Ban on Same-Sex Marriages Declared Invalid by California Supreme Court

In the case of In re Marriage Cases decided May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court held in a 4-3 opinion that two state laws that had limited marriages to opposite-sex partners are unconstititional and held that single-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The court explained that it could not “find that retention of the traditional definition of marriage constitutes a compelling state interest.”

The court concludes that:

Plaintiffs are entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the appropriate state officials to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling in this case so as to ensure that county clerks and other local officials throughout the state, in performing their duty to enforce the marriage statutes in their jurisdictions, apply those provisions in a manner consistent with the decision of this court.

The decision will take effect thirty days after the decision unless the court grants a stay.

However, the victory for proponents of same-sex marriage may be short-lived.  According to Adam Liptak, California Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban, NY Times, May 16, 2008:

[The decision] was denounced by religious and conservative groups that promised to support an initiative proposed for the November ballot that would amend the California Constitution to ban same-sex marriages and overturn the decision. * * *

Opponents said they expected the proposed ballot initiative, which has been submitted to election officials with more than one million signatures, to pass in November. * * *

Mathew D. Staver, a lawyer with Liberty Counsel, a public interest firm that defends traditional marriage, said it would ask the court to stay its decision until the November election, meaning that the decision could be overturned before becoming effective.

“It would only be logical” to grant a stay, Mr. Staver said, given the confusion that would arise if same-sex marriages were available for a few months.