UNANIMOUS:California SUPREMES Decide To Hear The Marriage Cases
The California Supreme Court justices, (afffectionately known as “The Supremes“), unanimously decided to hear the appeal of the 6 same gender marraige cases today 12/20/06. The parties opposing the ban have 30 days to file a brief on why the ban on gay marraiges should be lifted. The opposing side will have another 30 days to respond. Oral arguments will then be set and hopefully there will be a decision by the next holiday season (or should I dare say “Christmas”?)
The Supremes could rule in various ways: (1) They could find that only the legislature has the power to make that determination and then the bill could go to the governor (maybe Leno should hold off a year on presenting the bill to the governor?); (2) They could find that Prop 22 prohibits in state same gender marraiges and therefore any bill, including Leno’s bill would have no effect; (3) They could find that same gender couples are entitled to the benefits of marraige and therefore do a New Jersey turn and let the legislature decide if it should be called a union or marriage; or (4) They could find that the current laws are outdated and discrimiantiroy and rule in favor of full marriage rights and benefits under the California Constitution.
Of course some people say that California same gender couples can go to a notorary and enter a domestic partnership but it is not entered into like a marriage. It is in fact a second class union. There are no witnesses, no best man, no bridesmaids, & no official witnesses except for the notary. There is no ceremony. Sure, one can have a commitment ceremony but it has no legal effect. Currently, same gender couples are legally treated different under the law. Whether you believe it is right or not is not up to you right now but it is up to the Honorable Ronald George and THE SUPREMES to make that decision and I hope and pray they make the RIGHT decision for California.
Well New Jersey is going to call it unions effective February 19, 2007. The Associated Prss states that California has domestic partner rights that give same gender couples the same rights as straight couples. But from what I have read there is no right to go to a minister to have him perform the ceremony. If that’s true why does the associated press say that domestic partenrs have the same rights?
Comment by Lee — December 23, 2006 @ 11:01 am
Lee posts: But from what I have read there is no right to go to a minister to have him perform the ceremony.
There is no right for heterosexual couple to be married by a minister of their choice. Clergy of many faiths put conditions on which couples they will or will not marry. Some churches will perform same-sex ceremonies, some will not.
I don’t think we want civil laws to dictate religious ritual requirements!
Bruce Albert
Comment by Bruce — December 24, 2006 @ 10:34 am
I think the point is that my rabbi could not sign a legal document to validate my domestic partnership but she can sign a license for a straight couple.
Maybe the county clerk should sign marriage licenses and domestic partnership forms and if you want a marriage or a comitment ceremony you are free to do so.
Maybe giving religious leades the power to validate legal relationships violates the basic tenants of the Constitution?
Comment by Marty — December 24, 2006 @ 11:06 am
Excuse me but can someone explain to me if domestic partnerships force private companies to give meidcial bnefits to DPs if they give them to spouses. I understand that in Vermont and Conn, union spouses get the benefits automatically if married spouses get them automatically. But I do not believe that it is automatic in California. I DO NOT EVEN SEE IT AS SEPARATE BUT UNEQUAL
Comment by A.C.L. — December 29, 2006 @ 11:39 am
Whether you believe it is right or not is not up to you right now but it is up to the Honorable Ronald George and THE SUPREMES to make that decision and I hope and pray they make the RIGHT decision for California.
Comment by smith — January 5, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
I understand that in Vermont and Conn, union spouses get the benefits automatically if married spouses get them automatically. But I do not believe that it is automatic in California
Comment by joseph — January 5, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
There are no witnesses, no best man, no bridesmaids, & no official witnesses except for the notary. There is no ceremony
Comment by Lita — January 5, 2007 @ 4:32 pm