Connecticut Supremes Overturn Same-Sex Marriage Ban

[Kanastrous]

HARTFORD, Connecticut - The Connecticut Supreme Court overturned a ban on same-sex marriage Friday in a victory for gay-rights advocates that will allow couples to marry in the New England state.

The court found that the state's law limiting marriage to heterosexual couples discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation. The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry.

Eight same-sex couples sued in 2004, saying their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process were violated when they were denied marriage licenses.

The plaintiffs wanted the court to rule that the law discriminated against them because it applies only to heterosexual couples, therefore denying gay couples the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.

The only U.S. states that allow same-sex couples to marry are Massachusetts and California.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27117467/

[Imperial Overlord]

I know this is close to one line span, but fuck yeah.

Can this ruling affect other states at all (i.e. be used as grounds to challenge or toss other marriage bans)? Or do we have to wait until we have a US Supreme Court with human beings as the majority for a court ruling to get rid of this nonsense?

[Isolder74]

No since is only the Supreme Court of Connecticut, it only affects the state of Connecticut. The Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut has no jurisdiction on any other state.

[Covenant]

This is just at the state level, so no. However, if other states make laws that they will not recognize gay marriage (as most try to do) then people from here could move to that new state and demand their legal marriage is recognized by the state. If it isn't then you could sue based on the Full Faith and Credit clause of the US Constitution:

"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

Which means if you're a legally married gay couple in California, and you move to Bumfuck, the township of Bumfuck must legally recognize you as a legally married gay couple there too, or be in violation of the United States Constitution. That then can lead all the way up to the United States Supreme Court, but it's a pretty clear-cut case and I doubt it'd get anywhere near there. Now, this doesn't mean you would force other States to give out gay marriage certificates, but it could be used to remove their ban against recognizing them. If so, you can probably expect a lot of people hopping state lines to get married in the Summer.

[Kanastrous]

Unless some weaselly way is found via Congress "by general laws prescribing the Manner" in which ff&c is observed, that screws legally-married same-sex couples.

[Alyrium Denryle]

This is just at the state level, so no. However, if other states make laws that they will not recognize gay marriage (as most try to do) then people from here could move to that new state and demand their legal marriage is recognized by the state. If it isn't then you could sue based on the Full Faith and Credit clause of the US Constitution:

"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

Which means if you're a legally married gay couple in California, and you move to Bumfuck, the township of Bumfuck must legally recognize you as a legally married gay couple there too, or be in violation of the United States Constitution. That then can lead all the way up to the United States Supreme Court, but it's a pretty clear-cut case and I doubt it'd get anywhere near there. Now, this doesn't mean you would force other States to give out gay marriage certificates, but it could be used to remove their ban against recognizing them. If so, you can probably expect a lot of people hopping state lines to get married in the Summer.

As Wilkins pointed out in the other thread because the congress is given wild latitude due to that last clause "and the effect thereof"

Best challenge is a 14th amendment challenge, as extending the legal protections of marriage to straight, but not gay people is a blatant violation of the equal protection clause... But it isnt like our current scotus is full of human beings...

[RedImperator]

I know this is close to one line span, but fuck yeah.

Can this ruling affect other states at all (i.e. be used as grounds to challenge or toss other marriage bans)?

Not directly. This ruling was based on the state constitution (as the Massachusetts and California rulings were, as well as the rulings in New Jersey and Vermont which legalized civil unions). There's no precedent created for other states because, obviously, the Connecticut state constitution doesn't apply there. But see below.

Or do we have to wait until we have a US Supreme Court with human beings as the majority for a court ruling to get rid of this nonsense?

SCOTUS will get involved once a court case involving the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) reaches it; several are percolating up through the courts right now. DOMA suspends the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the case of gay marriages; that's the clause of the Constitution which forces all states to recognize legal contracts from other states. If that section of DOMA is overturned, the states will have no choice but to recognize legal gay marriages from other states, even if gay couples cannot marry in that state.

The other section of DOMA forbids the Federal government from recognizing any form of same-sex union, which considering the tax benefits of marriage alone, is a major problem for gay couples. Whether this would be overturned along with first part depends on what grounds SCOTUS uses. If they overturn the first part on the grounds that Congress overreached its authority under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, then conceivably the second part could stand. If, however, SCOTUS would rule that the DOMA violates the rights to equal protection (14th Amendment) and due process (5th and 14th Amendments), then the whole thing would go down in flames.

It's also possible for Congress to simply reverse the act. A year ago I would have said it would never happen, but if the Democrats win big enough majorities in the House and Senate, and Obama wins the election, there's an outside chance it could get done. They'd need a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a big enough cushion in the House to allow conservative Democrats and Democrats from Republican districts to vote "no", and for President Obama to be popular enough that his re-election wouldn't be in jeopardy. And of course, they'd need the political will and courage to do it, and these are Democrats we're talking about. So a court ruling seems more likely.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Ghetto Edit:

As Wilkins pointed out in the other thread because the congress is given wild latitude due to that last clause "and the effect thereof", the SCOTUS could easily weasel out of that argument

(what the hell? Does my keyboard delete half my sentences or something?)

[Guardsman Bass]

Simply having a Democratic Congress do nothing when a DOMA suit hits the Supreme Court might be good enough (although the Court could always go the other way and strike down gay marriage as illegitimate). Had one of these suits threatened to hit the Supreme Court back when the Republicans were in power, they might have been tempted to simply strip the Court of its jurisdiction to try the case. It's happened before; look up Ex Parte McCardle.