Divorce Attorneys
Judge Rejects Md. Anti-Gay Marriage Law
|
|
A Baltimore judge ruled today that same-sex couples should be given the right to marry. Judge M. Brooke Murdock ruled that Maryland’s ban on gay marriage “cannot withstand constitutional challenge.” Murdock wrote that “while tradition and societal values are important,” they’re not enough to justify a discriminatory law. The decision is expected to be appealed to Maryland’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. Murdock’s order will be stayed pending the appeal. Nineteen gay men and women filed a lawsuit in Baltimore arguing that the state’s ban on same-sex marriages violates the guarantee of equal rights under the state constitution. The state passed a law in 1973 specifying that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. State attorneys had argued that granting same-sex couples the right to marry could create a conflict with federal law. The lawsuit vaulted Maryland into the national debate over who has access to the legal, societal and emotional advantages of marriage, attracting attention from other states and national groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped represent the palintiffs. The suit was filed against court clerks in Prince George’s, St. Mary’s, Dorchester and Washington counties and the city of Baltimore. |
Related Articles from Attorney for Divorce
Utah cases challenge whether anti-polygamy laws are constitutional
Polygamy is the practice (usually religious) of having multiple spouses (usually wives). There are two possible lines of constitutional attack on anti-polygamy statutes. One derives from the First Amendment's religion clauses. The other derives from Due Process "right to privacy" concepts -- and in particular, from the Supreme Court's recent holding in Lawrence v. Texas that adults have a privacy right that extends to private, consensual sex acts. In the end, neither of these lines of attack will -- or should -- be successful. Still, it is worth taking a close look at each to examine the extent to which the
Judge rules against gay couples in N.Y.
A judge has ruled against a group of same-sex couples who challenged the state's anti-gay marriage law after they were denied marriage licenses. The 25 couples sued the city of Ithaca and the state last June, arguing that the law contradicts a 2002 New York statute outlawing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. But State Supreme Court Judge Robert Mulvey rejected that argument Wednesday, saying it is up to the Legislature to change the law, not the courts. "Social perceptions of same-sex civil contracts may change over time," Mulvey wrote in his ruling. "If that day comes, it is within the
Judge rules against gay couples in N.Y.
- A judge has ruled against a group of same-sex couples who challenged the state's anti-gay marriage law after they were denied marriage licenses. The 25 couples sued the city of Ithaca and the state last June, arguing that the law contradicts a 2002 New York statute outlawing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. But State Supreme Court Judge Robert Mulvey rejected that argument Wednesday, saying it is up to the Legislature to change the law, not the courts. "Social perceptions of same-sex civil contracts may change over time," Mulvey wrote in his ruling. "If that day comes, it is within the
Judge Rejects Washington State’s Defense of Marriage Law
On Tuesday, Missouri voters passed a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage; and on Wednesday, a judge in Washington state showed why more states are considering such amendments. King County Superior Court Judge William Downing ruled that Washington State must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples -- even though Washington is one of 38 states with a state law defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Judge Downing said Washington's defense of marriage law is unconstitutional because it denies marriage to homosexuals. The state law "is not rationally related to any legitimate or compelling state interest," the judge
Clinton, Congress say okay to discrimination
On Sept. 10 in Hawaii, a court heard opening arguments in a case that has so shaken the anti-gay U.S. ruling class that in Washington the same day, the Senate held its first vote ever on gay rights. Actually, there were two votes. The bigots prevailed in both. By 85 to 14, the Senate joined the House in voting to deny federal recognition of same-sex marriage if Hawaii or another state grants that right. And by 50 to 49, the Senate killed a bill to ban anti-gay discrimination on the job. The ruling class is the real force behind the