Journal Express, Knoxville, IA

CNHI/SE Iowa

December 7, 2012

Gay marriage to get review from high court for 1st time

(Continued)

WASHINGTON —

Olson said in an interview before the court acted that he would make California-specific arguments as well as broader contentions that could establish same-sex marriage rights nationwide. Marriage, Olson said, is a "fundamental right that cannot be taken away from citizens on the basis of their sex or sexual orientation."

In court papers, Olson and Boies defended Reinhardt's reasoning. They said the judge correctly concluded that, by stripping away marriage rights, Proposition 8 "achieves nothing except the marginalization of gay and lesbian individuals and their relationships."

Gay marriage is on hold in California while the litigation plays out. More than 18,000 same-sex couples were married in the state before the ballot initiative passed.

Both sides asked the court to take up DOMA, a law the Obama administration decided last year it would begin opposing in court. That reversal left it to congressional Republicans led by House Speaker John Boehner to spearhead the defense.

Opponents say the law violates the Constitution's equal protection guarantee by denying legally married gay couples the same federal benefits as opposite-sex spouses. Under the law, people in same-sex marriages can't file joint federal tax returns, claim exemption from estate taxes, receive Social Security survivor benefits or obtain health insurance as the spouse of a federal employee.

Supporters of the law say it promotes traditional marriage, and by extension makes it more likely that children will grow up in a nurturing environment.

"Traditional marriage protects civil society by encouraging couples to remain together to rear the children they conceive," 15 states led by Indiana argued in court papers. "It creates the norm that potentially procreative sexual activity should occur in a long-term, cohabitative relationship."

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the New York-based 2nd Circuit rejected that reasoning. Ruling in the Massachusetts case, the 1st Circuit pointed to "a lack of any demonstrated connection between DOMA's treatment of same-sex couples and its asserted goal of strengthening the bonds and benefits to society of heterosexual marriage."

Text Only
CNHI/SE Iowa
Features
AP Video
Arizona Execution Takes Almost Two Hours Gen. Odierno Discusses Ukraine, NATO at Forum Mint Gives JFK Coin a Face-lift Creative Makeovers for Ugly Cellphone Towers Ariz. Inmate Dies 2 Hours After Execution Began Crash Kills Teen Pilot Seeking World Record Raw: Funeral for Man Who Died in NYPD Custody Israeli American Reservist Torn Over Return Former NTSB Official: FAA Ban 'prudent' Six Indicted in StubHub Hacking Scheme Biden Decries Voting Restrictions in NAACP Talk Broncos Owner Steps Down Due to Alzheimer's Trump: DC Hotel Will Be Among World's Best Republicans Hold a Hearing on IRS Lost Emails Ex-NYC Mayor: US Should Allow Flights to Israel David Perdue Wins Georgia GOP Senate Runoff 98-Year-Old Woman Left in Parked Truck Home-sharing Programs Help Seniors Last Mass Lynching in U.S. Remains Unsolved Disabled Veterans Memorial Nearing Completion
Facebook
Hyperlocal Search
Premier Guide
Find a business

Walking Fingers
Maps, Menus, Store hours, Coupons, and more...
Premier Guide
Poll

Upon completion and reopening of Third Street, should the City of Knoxville wait to start the next stage of the Streetscape and Infrastructure project until 2015?

Yes
No
     View Results