- Does Obama blueprint reduce budget deficit fast enough? (+video)
- Whitney Houston: a singing sensation silenced too soon
- Pentagon budget: Does it pit active-duty forces against retirees? (+video)
- Could Mitt Romney lose to Rick Santorum in Michigan? (+video)
- More than 30,000 Germans turn out against anti-piracy treaty ACTA
As court mulls, gays wed
A judge may decide as soon as Friday whether to stop San Francisco's rush of gay marriages.
For the past week, the broad granite steps of San Francisco's City Hall have stood like a finish line to gay and lesbian couples from every corner of the United States.
They have come by the thousands to line up in the rain of a raw northern California winter - in a blocks-long gathering that is part street festival, part civic protest. All in the hope of exchanging wedding vows beneath the hall's gilded dome - and in defiance of state law.
In truth, though, the conclusion to their dream lies not here, but just across the road. It's there, in California's conservative-leaning Supreme Court, that this audacious challenge to the traditional notion of the American family is likely to be decided.
The outcome will not only affect those who have flocked to wed, but it will also the shape the national conversation on what may be, at present, the most divisive issue in American society.
The first step toward a court decision could come Friday, when a local judge considers whether to stop San Francisco from issuing marriage licenses to anyone but a man and a woman.
"The California Supreme Court is going to have to resolve this question," says Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. "So long as the California courts decide this is an issue of California law, the United States Supreme Court won't get involved."
California is hardly the only state dealing with such issues. As states across the nation consider gay marriage - or constitutional amendments to block it - the focus as of early last week was on Massachusetts, where the state's highest court says the state constitution permits gay marriages. But by the end of the week, as San Francisco was issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples at Mayor Gavin Newsom's order, Massachusetts lawmakers had decided to postpone deliberations on possible constitutional amendments. Thus, for the moment, California stands at the epicenter of the controversy.
Since San Francisco began offering marriage licenses to same-sex couples last Thursday, two conservative groups have separately asked courts to step in and stop the city. Responding to one of the requests, a judge asked the city to stop, but didn't make his order binding, meaning that the city could continue until its next court date on March 29. That leaves Friday's hearing on the other request, which could immediately stop the city.
Some legal experts suggest that San Francisco's decision to grant marriage licenses to same-sex partners will crumble in the state's highest court. Others argue that the city is using the same tactic that worked in Massachusetts. The case essentially turns on two opposing views of the California Constitution. On one hand, a proposition overwhelmingly adopted by state voters in 2000 declares that only marriages between a man and a woman are valid in California. But San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom contends that same-sex couples are afforded the right to marry under the equal-protection clause of the state constitution.
Page: 1 | 2 



