Tweet
California Couples Await Gay Marriage Ruling
Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Gay families in San Francisco prepared for Tuesday’s decision by the California Supreme Court on Proposition 8, the voter initiative banning same-sex marriage.
By JESSE McKINLEY
Published: May 25, 2009
SAN FRANCISCO — After more than 30 years together, Brent Lok and Wade French have accumulated more than a few possessions, including a hilltop home, an impressive collection of Asian art and, alongside their diplomas, vacation photos and family portraits, a framed marriage license, dated June 17, 2008.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Wade French and Brent Lok, holding an invalid marriage license from 2004 and a valid one from 2008, are awaiting the California Supreme Court's decision on their marriage and more than 18,000 others.
On Tuesday, Mr. Lok and Mr. French will discover what that license means in the eyes of the law, as the California Supreme Court hands down its decision on Proposition 8, the voter initiative passed in November that outlawed same-sex marriage. Previously, in May 2008, the court legalized same-sex marriage, and since the election, several groups have sued, saying the proposition’s revocation of that right was unconstitutional.
In addition to answering that legal question, however, the seven-member court is expected to address the legal status of some 18,000 same-sex couples who were married in California between June — when the legalization took effect — and Election Day in November.
The state’s attorney general, Jerry Brown, said last year that he believed those same-sex marriages would be legal regardless of Proposition 8. But opponents of same-sex marriage argue that it is illogical to continue to recognize marriages that can no longer be legally performed here.
Andrew P. Pugno, the general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the leading group behind Proposition 8, said it was meant to be “a blanket unqualified statement that applies to all marriages.” Allowing some same-sex marriages to stand, Mr. Pugno said, would “create two classes of gay couples” in the state.
“Hopefully, the court is thinking about the future,” he said.
The tone of the court’s questions during oral arguments in March suggested that it would be unlikely to overturn Proposition 8. But several justices suggested that the proposition’s spare language — 14 words, stating that only male-female marriages were “valid or recognized” — was not explicitly retroactive.
Karl M. Manheim, a professor of law at Loyola Law School Los Angeles, said that if the marriages were invalidated, the same-sex couples might be able to sue in federal court on due-process grounds. Professor Manheim added that judges were generally averse to applying laws retroactively unless there was “unmistakable intent” to do so.
“It needs to be on the face of the law,” he said.
Mr. Pugno said his group was more concerned about the fate of Proposition 8 and was unlikely to challenge the marriages if they were allowed to stand. “It’s such a tiny number,” he said. “And it’s not the core issue.”
Last November, hundreds of same-sex couples went to the altar in the days before the election in California, which had become the second state to legalize same-sex marriage. (Massachusetts was the first, in 2004.) One couple who wed in 2008, Chloe Harris and Frankie Frankeny, had already had a commitment ceremony, and they hold domestic partnerships for San Francisco and for California.
“Keeping up with anniversaries is difficult,” Ms. Harris said.
But Ms. Harris, a freelance writer, and Ms. Frankeny, a photographer, said, their marriage last fall “was a big moment.”
“We had said ‘I do’ before, but this time it carried a lot more weight particularly because our families were there,” said Ms. Harris, who, like Ms. Frankeny, is from Texas. “What really changed was the relationship with our families. It’s when our relationship really gelled in their minds. They may not understand how — or why — we’re gay, but now they get why we wanted to get married.”
Since the passage of Proposition 8, several states have legalized same-sex marriage, including Iowa, Maine and Vermont. Connecticut, where a court decision legalized same-sex marriage shortly before Election Day, began performing ceremonies shortly after California banned them. At the moment, married same-sex couples in California have the same rights as straight, married couples under California law, though same-sex couples have no federal recognition.
Like several other states, California allows members of the same sex to enter into domestic partnerships, which afford many of the same rights as marriage. But Kate Kendell, the executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, says domestic partnerships are not equivalent to marriage.
“It is more than symbolism to say that an entire category of recognition is off limits to one class of people,” Ms. Kendell said. “And the category that is off limits is the one that is most culturally desirable.”
And, it seems, an institution not taken lightly. Gerardo Marin and Jay Thomas said they debated whether to codify their decade-long relationship last fall, but opted against getting married at the last moment, because “we didn’t feel we should be rushed into it,” said Mr. Marin, 35.
Nonetheless, they decided to join a lawsuit against Proposition 8, in part, Mr. Marin said, because “future generations are going to want to get married.”
Mr. Marin, who is Mexican-American and active in the Latino gay rights movement, said he planned to protest on Tuesday if Proposition 8 was upheld. If it is struck down, however, it does not necessarily mean wedding bells, Mr. Thomas said.
“We would continue the conversations we were having,” said Mr. Thomas, 37, a data analyst.
For those couples who already took the plunge, the idea that their marriage may be allowed while other couples are denied the right is unsettling. “I’d always feel like there was an asterisk,” Mr. French said.
Mr. Lok, his legally recognized spouse, at least for now, was more sanguine.
