What Kennedy and the rest of the Supreme Court saw was by all accounts a momentous day for gay rights and same-sex marriage.
The country reelected a president who has "evolved" enough on the issue to support gay marriage. Wisconsin elected Democrat Tammy Baldwin, who will be the first openly gay member of the U.S. Senate.
Iowa, which two years ago voted out three state supreme court justices who ruled that homosexuals must be allowed to marry in the state, reversed course. It retained a fourth justice who had joined in the decision after a spirited campaign to oust him.
Maryland, Maine and Washington became the first states to approve same-sex marriage through popular vote, rather than a decision of the legislature or the courts. Minnesota defeated an attempt to amend the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, the first time such an attempt has failed at the ballot box.
"The justices obviously pay attention," said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights organization.
But, with the court on the cusp of its most serious examination of the constitutional issues surrounding same-sex marriage, it is unclear what the justices heard.
They will soon sort through a half-dozen cases that raise the issue of same-sex relationships; the date for their private conference on whether to accept any has been rescheduled for Nov. 30.
Most of the cases involve the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed in 1996 to bar the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in states where it is legal. The Obama administration no longer defends the law, and every court that has heard a challenge has found it unconstitutional.
The justices also have in front of them the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to overturn Proposition 8, in which Californians changed their state constitution to remove a right to same-sex marriage the state supreme court recognized.
And the same appeals court has blocked an Arizona law that rescinded the extension of certain benefits to the domestic partners of state employees.
Tuesday's ballot results are prompting some nuanced responses from those on both sides of the issue.
Supporters of same-sex marriage say the votes — along with polls showing acceptance of gay marriage high among younger Americans — point to inevitable momentum, but not so much that the court should leave the question of equal rights to the political process.
"At the end of the day, it's the reason we have the judiciary — to protect the rights of the minority," Griffin said.
Those opposed to same-sex marriage say that Tuesday's votes show gays are hardly powerless in the political arena, and the court would be unwise to disrupt the process with, for instance, a finding that there is a constitutional right to marry.
0 comments:
Post a Comment