN

” Like his lleagu the majory, he lv to the history of marriage, even givg a nod to one of the favore arguments of gay-marriage opponents: that legalizg gay marriage is sentially a slippery slope. In each of their dissents, Thomas and Alo addrs the qutn of relig liberty, argug that this cisn will make much more difficult for those who oppose gay marriage on the basis of fah to exercise their beliefs. Opponents of same-sex marriage have long argued that the stutn of marriage is sacred, and that gay unns would change s very nature.

In so dog, the urt went past even the arguments advanced by Solicor General Donald Verrilli and some gay-rights advot who urged the more most approach of merely strikg down bans on gay marriage unr the Equal Protectn Clse of the Constutn.

Instead, he boldly asserted same-sex upl have the same right to marriage as everybody else -- leavg for another day the qutn of whether gays are also a spect class entled to heightened protectn. Fally, he wrote, marriage provis a “nstellatn of benefs” that the stat should not be allowed to ny their cizens simply bee they are gay.

GAY MARRIAGE, OTHER RIGHTS AT RISK AFTER U.S. SUPREME COURT ABORTN MOVE

Opponents of gay marriage base on “cent and honorable relig or philosophil premis, and neher they nor their beliefs are disparaged here, " Kennedy wrote.

The practil impact of the cisn is that all stat mt allow gay marriag and honor same-sex marriag approved by other stat. The send sentence go further; would overri any existg lol and state level protectns and benefs for gay and lbian upl, or any other unmarried uple, cludg hospal visatn rights, herance rights, pensn benefs, and health surance among others.

GAY MARRIAGE IS NOW A CONSTUTNAL RIGHT THE UNED STAT OF AMERI

While civil unns are a meangful step toward endg discrimatn agast gay and lbian upl, they fall short of te equaly by settg up a separate tegory of rights and protectns for gay and lbian upl. Gay and lbian Amerins serve the ary, keep our muni safe as firefighters and police officers, staff our hospals, build our ci and pay tax. Gay and lbian upl long-term mted relatnships should not be nied legal rights pensns, health surance, hospal visatns, and herance that other long-term mted upl enjoy.

What about relig groups who believe homosexualy is wrong – won’t this prsure them to regnize homosexual upl or accept marriage of gay and lbian upl? The First Amendment protects the right of people of fah to anize themselv acrdg to their own beliefs and tradns, and no law regnizg marriage of lbian and gay upl will lim the eedom of religns to fe marriage as each se f. Amerins’ attus toward the rights of gays and lbians are evolvg jt as attus on civil rights of other groups of Amerins have evolved over time.

Early Years: Same-Sex Marriage Bans In 1970, jt one year after the historic Stonewall Rts that galvanized the gay rights movement, law stunt Richard Baker and librarian Jam McConnell applied for a marriage license Gerald Nelson rejected their applitn bee they were a same-sex uple, and a trial urt upheld his cisn.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUTNS ABOUT THE FERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT AND GAY MARRIAGE

” This lg effectively blocked feral urts om lg on same-sex marriage for s, leavg the cisn solely the hands of stat, which alt blow after blow to those hopg to see gay marriage beg 1973, for stance, Maryland beme the first state to create a law that explicly f marriage as a unn between a man and woman, a belief held by many nservative relig groups.

GAY MARRIAGE

Though the gay rights movement saw some advancements the 1970s and 1980s—such as Harvey Milk beg the first openly gay man elected to public office the untry 1977—the fight for gay marriage ma ltle headway for many years. In 1989, the San Francis Board of Supervisors passed an ordance that allowed homosexual upl and unmarried heterosexual upl to register for domtic partnerships, which granted hospal visatn rights and other years later, the District of Columbia siarly passed a new law that allowed same-sex upl to register as domtic partners. C., 1993, the hight urt Hawaii led that a ban on same-sex marriage may vlate that state nstutn’s Equal Protectn Clse—the first time a state urt has ever ched toward makg gay marriage Hawaii Supreme Court sent the se—brought by a gay male uple and two lbian upl who were nied marriage licens 1990—back for further review to the lower First Circu Court, which 1991 origally dismissed the the state tried to prove that there was “pellg state tert” jtifyg the ban, the se would be tied up ligatn for the next three Defense of Marriage Act Opponents of gay marriage, however, did not s on their hnch.

Congrs 1996 passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which Print Bill Clton signed to didn’t ban gay marriage outright but specified that only heterosexual upl uld be granted feral marriage benefs.

BH BACKS BAN CONSTUTN ON GAY MARRIAGE

That is, even if a state ma gay marriage legal, same-sex upl still wouldn’t be able to file e tax jotly, sponsor spo for immigratn benefs or receive spoal Social Secury payments, among many other act was a huge setback for the marriage equaly movement, but transient good news arose three months later: Hawaii Judge Kev S. Phg for Change: Civil Unns The next saw a whirlwd of activy on the gay marriage ont, begng wh the year 2000 when Vermont beme the first state to legalize civil unns, a legal stat that provis most of the state-level benefs of years later, Massachetts beme the first state to legalize gay marriage when the Massachetts Supreme Court led that same-sex upl had the right to marry Goodridge v.

The state fally troduced the untry to gay marriage (m the feral benefs) when began issug same-sex marriage licens on May 17, that year, the U. 2004 was notable for upl many other stat as well, though for the oppose reason: Ten typilly nservative stat, along wh Oregon, enacted state-level bans on gay marriage.