(RNS) A federal appeals court panel in Virginia became the second one this summer to strike down a state ban against same-sex marriage Monday (July 28), making it more likely that the Supreme Court will settle the issue as early as next year.

David Boies, left, and Ted Olson, of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, were part of the legal team that challenged Virginia's ban on gay marriage. The duo also successfully challenged California’s Proposition 8 ballot proposal and constitutional amendment.

David Boies, left, and Ted Olson, of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, were part of the legal team that challenged Virginia’s ban on gay marriage. The duo also successfully challenged California’s Proposition 8 ballot proposal and constitutional amendment. Creative Commons image by Steve Rhodes

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond ruled 2-1 that gay men and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry that is paramount to state marriage laws. The ruling affirmed a district judge’s decision rendered in February.

“We recognize that same-sex marriage makes some people deeply uncomfortable,” said Judge Henry Floyd, originally appointed a district judge by George W. Bush and elevated to the circuit court by President Obama. “However, inertia and apprehension are not legitimate bases for denying same-sex couples due process and equal protection of the laws.”

The circuit court has jurisdiction over Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. The panel’s decision will not take effect until at least Aug. 18 while circuit clerks defending the state’s ban decide whether to appeal to the full appellate court or the Supreme Court.

Like the first appeals court panel to rule on the issue this year in Utah and Oklahoma, the three-judge panel was deeply divided. But Floyd, considered the swing vote, came down on the side of same-sex marriage. Judge Roger Gregory, originally appointed by Bill Clinton in 2000, joined the majority. Presiding Judge Paul Niemeyer, a George H.W. Bush nominee, dissented.

“I do strongly disagree with the assertion that same-sex marriage is subject to the same constitutional protections as the traditional right to marry,” Niemeyer said. “I would reverse the district court’s judgment and defer to Virginia’s political choice in defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.”

The Virginia case, which involves two couples seeking to marry in the state and two couples seeking to have their marriages from other states recognized, now gives the Supreme Court a choice. It can hear the Utah or Oklahoma cases from the 10th Circuit, wait for Virginia’s to be appealed or defer action even longer for other gay marriage cases scheduled for appellate hearings in August, September and beyond.

One way or another, legal experts agree the high court likely will accept a case for its 2014 term beginning in October or the 2015 term that follows.

Because Virginia’s new Democratic attorney general, Mark Herring, had refused to defend the state’s gay marriage ban, that task was left to circuit court clerks from two counties. Brian Babione, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented one of the clerks, said they were considering their options.

“In his dissent, Judge Niemeyer correctly noted that ‘there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, and there are rational reasons for not recognizing it,’” Babione said.

The justices paved the way last year for what has become an unbroken string of federal and state court victories for gay marriage proponents. They ruled 5-4 that the federal government cannot deny benefits to legally married same-sex couples without violating the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution.

Since then, district judges in 18 states have struck down bans on gay marriage or ruled that marriages performed elsewhere must be recognized in their states. Only the Utah, Oklahoma and Virginia cases have been heard by appeals courts so far.

“The 4th Circuit has affirmed that equality is not just a California value or a New York value — it’s a fundamental American value,” said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s leading gay rights organization.

The 10th Circuit appeals court includes Utah, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado and Wyoming, as well as New Mexico, where same-sex couples already can marry. The precedent set by the Utah and Oklahoma rulings applies to all those states, but the panel blocked them from taking effect pending appeal. Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes has said he will seek seek Supreme Court review.

Other appellate court cases involving marriage bans in Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee and Wisconsin will be argued in August and September. Appeals also are pending from Arkansas, Texas and Colorado.

The high court ruled last June that the federal government must recognize legal same-sex marriages, and it cleared the way for California to become the 13th state where gay men and lesbians could marry. Since then, six other states have legalized gay marriages by legislative action or court order — New Jersey, New Mexico, Illinois, Hawaii and, most recently, Pennsylvania and Oregon.

More than 70 lawsuits are pending in all 31 states that still have prohibitions. Some raise specific issues such as divorce or death benefits.

The Virginia case stands out for at least three reasons. It comes from the South, a region that has yet to embrace gay marriage. The state attorney general is the first at the appellate level to refuse to defend such a law since the California case that made it to the Supreme Court last year. And the lawyers for the original gay and lesbian plaintiffs, Theodore Olson and David Boies, are the same ones who won gay marriage rights in California last year.

“Today’s decision stands as a testament that all Americans are created equal, and denying loving gay and lesbian couples the opportunity to marry is indefensible,” Olson said.

