Tweet
April 8, 2009
Gay Rights Groups Celebrate Victories in Marriage Push
By ABBY GOODNOUGH
MONTPELIER, Vt. — Gay-rights groups say that momentum from back-to-back victories on same-sex marriage in Vermont and Iowa could spill into other states, particularly since at least nine other legislatures are considering measures this year to allow marriage between gay couples.
The Vermont Legislature on Tuesday overrode Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto of a bill allowing gay couples to marry, mustering one more vote than needed to preserve the measure.
The step makes Vermont the first state to allow same-sex marriage through legislative action instead of a court ruling, and comes less than a week after the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages in that state.
New York, New Jersey, Maine and New Hampshire are among the states where such proposals have gained legislative support in recent months.
“This is a reminder to those legislatures that they should finish the job,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a national advocacy group based in New York. “Contrary to the claims made by the opponents of equality, it’s not just judges, it’s not just the coasts, and it’s not just going away.”
Even opponents of same-sex marriage recognized the week’s developments as a potential watershed moment that could subdue the effect of their Election Day victory in California. Voters there narrowly approved Proposition 8, which amended the state’s Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, effectively reversing a decision by the state’s Supreme Court that had legalized it.
“It’s a bad day for the country,” said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, a group established to fight same-sex marriage. “There is a palpable sense that something has changed and people need to get active.”
Vermont, which in 2000 became the first state to adopt civil unions for gay couples, is now the fourth state to allow same-sex marriage. In addition to Iowa, the others are Connecticut and Massachusetts.
The vote in Vermont came on the same day the Council of the District of Columbia gave preliminary approval to a plan recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Since Congress has the option of overriding that vote, the battle over same sex-marriage could end up on the federal stage this year.
The mood among equal rights advocates is distinctly different now than in recent years, when state after state moved to legally define marriage as between a man and a woman. Voters approved constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in 26 states since the Massachusetts law, a landmark, took effect in 2004; the constitutions of four other states also limit marriage to heterosexuals.
Advocates have acknowledged that they strategically chose the states in which they have won battles for same-sex marriage so far. While states like New York and New Jersey offer strong possibilities for additional victories, many others — especially those with constitutional bans on same-sex marriage — present formidable challenges.
Jennifer C. Pizer, the marriage project director for Lambda Legal, said after the Iowa ruling on Friday that the approach in the states with constitutional bans would have to be different.
“I think we will have a period that we really haven’t ever seen before in American history,” Ms. Pizer said, “of people needing to undo state constitutional amendments — which is not an easy thing to do.”
Several groups that oppose same-sex marriage suggested Tuesday that the successive victories for gay rights advocates would give the opposition movement new energy. Mr. Brown, of the National Organization for Marriage, said the developments in Iowa and Vermont had prompted his group to start running advertisements against same-sex marriage in several states now, instead of in late spring, as originally planned. In particular, he said, the ruling in Iowa caught opponents off guard and invigorated them because they had not expected it so soon.
His group will hold news conferences Wednesday in New Jersey and Rhode Island to denounce same-sex marriage bills under consideration there.
“People are beginning to understand there is a systematic, targeted effort to get same-sex marriage through the legislatures in the Northeast,” he said, “to continue to work through the courts in other states, and ultimately to use these redefinitions of marriage to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act on the federal level.”
The Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress in 1996, prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage. It denies federal benefits, like Social Security survivors’ payments, to spouses in such marriages. Last month, a legal advocacy group in Boston filed a lawsuit seeking to have the law overturned on equal protection grounds.
Polls suggest that Americans remain divided on the issue. A CBS News poll last week found that while 6 out of 10 Americans think some form of legal recognition is appropriate for same-sex couples, only a third think those couples should be allowed to marry. Americans are somewhat more supportive of same-sex marriage than in 2004, when just 22 percent supported it.
Last month, the House of Representatives in New Hampshire voted narrowly to approve a bill to legalize same-sex marriages. The Senate is expected to take up the bill in the next few weeks. The California Supreme Court is expected to rule in the coming months on a petition to overturn Proposition 8, but many legal scholars have predicted that it will be upheld.
In Vermont, approval of the marriage bill had been expected in the Senate, where the vote was 23 to 5. But the outcome in the House of Representatives was not clear until the final moments of a long roll call, when Representative Jeff Young, a Democrat who voted against the bill last week reversed his position.
Two other Democrats who had opposed the bill also supported the override, and one Republican who had opposed it was absent. The vote was 100 to 49, slightly more than the required two-thirds majority of members present.
After the final tally, cheers erupted in both chambers of the State House and in the hallways. Several lawmakers on both sides of the debate looked stunned.
Representative Robert South, a freshman Democrat from a conservative district, said he reversed his position after 228 of his constituents reached out and urged him to support the override, compared with 198 who urged him to oppose it.
“It was very difficult for me,” Mr. South said, “because the marriage equality bill, as far as I’m concerned, has split the state. I see how close my numbers are for and against same-sex marriage, and it’s divided my constituents, and that’s what upsets me.”
