Judge Rules California Gay Weddings Can Begin Aug. 18 (Update3)
Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A
By Edvard Pettersson and Joel Rosenblatt
Aug. 12 (Bloomberg) -- A California federal judge held that his ruling allowing same-sex marriages in the state shall take effect Aug. 18, saying there’s no reason to delay enforcing the decision for more than a few days.
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco today denied a request by supporters of the state’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage to suspend his Aug. 4 order while they appeal. The U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco could still order an emergency suspension of Walker’s order.
“None of the factors the court weighs in considering a motion to stay favors granting a stay,” Walker wrote in today’s ruling. “The court denies a stay except for a limited time solely in order to permit the court of appeals to consider the issue in an orderly manner.”
Proponents of the amendment, known as Proposition 8, said in court filings that delay was required because it’s likely they will prevail on appeal and because of “the possibility of irreparable harm” should the decision take effect immediately. The case may end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Charles Cooper, the lead lawyer for proponents of the ban, said his side was “gratified that Judge Walker has continued until Aug. 18 the temporary stay of his decision. We will promptly seek from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals a stay pending the final resolution of the case.”
Cooper’s firm previously filed a notice of intent to appeal on behalf of four individuals and the website www.protectmarriage.com.
Proponents Not Persuasive
Proponents of Proposition 8 weren’t persuasive that a stay should be granted because they failed to prove a good chance of success on appeal, Walker ruled. They didn’t fulfill their requirement to show they will be harmed by the original ruling, the judge said.
The Proponents argued “that they have an interest in defending Proposition 8 but failed to articulate even one specific harm they may suffer as a consequence” of the order striking down the measure, Walker wrote.
Walker also said it’s doubtful proponents of the ban will be able to proceed on appeal because they don’t have a “state defendant” on their side. They may have to resort to persuading California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger or Attorney General Jerry Brown to file the appeal to get the case heard, Walker said. Both Schwarzenegger and Brown submitted court filings opposing the stay.
‘Same Rights’
“The court’s decision today recognizes that there is no reason to delay allowing gay men and lesbians to enjoy the same rights that virtually all other citizens already enjoy,” Theodore B. Olson, one of the lawyers who argued on behalf of same-sex marriage, said in an e-mailed statement.
Since Proposition 8 passed in 2008 by 52 percent of California’s voters, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage. Massachusetts did so in 2004.
The three judges assigned to review any request to suspend Walker’s ruling are Edward Leavy, nominated by President Reagan and confirmed in 1987; and Michael Hawkins and Sidney Thomas, both nominated by President Clinton and confirmed to the appeals court in 1994 and 1996, respectively, according to the website for the San Francisco-based appellate court.
Schwarzenegger ‘Pleased’
“I am pleased to see Judge Walker lift his stay and provide all Californians the liberties I believe everyone deserves,” Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said in an e-mailed statement. “Today’s ruling continues to place California at the forefront in providing freedom and equality for all people.”
Walker said in his original decision that the plaintiffs, the city of San Francisco and two couples, demonstrated by “overwhelming evidence” that Proposition 8, passed by the state’s voters to upend a state Supreme Court decision, violates rights to equal protection under the law guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. He prohibited California’s officials from standing in the way of same-sex marriages.
“Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians,” Walker wrote. “The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples” and violates constitutional protections because it “disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification.”
About 18,000 gay couples married in California before Proposition 8 was passed. As of 2006, there were an estimated 109,000 gay couples in California, more than any other state, according to U.S. Census data compiled by the University of California, Los Angeles.
The case is Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 09-cv-02292, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).
To contact the reporter on this story: Bob Van Voris in New York at rvanvoris@bloomberg.net; Edvard Pettersson in Los Angeles at epettersson@bloomberg.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment