(CNN) -- Massachusetts' highest court ruled Tuesday that the state cannot deny gays and lesbians the right to marry.
But the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court stopped short of allowing marriage licenses to be issued to the couples who challenged the law, and gave the state Legislature 180 days to find a solution, The Associated Press reported.
In the United States, Vermont is the only state to allow same-sex couples the rights and benefits of marriage. Vermont calls them civil unions, rather than marriages.
California's State Assembly has passed a domestic partnership law to provide similar benefits, but it stops short of allowing gays to marry.
In its ruling, the Massachusetts court said the state "failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason for denying civil marriage to same-sex couples."
Arguments in the case were heard March 4. Under its internal guidelines, the court usually tries to issue decisions within 130 days of hearing such arguments, but the decision went past the anticipated summer deadline.
The case was filed by seven same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses and has attracted national attention, with advocates on both sides predicting that the Massachusetts court could become the first in the nation to legalize gay marriage.
"We're talking about people who don't have equality under the law and should have it, because all citizens in this state are born free and equal," Mary Bonauto, an attorney for the plaintiffs who also works for the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said last summer.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional, and last June 10, an appeals court in the Canadian province of Ontario struck down a ban on same-sex marriage.
States determine marriage laws
In the United States, marriage laws are determined by states, and a number of states have passed laws forbidding gays from marrying, often also barring the recognition of a same-sex marriage performed in another state. The federal government's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), while not an outright ban on gay marriage, declares that states are not required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.
DOMA, passed by Congress in 1996, also effectively bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions by defining marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and spouse as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
Among the plaintiffs in the Massachusetts case are Julie and Hillary Goodridge, women who have been a couple for 16 years. They are raising a daughter, Annie, who is 7 years old.
In Goodridge et al v. Department of Public Health, the Goodridges and six other couples seek recognition of their marriages.
Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Judith Yogman argued the state's case before the court in March, saying the state wants to encourage the heterosexual model of marriage.
Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly had argued it is for the legislature, not the courts, to decide whether to redefine the institution of marriage.
But the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court stopped short of allowing marriage licenses to be issued to the couples who challenged the law, and gave the state Legislature 180 days to find a solution, The Associated Press reported.
In the United States, Vermont is the only state to allow same-sex couples the rights and benefits of marriage. Vermont calls them civil unions, rather than marriages.
California's State Assembly has passed a domestic partnership law to provide similar benefits, but it stops short of allowing gays to marry.
In its ruling, the Massachusetts court said the state "failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason for denying civil marriage to same-sex couples."
Arguments in the case were heard March 4. Under its internal guidelines, the court usually tries to issue decisions within 130 days of hearing such arguments, but the decision went past the anticipated summer deadline.
The case was filed by seven same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses and has attracted national attention, with advocates on both sides predicting that the Massachusetts court could become the first in the nation to legalize gay marriage.
"We're talking about people who don't have equality under the law and should have it, because all citizens in this state are born free and equal," Mary Bonauto, an attorney for the plaintiffs who also works for the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said last summer.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional, and last June 10, an appeals court in the Canadian province of Ontario struck down a ban on same-sex marriage.
States determine marriage laws
In the United States, marriage laws are determined by states, and a number of states have passed laws forbidding gays from marrying, often also barring the recognition of a same-sex marriage performed in another state. The federal government's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), while not an outright ban on gay marriage, declares that states are not required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.
DOMA, passed by Congress in 1996, also effectively bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions by defining marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and spouse as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
Among the plaintiffs in the Massachusetts case are Julie and Hillary Goodridge, women who have been a couple for 16 years. They are raising a daughter, Annie, who is 7 years old.
In Goodridge et al v. Department of Public Health, the Goodridges and six other couples seek recognition of their marriages.
Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Judith Yogman argued the state's case before the court in March, saying the state wants to encourage the heterosexual model of marriage.
Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly had argued it is for the legislature, not the courts, to decide whether to redefine the institution of marriage.
Comment