The state Supreme Court decision striking down California laws banning same-sex marriage was an epic legal victory for gay and lesbian civil rights advocates that capped a four-year legal battle.
But that triumph might be short-lived, as opponents attacked the ruling immediately after it was released yesterday morning and readied for a potential November vote on a constitutional amendment that could make the court's historic decision moot.
In a 4-3 ruling, the state's highest court said two state laws, one of which was approved by voters, are unconstitutional discrimination because they limit marriage to opposite-sex couples.
Today's San Diego Union-Tribune opinion section has invited two prominent pundits to discuss the pros and cons of this decision.
Read their opinons then feel free to join the conversation below.
CON
By Glen Lavy
Lavy argued before the California Supreme Court in defense of Proposition 22. He is a senior vice president and senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund (telladf.org). The California office of ADF is in Sacramento.
In ruling that Proposition 22, the California Defense of Marriage Act, is unconstitutional, the state Supreme Court unwittingly made all the predictions come true about the need for Californians to approve a state marriage amendment in November. This is because the high court has accomplished three things with its decision.
Read more ...
PRO
By Barbara J. Cox
Cox is the Clara Shortridge Foltz Professor of Law at California Western School of Law in San Diego. She chairs the steering and executive committees of the national Freedom to Marry organization.
Yesterday, my marriage neared validity in California, and my domestic partner soon will be my spouse. We were married in Canada in July 2003, long after we knew that we wanted to commit ourselves to one another forever and more than 11 years after we had a private commitment ceremony attended by our family and friends.
Read more ...
