Gay Couples Cheer
California High Court Ruling

Gay and lesbian couples around California are planning their nuptials following a refusal by the state's highest court to delay its decision legalizing same-sex marriage.

The California supreme court's announcement Wednesday cleared the final hurdle for same-sex couples in the nation's most populous state to wed beginning June 17, when state officials have said counties must start issuing new gender-neutral marriage licenses.

Judy Appel, executive director of Our Family Coalition, a San Francisco-based group that advocates for same-sex couples with children, said she was thrilled by the court's refusal to stay the ruling.

''Today is a great day not only for every lesbian and gay couple who wants to get married, but for every Californian who believes in fairness and equal opportunity for all,'' said Appel, a mother of two who plans to marry her partner of 16 years in coming months.

Conservative religious and legal groups had asked the justices to stop its May 15 order requiring state and local officials to sanction same-sex unions from becoming effective until voters have the chance to consider the issue in November. The justices' decisions typically become final after 30 days.

An initiative to ban gay marriage has qualified for the November 4 ballot. Its passage would overrule the court's decision by amending the state constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman.

In arguing for a delay, the amendment's sponsors predicted chaos if couples married in the next few months, only to have the practice halted -- or nullified -- at the ballot box.

The attorneys general from 11 states had submitted briefs backing that claim. California does not have a residency requirement or waiting period for obtaining marriage licenses, forcing other states to consider whether it would recognize same-sex marriages from California.

The four justices who denied the stay request -- three of them appointed by Republican governors -- were the same judges who joined in the majority opinion that found withholding marriage from same-sex couples constituted discrimination. The three dissenting justices said they thought a hearing on whether the stay should be granted was warranted.

Ronald Prentice, executive director of the coalition sponsoring the November measure, predicted the court's refusal to put the brakes on its historic ruling would motivate gay marriage opponents to vote for the ban.

''Certainly it was our hope that one or more members of the majority decision would recognize that they had overstepped their bounds, and would allow the November vote to speak on behalf of the state's citizens,'' Prentice said. ''We are obviously disappointed by their continued arrogance to overrule the will of the people.''

Glen Lavy, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, which filed the leading stay request and is part of a coalition backing the fall ballot measure, said taking the issue to the federal courts was not an option because the supreme court did not give his group legal standing in the case.

''This was a 4-3 vote for legal chaos,'' Lavy said. ''This refusal to wait until the constitutional process is played out confirms that this is kind of agenda-driven.''

Gay rights advocates had urged the court to let same-sex marriages begin as quickly as possible, arguing there was no legal basis for continuing to subject gay couples to unequal treatment.

''It would be unprecedented to postpone constitutional rights based on a speculation of how a political scenario may or may not have played out,'' said San Francisco city attorney Dennis Herrera, whose office represented the city in successfully suing to overturn California's one man-one woman marriage laws.

California has an estimated 108,734 same-sex households, according to 2006 U.S. Census figures. The state already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners many of the legal rights and responsibilities afforded to married couples, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.

In its May 15 ruling, the high court struck down state laws against same-sex marriage and said domestic partnerships are not enough.

Backers of the fall initiative now hope to add California to the list of 26 states that have approved constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. It is unclear whether marriages performed before the fall election would be nullified if the amendment passes. Some legal scholars have said the supreme court might get called on again to settle that question.

Despite the uncertainty, hundreds of couples already have scheduled appointments to obtain marriage licenses at San Francisco City Hall on June 17 and in the weeks after.

Mayor Gavin Newsom said the city planned to have extended hours to avoid ''a mass wedding'' and has asked the state for permission to begin issuing the licenses on June 16.

''We want to allow for hundreds, if not thousands, of people to come to San Francisco to start their lives together,'' Newsom said. (Lisa Leff, AP)