Gay Rights Groups Celebrate Victories in Marriage Push
By ABBY GOODNOUGH
MONTPELIER, Vt. — Gay-rights groups say that momentum from back-to-back victories on same-sex marriage in Vermont and Iowa could spill into other states, particularly since at least nine other legislatures are considering measures this year to allow marriage between gay couples.
The Vermont Legislature on Tuesday overrode Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto of a bill allowing gay couples to marry, mustering one more vote than needed to preserve the measure.
The step makes Vermont the first state to allow same-sex marriage through legislative action instead of a court ruling, and comes less than a week after the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages in that state.
New York, New Jersey, Maine and New Hampshire are among the states where such proposals have gained legislative support in recent months.
“This is a reminder to those legislatures that they should finish the job,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a national advocacy group based in New York. “Contrary to the claims made by the opponents of equality, it’s not just judges, it’s not just the coasts, and it’s not just going away.”
Even opponents of same-sex marriage recognized the week’s developments as a potential watershed moment that could subdue the effect of their Election Day victory in California. Voters there narrowly approved Proposition 8, which amended the state’s Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, effectively reversing a decision by the state’s Supreme Court that had legalized it.
“It’s a bad day for the country,” said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, a group established to fight same-sex marriage. “There is a palpable sense that something has changed and people need to get active.”
Vermont, which in 2000 became the first state to adopt civil unions for gay couples, is now the fourth state to allow same-sex marriage. In addition to Iowa, the others are Connecticut and Massachusetts.
The vote in Vermont came on the same day the Council of the District of Columbia gave preliminary approval to a plan recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Since Congress has the option of overriding that vote, the battle over same sex-marriage could end up on the federal stage this year.
The mood among equal rights advocates is distinctly different now than in recent years, when state after state moved to legally define marriage as between a man and a woman. Voters approved constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in 26 states since the Massachusetts law, a landmark, took effect in 2004; the constitutions of four other states also limit marriage to heterosexuals.
Advocates have acknowledged that they strategically chose the states in which they have won battles for same-sex marriage so far. While states like New York and New Jersey offer strong possibilities for additional victories, many others — especially those with constitutional bans on same-sex marriage — present formidable challenges.
Jennifer C. Pizer, the marriage project director for Lambda Legal, said after the Iowa ruling on Friday that the approach in the states with constitutional bans would have to be different.
“I think we will have a period that we really haven’t ever seen before in American history,” Ms. Pizer said, “of people needing to undo state constitutional amendments — which is not an easy thing to do.”
Several groups that oppose same-sex marriage suggested Tuesday that the successive victories for gay rights advocates would give the opposition movement new energy. Mr. Brown, of the National Organization for Marriage, said the developments in Iowa and Vermont had prompted his group to start running advertisements against same-sex marriage in several states now, instead of in late spring, as originally planned. In particular, he said, the ruling in Iowa caught opponents off guard and invigorated them because they had not expected it so soon.
His group will hold news conferences Wednesday in New Jersey and Rhode Island to denounce same-sex marriage bills under consideration there.
“People are beginning to understand there is a systematic, targeted effort to get same-sex marriage through the legislatures in the Northeast,” he said, “to continue to work through the courts in other states, and ultimately to use these redefinitions of marriage to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act on the federal level.”
The Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress in 1996, prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage. It denies federal benefits, like Social Security survivors’ payments, to spouses in such marriages. Last month, a legal advocacy group in Boston filed a lawsuit seeking to have the law overturned on equal protection grounds.
Polls suggest that Americans remain divided on the issue. A CBS News poll last week found that while 6 out of 10 Americans think some form of legal recognition is appropriate for same-sex couples, only a third think those couples should be allowed to marry. Americans are somewhat more supportive of same-sex marriage than in 2004, when just 22 percent supported it.
Last month, the House of Representatives in New Hampshire voted narrowly to approve a bill to legalize same-sex marriages. The Senate is expected to take up the bill in the next few weeks. The California Supreme Court is expected to rule in the coming months on a petition to overturn Proposition 8, but many legal scholars have predicted that it will be upheld.
In Vermont, approval of the marriage bill had been expected in the Senate, where the vote was 23 to 5. But the outcome in the House of Representatives was not clear until the final moments of a long roll call, when Representative Jeff Young, a Democrat who voted against the bill last week reversed his position.
Two other Democrats who had opposed the bill also supported the override, and one Republican who had opposed it was absent. The vote was 100 to 49, slightly more than the required two-thirds majority of members present.
After the final tally, cheers erupted in both chambers of the State House and in the hallways. Several lawmakers on both sides of the debate looked stunned.
Representative Robert South, a freshman Democrat from a conservative district, said he reversed his position after 228 of his constituents reached out and urged him to support the override, compared with 198 who urged him to oppose it.
“It was very difficult for me,” Mr. South said, “because the marriage equality bill, as far as I’m concerned, has split the state. I see how close my numbers are for and against same-sex marriage, and it’s divided my constituents, and that’s what upsets me.”
Comment