Posted on 05/16/2006 5:11:43 PM PDT by SmithL
ATLANTA -- A judge has struck down Georgia's ban on same-sex marriages, saying a measure overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2004 violated a provision of the state constitution that limits ballot questions to a single subject.
The ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell had been eagerly awaited by gay-rights supporters who filed the court challenge in November 2004, soon after the constitutional ban was approved.
Russell said the state's voters must first decide whether same-sex relationships should have any legal status before they can be asked to decide whether same-sex marriages should be banned.
"People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships should have some place — although not marriage," she wrote. "The single-subject rule protects the right of those people to hold both views and reflect both judgments by their vote."
Russell said "procedural safeguards such as the single-subject rule rarely enjoy public support."
"But ultimately it is those safeguards that preserve our liberties, because they ensure that the actions of government are constrained by the rule of law," the judge wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
What gives a superior court judge reason to rule on state matters?
I'll bet.
Ridiculous. Her basis for this ruling is absurd. Judges are completely out of control.
Voters be damned!
More in line with what he meant, IMNSHO.
This may be okay. Looks like potential for two more voter initiatives on the ballot.
The Georgia Supreme Court could be interesting. They did strike down the state sodomy statute.
Out of control judges ought to be unconstitutional.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution so as to provide that this state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman; to provide for submission of this amendment for ratification or rejection; and for other purposes.
The judge's comment was: "People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships should have some place — although not marriage," she wrote. "The single-subject rule protects the right of those people to hold both views and reflect both judgments by their vote."
HER statement, not the text of the Amendment, deals with two issues. The text of the Amendment deals with marriage only. It defines it as between a man and a woman. The state would still be free to pass legislation granting a level of recognition to same sex relationships as long as it didn't have equal status with marriage.
Is there an override clause the legislature can use?
that was the SCOTUS
agreed... how did we let this republic become controlled by Judges and not the people?
I agree. But look on the bright side - this will give Ga. an excuse to put it on the ballot again, thus drawing plenty of conservatives to the polls.
Leftist see their judges as anointed from on high.
The Georgia Constitution. Who do you think should be ruling on state matters?
So let me get this right. Ballot initiatives in Georgia must deal with one issue only. Voters approved a ballot initiative limiting marriage to one man and one woman. This judge says that ballot initiative violated the one issue rule by not also addressing the issue of civil unions. Okaaaayyyy!
Hopefully this idiotic ruling will be appealed.
Was this Judge appointed, or elected? If elected, by whom?
Ping for later
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.