After the verdict was announced, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper said he no longer would defend his state’s gay marriage ban. “Our office believes the judges in North Carolina are bound by this 4th Circuit decision,” he said.

The original plaintiffs are Timothy Bostic and Tony London, who were denied a marriage license in Norfolk, and Carol Schall and Mary Townley of Richmond, whose marriage in California isn’t recognized by Virginia. They have been joined by the plaintiffs in another Virginia case, Joanne Harris and Jessica Duff of Staunton and Christy Berghoff and Victoria Kidd of Winchester, who seek to represent all gay and lesbian couples in the state.

Judge Floyd’s ruling left little doubt about where the panel majority stands on their right to marry.

“The choice of whether and whom to marry is an intensely personal decision that alters the course of an individual’s life,” the court majority said. “Denying same-sex couples this choice prohibits them from participating fully in our society, which is precisely the type of segregation that the Fourteenth Amendment cannot countenance.”

(Richard Wolf writes for USA Today.)

MG END WOLF

18 Comments

  1. So the only legal arguments really being used to oppose marriage equality are based on ignoring the 14th Amendment.

    “defer to Virginia’s political choice in defining marriage as only between one man and one woman.”

    Ignoring that all discriminatory laws are passed by “political choice” and that majority voter assent does not grant the right to attack the civil liberties of minorities

    ” ‘there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, and there are rational reasons for not recognizing it,’””

    A complete misstatement and reversal of the burdens involved. There is a fundamental right marriage barring rational reasons NOT to recognize it.

    North Carolina is not trying to kick the case up to SCOTUS is because there is no chance of success on an 14th Amendment Equal Protection argument. Justice Kennedy is not going to overrule himself. All of these bans would be wiped out in a single decision. The nightmare for the anti-gay crowd.

    The only state crazy enough to try to appeal to SCOTUS was Utah.

  2. It doesnt really matter. Unlike the dirty liberal coasts, there are no gays here in the Bible Belt so there will not be any gay marraiges even if it is legal. And if some gay marraige does somehow occur, the locals will know how to deal with it.

    • Why? My guess is spite and a strong desire to see people discriminated against under the color of law.

      Like everyone else who votes on laws which violate equal protection under the law.

      If there were rational and secular arguments to be made for such bans, there would have been far fewer court cases lost by the anti marriage equality crowd.

    • My “hate voice”?

      This is me using my hate voice.

      This is me using my loving voice.

      This is me laughing at a aclu trained member carrotcakeman who believes he thinks “independently”.

  3. God’s Marriage Laws:
    • No marriage will be sanctioned between people who have been divorced. (Matthew 5:32)
    • No marriage shall be sanctioned between Christians & non-Christians. (2 John 1:9-11, 2 Corinthians 6:14-17)
    • No marriage shall be sanctioned in which the wedding ceremony shall
    occur during the women’s menstrual cycle (Leviticus 18:19, 20:18, &
    Ezekiel 18:5-6)
    • No marriage shall be sanctioned of people of different races. (Deuteronomy 7:3, Numbers 25:6-8, 36:6-8, 1 Kings 11:2)
    • A married couple who have sexual intercourse during a woman’s period shall both be executed. (Leviticus 18:19)
    • No marriage shall be sanctioned involving a widow (unless it is to her
    brother-in-law). All women whose husbands have passwed away shall
    refrain from intimacy & pleasure for the remainder of their lives.
    (1 Timothy 5:5-15)
    • No marriage shall be sanctioned for any man who has had sexual thoughts of any woman other than his intended (Matthew 5:28)
    • A woman not a virgin on her wedding night must be executed. (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
    • If a married person has sex with someone else’s husband or wife, both adulterers be stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 22:22)
    • A virgin who is raped must marry her rapist. Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
    • If a man gets into a fightwith another man and his wife seeks to
    rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy’s genitals, her hand shall be
    cut off and no pity shall be shown her. (Deuteronomy) 25:11-12)
    • A virgin who is raped must marry her rapist. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)
    • If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered to have intercourse with
    each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male
    heir. (Mark 12:18-2)

    - BUT Polygamy endorsed by God:
    • Solomon … had 700 wives … and 300 concubines. (1 Kings 11:2-3)
    • Rehoboam … took 18 wives, and 60 concubines. (2 Chronicles 11:21)
    • But Abijah waxed mighty, and married 14 wives…. (2 Chronicles 13:21)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments with many links may be automatically held for moderation.