As gay activists celebrate May’s California supreme court victory (and prepare for the next battle in November), they’re also anticipating the next states to follow in the Golden State’s footsteps.
Gary Buseck, legal director of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, has high hopes for Connecticut. The Connecticut supreme court is currently deciding in Kerrigan and Mock v. Connecticut Department of Health whether limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is unconstitutional -- despite the state’s civil union law that offers same-sex couples the same legal benefits married Connecticut couples have. “I think the court is in a good position to bring us the third state with full marriage equality,” says Buseck, who is anxious to hear a ruling. GLAD argued this case before the Connecticut high court more than a year ago, and a decision is expected any day.
Lambda Legal has yet to argue its case before the Iowa supreme court. While it has fully briefed the case -- brought on behalf of six same-sex couples denied marriage licenses in Iowa -- the court hasn’t yet set a date to hear oral arguments. Expect Lambda to argue, as it did in California, that denying marriage to same-sex couples violates the equal protection and due process guarantees in the Iowa state constitution. While arguments are expected in late 2008 or early 2009, it could take more than a year for the court to hand down a ruling, says Jon Davidson, Lambda Legal’s legal director.
Then there’s New Jersey, which could become the first state to enact marriage equality legislatively rather than via court ruling. In October 2006 the New Jersey supreme court ruled in Lewis v. Harris that same-sex couples must be treated equally under the law and asked the state legislature to decide in that instance how to correct the inequality same-sex couples faced. And while marriage rights would have fulfilled the state constitution’s promise of equality, the legislature chose to enact a civil union law. However, leaders in both houses of the legislature now support marriage equality legislation, and New Jersey governor Jon Corzine says he would sign the bill, just not in 2008, a presidential election year.
Which means that New York could steal New Jersey’s crown and become the first state to have its legislature adopt same-sex marriage. In June 2007 the Democratic-controlled New York State assembly passed same-sex marriage legislation, becoming the first legislative chamber in the nation to pass a marriage equality bill with bipartisan support. While Gov. David Paterson resoundingly supports marriage equality, the legislation has stalled in the GOP-controlled senate, where Republican majority leader Joseph L. Bruno has refused to take up the bill.
Whether marriage equality lawsuits will be filed in other states depends largely on the outcomes in Iowa and Connecticut. “We’ve been in kind of a litigation phase on marriage across the country, and that string of existing cases is coming to an end,” explains Buseck. Which means, says Davidson, “we’ll just have to wait and see.”
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.
Home | Contact | Current Issue | LGBT Community Partners | Staff
Career Opportunities | Help
Subscribe: Print Edition Digital Edition | Subscriber Services: Print Edition Digital Edition
Visit our Websites
Out.com | OutTraveler.com | HIVPlusMag.com | Alyson.com | HereTV.com | GayWired.com | SheWired.com
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Community Guidelines | Legal Notice
Advocate.com © 2009 Regent Entertainment Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.
