By Bob Van Voris and Andrew M. Harris
April 3 (Bloomberg) -- The Iowa Supreme Court unanimously struck down a gay marriage ban as unconstitutional, making it the third state after Massachusetts and Connecticut to allow same sex couples equal access to the union’s legal protections.
“The right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all,” the Des Moines-based court said in a 69-page opinion issued today.
The court ruling came as part of a lawsuit filed by six gay Iowa couples who sued the Polk County recorder in Des Moines, challenging a 1998 state law restricting marriage to a man and a woman. The plaintiffs argued the state ban violated their right to marry, privacy rights and right to familial association. They also claimed the law unconstitutionally discriminated against them on the basis of sexual orientation.
A lower-court judge in Des Moines ruled the law violated the due process and equal protection clauses of the Iowa Constitution. The state Supreme Court upheld that ruling today.
“Plaintiffs are in committed and loving relationships, many raising families, just like heterosexual couples,” the court said in the opinion by Justice Mark Cady. “Moreover, official recognition of their status provides an institutional basis for defining their fundamental relational rights and responsibilities, just as it does for heterosexual couples.”
Equal Access
The Iowa high court ruled that Iowa officials must disregard the gay-marriage ban and allow gay couples to be married on an equal footing with heterosexuals. The court said the ruling will take effect in 21 days unless a request to reconsider the case is filed beforehand.
“The language in Iowa Code section 595.2 limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman must be stricken from the statute, and the remaining statutory language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage,” the court said.
John Sarcone, the county attorney for Polk County, didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment.
“Today’s victory is a testament to the strength of love, hope and courage -- our clients have shown an abundance of all three for many years and now at long last they will be able to marry,” Camilla Taylor, an attorney with New York-based Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc., said in a statement. The gay rights advocacy group represents the couples in the lawsuit.
Legalized Gay Marriage
Last month, the California Supreme Court, which legalized gay marriage in 2008, heard arguments over a ballot measure there that overturned the court’s previous ruling and banned the practice. Two days ago, the New York Court of Appeals in Albany, that state’s highest court, agreed to review lower court rulings allowing out-of-state gay marriages to be recognized there.
In California, civil rights groups and cities including San Francisco and Los Angeles are seeking to overturn the state’s ballot measure, known as Proposition 8, which on Nov. 4 won 52 percent approval of voters to amend the state’s constitution to ban homosexual marriage in the nation’s most populous state.
In oral arguments last month in San Francisco, at least four of the seven justices repeatedly asked whether the measure merely took away the label of marriage and left intact rights gay couples have in domestic partnerships. They said Californians are guaranteed the right to change their constitution and reverse rulings through ballot initiatives.
San Francisco Mayor
In 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom declared it discriminatory to bar same-sex couples from obtaining marriage licenses, setting off a legal battle in the state.
California has at least 92,000 same-sex couples, more than any other state, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. It was the second state after Massachusetts to allow gay weddings. The ballot measure generated a backlash against its supporters.
Mormon and evangelical churches there were targeted by protesters over their support of the measure. Proposition 8 campaign donors, some of whose names were publicized on Web sites, received critical e-mails and phone calls or threats to boycott their businesses, according to court records.
The Iowa case is Varnum v. Brien, 07-01499, Supreme Court of Iowa (Des Moines).