“The 18,000 marriages will be evidence that California is not going to fall apart if gay people get married,” Mr. Lok said. “It’s not like there’s not going to be an ear
Jim Wilson/The New York TimesGay families in San Francisco prepared for Tuesday’s decision by the California Supreme Court on Proposition 8, the voter initiative banning same-sex marriage.
By JESSE McKINLEY
Published: May 25, 2009
SAN FRANCISCO — After more than 30 years together, Brent Lok and Wade French have accumulated more than a few possessions, including a hilltop home, an impressive collection of Asian art and, alongside their diplomas, vacation photos and family portraits, a framed marriage license, dated June 17, 2008.
Jim Wilson/The New York TimesWade French and Brent Lok, holding an invalid marriage license from 2004 and a valid one from 2008, are awaiting the California Supreme Court's decision on their marriage and more than 18,000 others.
On Tuesday, Mr. Lok and Mr. French will discover what that license means in the eyes of the law, as the California Supreme Court hands down its decision on Proposition 8, the voter initiative passed in November that outlawed same-sex marriage. Previously, in May 2008, the court legalized same-sex marriage, and since the election, several groups have sued, saying the proposition’s revocation of that right was unconstitutional.
In addition to answering that legal question, however, the seven-member court is expected to address the legal status of some 18,000 same-sex couples who were married in California between June — when the legalization took effect — and Election Day in November.
The state’s attorney general, Jerry Brown, said last year that he believed those same-sex marriages would be legal regardless of Proposition 8. But opponents of same-sex marriage argue that it is illogical to continue to recognize marriages that can no longer be legally performed here.
Andrew P. Pugno, the general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the leading group behind Proposition 8, said it was meant to be “a blanket unqualified statement that applies to all marriages.” Allowing some same-sex marriages to stand, Mr. Pugno said, would “create two classes of gay couples” in the state.
“Hopefully, the court is thinking about the future,” he said.
The tone of the court’s questions during oral arguments in March suggested that it would be unlikely to overturn Proposition 8. But several justices suggested that the proposition’s spare language — 14 words, stating that only male-female marriages were “valid or recognized” — was not explicitly retroactive.
Karl M. Manheim, a professor of law at Loyola Law School Los Angeles, said that if the marriages were invalidated, the same-sex couples might be able to sue in federal court on due-process grounds. Professor Manheim added that judges were generally averse to applying laws retroactively unless there was “unmistakable intent” to do so.
“It needs to be on the face of the law,” he said.
Mr. Pugno said his group was more concerned about the fate of Proposition 8 and was unlikely to challenge the marriages if they were allowed to stand. “It’s such a tiny number,” he said. “And it’s not the core issue.”
Last November, hundreds of same-sex couples went to the altar in the days before the election in California, which had become the second state to legalize same-sex marriage. (Massachusetts was the first, in 2004.) One couple who wed in 2008, Chloe Harris and Frankie Frankeny, had already had a commitment ceremony, and they hold domestic partnerships for San Francisco and for California.
“Keeping up with anniversaries is difficult,” Ms. Harris said.
But Ms. Harris, a freelance writer, and Ms. Frankeny, a photographer, said, their marriage last fall “was a big moment.”
“We had said ‘I do’ before, but this time it carried a lot more weight particularly because our families were there,” said Ms. Harris, who, like Ms. Frankeny, is from Texas. “What really changed was the relationship with our families. It’s when our relationship really gelled in their minds. They may not understand how — or why — we’re gay, but now they get why we wanted to get married.”
Since the passage of Proposition 8, several states have legalized same-sex marriage, including Iowa, Maine and Vermont. Connecticut, where a court decision legalized same-sex marriage shortly before Election Day, began performing ceremonies shortly after California banned them. At the moment, married same-sex couples in California have the same rights as straight, married couples under California law, though same-sex couples have no federal recognition.
Like several other states, California allows members of the same sex to enter into domestic partnerships, which afford many of the same rights as marriage. But Kate Kendell, the executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, says domestic partnerships are not equivalent to marriage.
“It is more than symbolism to say that an entire category of recognition is off limits to one class of people,” Ms. Kendell said. “And the category that is off limits is the one that is most culturally desirable.”
And, it seems, an institution not taken lightly. Gerardo Marin and Jay Thomas said they debated whether to codify their decade-long relationship last fall, but opted against getting married at the last moment, because “we didn’t feel we should be rushed into it,” said Mr. Marin, 35.
Nonetheless, they decided to join a lawsuit against Proposition 8, in part, Mr. Marin said, because “future generations are going to want to get married.”
Mr. Marin, who is Mexican-American and active in the Latino gay rights movement, said he planned to protest on Tuesday if Proposition 8 was upheld. If it is struck down, however, it does not necessarily mean wedding bells, Mr. Thomas said.
“We would continue the conversations we were having,” said Mr. Thomas, 37, a data analyst.
For those couples who already took the plunge, the idea that their marriage may be allowed while other couples are denied the right is unsettling. “I’d always feel like there was an asterisk,” Mr. French said.
Mr. Lok, his legally recognized spouse, at least for now, was more sanguine.
“The 18,000 marriages will be evidence that California is not going to fall apart if gay people get married,” Mr. Lok said. “It’s not like there’s not going to be an ear
Comment