Posted on 02/13/2014 8:14:49 PM PST by cutofyourjib
NORFOLK, Va. (WTVR) – A federal judge declared late Thursday night that Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, confirmed Michael Kelly, Director of Communications for Attorney General Mark Herring.
The update was first made on Herring’s Facebook page and his Twitter account.
MT “@AGMarkHerring: *ALERT* Federal judge declares state's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. Issues stay pending appeal.”— Mark Herring (@MarkHerringVA) February 14, 2014
“Equality in Virginia took a big step forward tonight as a federal district judge declared Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional,” Herring wrote.
“The judge issued a stay with her injunction pending appeal, meaning marriage licenses will not yet be issued to same-sex couples, but today is a great day for those who want to see all Virginians treated equally regardless of who they love.”
That ruling can be read in full here: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/edva-ssm-opinion.pdf
A lawsuit challenging the commonwealth’s ban on same-sex marriage went before U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen on February 4, in Norfolk.
The case of Bostic vs. Rainey argued that the Virginia Marriage Amendment, passed in 2006 by 57 percent of voters, is unconstitutional.
Tim Bostic and Tony London are the Norfolk couple who applied for a marriage license last year and were denied.
Since then they have gain the support of Virginia’s top brass behind them. State Attorney General Mark Herring and Governor Terry McAuliffe, both Democrats, have said they won’t defend the state’s constitutional ban.
Herring’s office issued a statement a couple of weeks ago saying they hope it “will be a landmark ruling in Virginia on one of the most important civil rights issues of our time.”
An excerpt from the judge’s conclusion reads:
“ The Court is compelled to conclude that Virginia’s Marriage Laws unconstitutionally deny Virginia’s gay and lesbian citizens the fundamental freedom to choose to marry.
Government interests in perpetuating traditions, shielding state matters from federal interference, and favoring one model of parenting over others must yield to this country’s cherished protections that ensure the exercise of the private choices of the individual citizen regarding love and family.”
Organizations that have worked towards marriage equality in the Commonwealth for years, like Equality Virginia, said that the ruling is historic.
“The ruling finally puts Virginia on the path toward allowing lesbian and gay couples to marry the person they love here in the place they call home,” James Parish, executive director for Equality Virginia said.
Not fair to say that. Virginia would still go red every time if it didn't have the cancerous growth of Washington DC spreading its tentacles all over the northern part of our poor state. Imagine if DC was next to YOUR state. :-(
I am quite familiar with politics in sw Virginia since I live in the Tri-Cities. The democrips hold too many seats.
Try living in Oregon, where most of the population are California imports.
No. The “Fundamental Transformation” isn’t complete yet. You’ll know when they’re done when you’re breaking your back in a rise paddy or rotting in a gulag.
We’re on the edge of economic, political, and social disaster. This is yet another sign.
It was not considered discrimination that one not be permitted to marry a sibling or, in most cases, even a first cousin (of the opposite sex).
So why is a restriction on a Biblically and biologically unsound union considered discrimination?
They remain free to marry, just not under conditions imposed on all. Because those conditions were imposed on all, there is no discrimination, only their desire to act in opposition to the conditions.
As for the whomever they love part, what if that is a pet, a child, a sibling? What kettle of worms do they open with this nonsense? Those ruling this way are sick, twisted, or patently insane.
How can this be a “denial” of equal protection?
Bingo!
By the way, the erroneous reasoning by judges on equal protection grounds would and does apply to any activity licensed by the state.
If one prefers to cut hair, the state should not deny cosmetology licenses to those who only have skills to repair automobiles.
The state cannot restrict persons who prefer driving on sidewalks to driving only on paved highways.
The state cannot forbid deer hunting licenses to those who prefer to hunt possums.
And as you point out, homosexuals are in fact NOT treated distinctly from heterosexuals. Homosexuals have identical treatment under the law. The homosexual is forbidden from using his cosmetology license to practice psychiatry and surgery, the homosexual is forbidden from using his squirrel hunting license to hunt muskrats, the homosexual is forbidden to use his driver's license to drive on sidewalks, and the homosexual is forbidden from using a marriage license to marry somebody of the same sex. It is in fact, irrelevant that the license applicant is heterosexual or homosexual.
And, also by the way, the state has NO tests on love when issuing marriage licenses. Love is not a requirement, and it is not tested..... And this is rightly so, for I love my mother, father, daughter, son, neighbor, dog, preacher, teacher, neighbor, and married friend.
And.... Homosexuals have the same contract rights as anybody else. Timmy and Tommy and Tony and Tammy Too can contract to love, cherish, fornicate, and share bank accounts as they desire.
These jduges are idiots as well as being un-American.
The plaintiffs in this case have the exact same rights to marry that I do. They can marry one person of the opposite sex that will have them.
They cannot marry their toaster, or their goat, or their mother nor another man. Same limitations I have.
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.