Divorce Attorneys
Maryland judge orders ‘gay marriage’ legalized
|
|
A Maryland judge Jan. 20 struck down that state’s 33-year-old marriage law and ruled that “gay marriage” must be legalized. The ruling is being appealed. Click on image for related coverage The decision by Judge M. Brooke Murdock is only the latest victory on the state level for homosexual activists, joining recent wins in Massachusetts, California, New York and Washington state. Massachusett ’ highest court in 2003 ordered the state to legalize “gay marriage.” Judg s in California, New York and Washington also have issued pro-“gay marriage” rulings, although all of them have been appealed. In her 20-page ruling, Murdock said that a 1973 law defining marriage as being between one man and one woman violates the Maryland constitution’s Equal Rights Amendment. The marriage law was passed in the early 1970s shortly after a question arose concerning the legality of “gay marriage” in the state. “Having concluded that preventing same-sex marriage has no rational relationship to any other legitimate state interest, this court concludes that tradition and social values alone cannot support adequately a discriminatory classification,” Murdock wrote. Although 19 states have passed marriage amendments, homosexual activists have filed “gay marriage” suits in liberal-leaning states where courts are likely to be friendly and marriage amendments are less likely to be successful. Thus far, the Maryland legislature has been cool to the idea of an amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of nine homosexual couples and one homosexual individual. Dan Furmansky, executive director of the homosexual group Equality Maryland, called the ruling an “historic moment” for the state. Murdock asserted that the state’s marriage law served no “compelling government interests.” She rejected arguments that the law’s purpose was tied to procreation and child-rearing, as courts in other states have found. Conservatives criticized the ruling and vowed to fight for a marriage amendment to the state constitution. “This is one more outrageous, illogical ruling by a judge with an agenda,” Jan LaRue, an attorney with Concerned Women for America, said in a release. “The law applies equally to two men or two women regardless of their so-called ‘sexual orientation.’ There is no discriminatory classification. It’s bogus.” One Maryland pro-family group, calling itself VoteMarriage.org, is promoting a marriage amendment. A second group, www.DefendMarylandMarriage.com, is doing the same. “This will give our marriage campaign a huge shot in the arm,” Tres Kerns, executive director of Votemarriage.org, was quoted as saying on Concerned Women for America’s Web site. Although Massachusetts remains the only state with legalized “gay marriage,” that could change by the end of the year. Washington state’s highest court is expected to issue a ruling on the issue any week now, and New Jersey’s highest court will hear a “gay marriage” case in February. |
Related Articles from Attorney for Divorce
Maryland judge assailed for pro-gay ruling
Maryland lawmaker Donald H. Dwyer Jr. called for the impeachment of Baltimore Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock on Tuesday for ruling Maryland's marriage law unconstitutional and discriminatory. In January Murdock ruled on the side of same-sex couples who claimed the state's marriage law violated the state Constitution. That decision is being appealed. Dwyer, the Republican author of a failed attempt to put a ban on same-sex marriages on the November ballot, wants Murdock removed from the bench for what he calls "incompetence" and "misbehavior." Dwyer believes that by making an "address for removal" to the House he can force the Judiciary Committee
Lawsuits target 1913 Mass. marriage law
As same-sex couples began marrying on May 17, town clerks were ordered to check the affidavits signed by gay couples to make sure that the couples either lived in the state or were planning to move to Massachusetts. Both Reilly and Romney had previously announced that the 1913 law effectively barred all nonresident same-sex marriages, because no other state had legalized them. When several towns declined to follow orders, Romney demanded the paperwork for out-of-state newlyweds and will likely try and vitiate those marriages once he receives the documents. Meanwhile, Reilly ordered the towns to cease issuing nonresident licenses or face
Maryland marriage law not based on Bible, says professor
A Maryland state proposal to prohibit same-sex marriages has sparked a sharp exchange over the role of religion in government. During a March 1 committee hearing on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages, Sen. Nancy Jacobs cited a religious rationale for her support of the proposal. Jacobs, a...
Maryland marriage law not based on Bible, says professor.
A Maryland state proposal to prohibit same-sex marriages has sparked a sharp exchange over the role of religion in government. During a March 1 committee hearing on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages, Sen. Nancy Jacobs cited a religious rationale for her support of the proposal. Jacobs, a...
Marriage – Or Even Its Benefits – Denied in Maryland
In a 5-2 ruling strongly reminiscent of last year's decision by the Washington State Supreme Court, which was similarly sharply divided, Maryland's highest court on September 18 found that denying the right to marry to same-sex couples does not violate the Maryland Constitution. By a narrower vote, 4-3, the Maryland Court of Appeals also implicitly ruled that same-sex couples are not constitutionally entitled to the rights and benefits associated with marriage through any alternative arrangement such as a civil union. Writing for a majority of the court, Judge Glenn T. Harrell, Jr., rejected the reasoning in Baltimore Circuit Judge M. Brooke