Overview

Proposition 8, the voter lead block on gay marriage in California, has been ruled as unconstitutional as it violates the rights of gay Californians.

Introduction

In the land of the free and in a country which has as its constitutional mission statement:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…’

The American attitude to the gay lifestyle has always been confusing.   It seems counter to the sense of the statement that said ‘Creator’ would be homophobic.

However, last year the laid back electorate of California voted for proposition 8 which effectively blocked the 2008 law permitting gay civil partnerships, which had only be law for a few months.

Overturning Preposition 8

The 9th Circuit Court in California struck down preposition 8 as unconstitutional in that it violates the rights of gay Californians.

“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,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the decision. The court concludes that the law violates the 14th Amendment rights of gay couples to equal protection under the law. Access to gay marriage will remain on hold pending appeals to the decision.

In effect the ruling is saying that by taking away the right of  a gay couple to marry, which they had been able to do for just over 5 months,  amounted to a violation of equal protection because the right was specifically taken away from a minority group.

It is anticipated that this ruling will be fiercely contested and already the leader of the adjudication panel, District Judge Vaughn Walker, has been challenged as he, himself, is gay.  (Following the logic only a gay judge would rule on be unbiased  heterosexual divorce case).

Implications for the rest of the USA

It was spelt out that this ruling was specifically protecting the rights of gay Californians where the right to marry had been taken away.  It would not apply to states where gay marriage, the majority, was not legal.

However, others argue that the reasoning behind this ruling will imply that there is no legitimate state interest in denying same-sex marriage rights.

It is likely that there will be numerous legal battles before all the American states will allow a gay couple to follow their own constitutional pursuit of happiness and get married.

And if you don’t like it – well – I doubt you’d be invited to the wedding, anyway.

What do you think?