By Julia Cheever
May 29, 2008
Same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco urged the state Supreme Court Wednesday to allow its same-sex marriage ruling to go into effect June 17 and not to wait for a November vote.
City Attorney Dennis Herrera and a coalition of 15 couples and two gay rights organizations argued in briefs filed with the court in San Francisco that a delay would cause “serious and irreparable harm” to couples seeking to marry.
The briefs opposed a request by a traditional-values group for a stay until Californians vote Nov. 4 on a proposed state constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage.
The filings came on the same day that the state Office of Vital Records instructed county clerks to begin issuing same-sex marriage licenses on Tuesday, June 17.
The agency told the clerks in a letter that June 17 should be the start date because the court has until the end of the day on Monday, June 16, to reconsider.
The state high court ruled by a 4-3 vote on May 15 that same-sex couples have a right to marry under the California Constitution.
Court spokeswoman Lynn Holton said that while the ruling technically goes into effect 30 days later on Saturday, June 14, the court has jurisdiction until the end of the next business day, June 16.
Holton said the panel also has the option of delaying the effectiveness of its ruling for another 30 or 60 days if it needs more time to consider the stay request.
The proposed ballot initiative would overturn the high court ruling by amending the state constitution to say that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
County officials have until June 18 to verify signatures on the initiative and the secretary of state has until June 26 to certify it for the Nov. 4 ballot. Supporters say they are confident it will qualify because they submitted more than 1.1 million signatures, far more than the 694,354 needed.
The request for a stay of the court’s decision was filed last week by the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund, which argued that “legal havoc” could result if same-sex marriages are allowed for five months and then stopped.
Herrera and the same-sex couples argued in their responses that speculation about a future vote was not a reason to delay a constitutional right.
Herrera wrote, “To deny this fundamental constitutional right to same-sex couples based on speculation about what might happen in November would not merely be inappropriate. It would be inhumane.”
Shannon Minter, a lawyer with the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco, said the same-sex couples he represents don’t dispute the June 17 start date set by the vital records agency.
Minter said, “We’re very happy they issued the letter. It was very helpful. We want the marriages to be 100 percent statutorily and constitutionally valid.”
The agency resolved a problem with the wording of licenses by issuing a new license form replacing the words “bride” and “groom” with the terms “Party A” and “Party B.” It also said same-sex couples don’t need to dissolve domestic partnerships in order to marry.
More information:
San Francisco city attorney’s office (415) 554-4662
National Center for Lesbian Rights (415) 392-6257
Glen Lavy, attorney for Prop. 22 group (480) 444-0020
The Hunger Site
No Comments
Comments for Same-Sex Couples and City Ask High Court
not to Delay Gay Marriages are now closed.