Today in a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that California’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. In a bold statement by the majority, the court stated: “Proposition 8 served no purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California.” The holding, though limited to California, is another big step towards recognizing equal rights for gays and lesbians in the country.
Of significance, is that the Court cited and relied on precedent relating to “protected classes” that has been important in guaranteeing rights to women and racial minorities in the past. The opinion states: “When directly enacted legislation singles out a selected class of citizens for disfavored legal status, we must insist on knowing the relation between the classification and the object to be obtained so that we may ensure the law exists to further a proper legislative end rather than to make the class unequal to anyone else. Prop. 8 fails this test.”
Today’s decision upholds a prior decision finding the law unconstitutional. Proponents of Prop. 8 have already vowed to appeal. There are two steps available to challenge the decision. The Prop. 8 proponents can ask for a hearing en banc, which means of the full court. The Ninth Circuit is the largest in the country and covers Arizona, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. The significance is that the panel gets more diverse with the full court. The other more likely option is that they will petition the U.S. Supreme Court who can agree to hear the case or decline. If heard, the matter would likely not be argued for another year. Nonetheless, the current make-up of the Supreme Court would not bode well for same-sex marriage advocates and would likely result in a 5-4 decision.
In the meantime, the ban on same-sex marriage remains in place until the deadline for the request for a hearing en banc passes.
The full opinion can be found here.
Source: LA Times