Oregon's Supreme Courts Rules Gay Marriages Null and Void
By SARAH KERSHAW
regon's highest court ruled today that 3,000 same-sex marriages held a year ago in one county were null and void, saying that the county had overstepped its authority and that the marriage licenses it had issued were unconstitutional under Oregon law.
The Oregon Supreme Court opinion drew heavily on a vote by Oregonians last November approving a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. But the justices also ruled that even before the ballot measure was voted in, Oregon law had rendered the marriages - performed last March in Multnomah County, which includes Portland - illegal.
"County officials were entitled to have their doubts about the constitutionality of limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples," Justice W. Michael Gillette wrote in the ruling. "But, marriage and the laws governing it are matters of statewide, not local, concern."
The court ruling also said, "Today, marriage in Oregon - an institution once limited to opposite-sex couples only by statute - now is so limited by the State Constitution as well."
The court did not address the question of whether gay couples, in legal civil unions, are entitled to the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples, a question that is emerging as a new focus of both social conservatives and gay rights groups. Vermont is the only state that legally sanctions civil unions, but both Oregon and Connecticut are debating legislative measures that would make that option open to gay couples.
"Those marriages performed last year are not valid and that, of course, is extremely disappointing," said Rebekah Kassell, a spokeswoman for Basic Rights Oregon, one of the plaintiffs in the case. "But we are going to continue to advocate for civil unions and we are confident that the courts will end the exclusion of same-sex couples from these protections for their relationships and their families."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a Christian conservative group, issued a statement this afternoon saying, "When the people are given a voice on this important issue, accountable judges cannot help but acknowledge the will of the people and the rule of law. The people of Oregon have clearly supported marriage as a sacred institution, and one in which same-sex couples are not able to participate."
In Oregon, where Gov. Theodore R. Kulongoski introduced a bill this week to require civil unions under the State Constitution, state lawyers argued before the Supreme Court that while Multnomah County's decision to issue the marriage licenses was unconstitutional, gay Oregonians should be afforded the same benefits as married couples.
"The state's position from the outset was that the fundamental issue was whether or not same-sex couples were entitled to the rights and privileges of marriage, not just the institution of marriage itself," said Kevin Neely, a spokesman for State Attorney General Hardy Myers.
Oregon is one of 18 states with constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Legal cases tackling the question of whether gays can marry are winding their way through various state and county courts in at least six other states, according to the Human Rights Campaign, a national advocacy group. They include New York, Washington and California, where gay marriages were performed en masse in San Francisco shortly before the Oregon marriage licenses were granted.
Massachusetts is the only state where gay marriage is legal, under a decision last year by that state's highest court. |
