Divorce Attorneys

In the first known ruling of its kind, a federal judge in Florida on Wednesday upheld a federal law that lets states refuse to recognize marriages between same-sex couples who were legally wed in Massachusetts.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge James Moody comes less than a week after President Bush told the Washington Post he would not lobby aggressively for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage because it had no chance of passing unless the federal law – the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act – was struck down.

Bush’s position, which contradicted his stance during the presidential campaign last year, angered some conservative groups that had worked for his victory. The White House quickly issued clarifying statements stressing that the amendment remained on the president’s agenda.

The federal law authorizes states to refuse to recognize a same-sex couple’s marriage that was performed in a state or nation where the marriage was legal. Massachusetts is the only state that has legalized such marriages.

The Defense of Marriage Act is being challenged in numerous states, including California, under a constitutional provision requiring states to give “full faith and credit'’ to other states’ laws and court judgments.

Another section of the 1996 law, not at issue in the Florida case, specifies that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized under federal law, reinforcing federal agencies’ authority to deny marital benefits to gay or lesbian couples.

The law was challenged by a Tampa couple, Nancy Wilson and Paula Schoenwether, who have been together for 27 years. They went to Massachusetts in July to get married after Massachusetts’ highest court issued a ruling legalizing same-sex marriages under state law. The couple returned home and sued for recognition of marital status in Florida.

Like California – where a suit challenging the state’s ban on same-sex marriage is awaiting a ruling from a San Francisco Superior Court judge – Florida has a law limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Moody ruled that Florida was entitled to rely on its own law and the federal law to disregard the Massachusetts marriage.

“Florida is not required to recognize or apply Massachusetts’ same-sex marriage law because it clearly conflicts with Florida’s legitimate public policy of opposing same-sex marriage,'’ the judge wrote. He said the federal law properly regulates conflicts between state laws.

Citing last year’s ruling by a federal appeals court that upheld Florida’s ban on gay or lesbian adoptions, Moody said the federal law was a legitimate method of “encouraging the raising of children in homes consisting of a married mother and father.'’

Wilson, a minister of Metropolitan Community Churches, said in a statement that she and Schoenwether “are still married in our hearts'’ and would appeal the ruling. But a leading advocate for same-sex couples in California said the couple should drop the suit.

A suit that “seeks to force an unwilling state to recognize the marriage'’ has little chance of winning and is likely to galvanize support for a federal constitutional amendment, said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco. She said challenges should instead be directed at the section of the 1996 law that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples.