s******8
发帖数: 311 | 1 http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/federal-appeals-court-rules-
The march toward gay marriage across the U.S. hit a roadblock Thursday when
a federal appeals court upheld laws against the practice in four states,
creating a split in the legal system that increases the chances the Supreme
Court will step in to decide the issue once and for all.
The cases decided were from Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee.
Breaking ranks with other federal courts around the country, the 6th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that states have the right to set rules
for marriage and that changing a definition that dates to "the earliest days
of human history" is better done through the political process, not the
courts.
"Surely the people should receive some deference in deciding when the time
is ripe to move from one picture of marriage to another," said Circuit Judge
Jeffrey Sutton, writing for himself and a fellow George W. Bush appointee,
while a Bill Clinton appointee dissented.
The ruling ran counter to a remarkably rapid string of victories for the gay
rights movement over the past few months that have now made same-sex
marriage legal in at least 30 states.
In fact, four other U.S. appeals courts in other regions of the country
ruled in recent months that states cannot ban gay matrimony.
Cincinnati attorney Al Gerhardstein, who represented gay plaintiffs in two
of the cases, said he was disappointed and will appeal to the nation's
highest court.
The president of pro-gay marriage group Freedom to Marry, Evan Wolfson,
blasted the ruling as being "on the wrong side of history" and out of step
with the courts and the majority of Americans.
"This anomalous ruling won't stand the test of time or appeal," he said in a
statement.
National Organization for Marriage president Brian Brown, an outspoken foe
of same-sex unions, said his group was "ecstatic" after the ruling.
"The other side was counting their chickens before they're hatched," Brown
said.
Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine's office, which argued in support of the
voter-passed 2004 Ohio ban on gay marriage, said it was "pleased the court
agreed with our arguments that important issues such as these should be
determined through the democratic process."
The appeals court, in its ruling, rejected one of the main arguments leveled
against gay marriage, saying that same-sex couples are just as capable as
heterosexual ones of effectively raising children.
But Sutton suggested that the same argument that says there is a
constitutional right to gay marriage could be used in support of polygamy or
some other combination.
"If it is constitutionally irrational to stand by the man-woman definition
of marriage, it must be constitutionally irrational to stand by the
monogamous definition of marriage," he wrote.
Gay rights advocates could seek a review of the panel's decision by the full
6th Circuit. But because the court is made up mostly of Republican
appointees, advocates will probably try to move the case straight to the
Supreme Court, for a definitive ruling on whether gays have a fundamental
right under the U.S. Constitution to wed.
The dissenting judge suggested that might have been the goal of Sutton and
Judge Deborah Cook in their ruling.
"Because the correct result is so obvious, one is tempted to speculate that
the majority has purposefully taken the contrary position to create the
circuit split," Judge Martha Craig Daugherty wrote. | D**S
发帖数: 24887 | 2 Though this new development may sound like a roadblock to marriage equality
for the four involved states (for now), it is highly likely to become a
catalyst for the SCOTUS to issue the much-anticipated nationwide ruling so
as to strike down same-sex marriage ban ONCE AND FOR ALL. People should be
cautiously optimistic about this potential outcome. |
|
