I'll have links and the text of the case as it becomes available.
UPDATE:
The NYT reports the following:
The Court of Appeals in a 4-2 decision rejected arguments from gay and lesbian plaintiffs throughout the state that their inability to get marriage licences in New York violated their constitutional rights.The 70 page decision can be read here. The key part, however, is stated in the opening paragraph:
Judge Robert Smith said New York's marriage law clearly limits marriage to between a man and a woman and any change in the law should come from the state Legislature.
The case combines four different lawsuits representing 44 gay and lesbian couples around New York State. The highest profile case is Hernandez v. Robles, in which five couples were suing New York City's clerk, who issued marriage licenses. It is the only case that has won a victory in the lower courts.
In Hernandez, Justice Doris Ling-Cohan of State Supreme Court ruled in February 2005 that state marriage law violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the State Constitution. The city appealed, and the Appellate Division overturned her decision last December, saying that it was up to the Legislature to change traditional views of marriage and family. The court called marriage between biological parents "the optimal situation for child-rearing."
The city's corporation counsel has argued that the marriage law "does not violate any fundamental rights" and that "there is a rational basis for the limitation of marriage to one male and one female." The city has also argued that society and government have an interest in encouraging heterosexual marriage as a child-rearing institution and has said that any change should be left to the Legislature.
We hold that the New York Constitution does not compel recognition of marriages between members of the same sex. Whether such marriages should be recognized is a question to be
addressed by the Legislature.
No comments:
Post a Comment