It’s all over the news and other blogs that Proposition 8 in California has been overturned by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. I’m pleased that this is the outcome, but I’m also interested in the decision itself. Anti-gay marriage parties have been making arguments for years why LGBT couples should not be allowed to marry. The decision runs counterpoint to that, and I wanted to see what was written about them. Here are some highlights that I found interesting:
“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.”
“…Proposition 8 singles out same-sex couples for unequal treatment by taking away from the alone the right to marry, and this action amounts to a distinct constitutional violation because the Equal Protection Clause protects minority groups from being targeted for the deprivation of an existing right without a legitimate reason.”
“We do not celebrate when two people merge their bank accounts; we celebrate when a couple marries. The designation of ‘marriage’ is the status that we recognize.”
Regarding other states that have done similar things to take away rights, the decision references Colorado and the repeal of equal protection rights. The comment was that the Supreme Court found this unconstitional as “it is not within our constitutional tradition to enact laws of this sort” such as “laws that single out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status.”
And regarding the state interests claimed to be furthered by Prop 8 proponents, “Because Proposition 8 did not further any of these interests, we conclude that they cannot have been rational bases for this measure…”
Finally, “It is implausible to think that denying two men or two women the right to call themselves married could somehow bolster the stability of families headed by one man and one woman.”
Sources: