Second state judge strikes down gay marriage law

Second state judge strikes down gay marriage law

Citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s Lawrence vs. Texas decision, a second Washington state judge struck down that state’s ban on same-sex marriage Sept. 7, saying it violates the Washington state constitution.

The ruling by Superior Court Judge Richard D. Hicks follows a similar ruling by another Washington state judge in early August. Both men ruled against the state’s Defense of Marriage Act, which was passed by the legislature in 1998 and prevents the state from recognizing same-sex marriage.

Prior to the rulings, no American court had ever struck down a state’s defense of marriage act.

“The clear intent of the Legislature to limit government-approved contracts of marriage to opposite sex couples is in direct conflict with the constitutional intent to not allow a privilege to one class of the community that is not allowed to the entire community,” Hicks wrote.

The case, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of 11 homosexual couples, likely will end up before the Washington state Supreme Court — possibly as early as this year. Washington is one of nine states involved in lawsuits seeking same-sex marriage legalization.

Although a setback for pro-family groups, the Washington case could be used to pressure state legislatures to pass a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Prior to the two rulings, some state legislatures argued that an amendment was unnecessary because current state law was adequate.

Unlike many states, Washington does not have a law allowing citizens to gather petitions and place constitutional amendments on the ballot.

Instead, amendments must originate in the legislature.

Hicks compared laws banning same-sex marriage to laws of yesteryear banning interracial marriage. In arguing that marriage is “a fundamental right,” Hicks pointed to the 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas decision that struck down anti-sodomy laws. When the Supreme Court issued that opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the minority, warned that the opinion would pave the way for same-sex marriage.  (BP)