Friday,
March 11, 2005
Volume 33,
Issue 10
Tue, Mar 16, 2010
IN THE SGN
SECTION ONE
Front Page
MORE/ALL
SECTION ONE
STORIES
SECTION TW0
Arts & Entertainment
Attorneys pleased with Tuesday hearing before state Supreme Court |
||
|
|
||
| Attorneys pleased with Tuesday hearing before state Supreme Court - We have every reason to believe that the | ||
| by Matt Nagle
- SGN Managing Editor
OLYMPIA The Washington Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in a lawsuit brought by Lambda Legal and the Northwest Womens Law Center seeking marriage for same-sex couples statewide. A decision is expected to be handed down within the next four-six months. The nations eyes were focused on our state Tuesday for good reason. If our state court rules in favor of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, Washington will be second only to Massachusetts in allowing same-sex couples to be married. Plus, Washington would be the first state in the nation to marry out-of-state same-sex couples which would impact Gay marriage across the country as couples married in Washington return home and sue the state in which they live to have their marriage legally recognized. In a historic ruling in the case in August 2004, King County Superior Court Judge William Downing said that the Washington State Constitution guarantees basic rights to Lesbian and Gay people and that those rights are violated by a state law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying. The ruling said the state Constitution requires same-sex couples to have equal access to marriage, and that the couples in the case must be given marriage licenses. One month later, a court in Thurston County ruled similarly. Both decisions were appealed to the Washington State Supreme Court, which heard arguments in both cases Tuesday. Because the cases are based entirely on the Washington Constitution, they will not go beyond the states Supreme Court. Tuesdays oral arguments mark the first time any state high court has heard a case seeking marriage for same-sex couples since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in 2003 that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry in that state. Immediately after Tuesdays oral arguments, Lambda Legal issued the following statement from Jennifer C. Pizer, Senior Counsel in Lambda Legals Western Regional Office and one of the attorneys handling the case: Many of the justices clearly understand that same-sex couples are being discriminated against because they cannot marry, and that this discrimination deserves their attention. This is clearly a moderate court thats looking very closely at the issues in front of it. Based on todays arguments, we have every reason to believe that the justices minds are open and that theyre taking this case very seriously. These justices clearly understand the human dimensions of why same-sex couples need the protections only marriage provides. From their questions, we can tell that a good number of the justices understand who Gay people are, and they seem to know Gay people personally. They understand that real people are harmed by the state law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying. They see that this isnt an abstract question that were talking about real families. A good number of the justices clearly understand that Lesbian and Gay Washingtonians have constitutional rights. Now theyre engaged in a process of grappling with what those rights look like and whether the legislature violated them by passing a law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying. Theyre grappling with what our rights look like, not whether we have rights. Unlike some courts before them, theyre starting with an understanding that these are serious questions. Most of their own questions during todays arguments were serious and respectful. Were hopeful because when judges appreciate the human dimensions of our cases, we often have good results. Once judges understand the human impact, they can fully determine what the state Constitutions guarantees of liberty and equality require and thats exactly what these justices are doing. The questions the justices asked today suggest that there is a range of legal issues theyre struggling with that will likely take them some time to sort out. What matters is that they appreciate the human dimension of the case, and we saw today that a good number of them do. The plaintiff couples in this case include: Heather Andersen and Leslie Christian, both successful businesswomen, who have been together for 14 years; Johanna Bender and Sherri Kokx, who have been together for seven years and are the parents of three-year-old Zachary and three-month-old Quintin; Janet Helson and Betty Lundquist, who have been together for 12 years and have two children, Tyler, 8, and Zora, 2; Peter Ilgenfritz and David Shull, who have been together for nearly 20 years, and were the first same-sex couple to be married in a religious ceremony at St. Pauls United Church of Christ in Chicago; David and Michael Serkin-Poole, who have been together for 23 years and care for their three adult children, all of whom have disabilities; Vegavahini Subramaniam and Vaijayanthimala Nagarajan, who have been together for six years and whose families come from the same community in South India, but who grew up in the United States and met in Washington; Elizabeth Reis and Barbara Steele, who have been in a committed relationship for over 26 years and celebrated their 20th anniversary with a ceremony they shared with 175 friends and family; and Michelle Esguerra and Boo Torres de Esguerra who have been together for five years and are both qualified apprentice electricians.t With reports from Lambda Legal |
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
 SEX TALK Simon Sheppard |
