Gay Groups

imported_GayGroups

6 couples denied licenses in S.F. seek to overturn California law

The legal battle over same-sex marriage in San Francisco moved into a new phase Friday as couples who were left stranded at City Hall by a court order halting same-sex weddings, and others who were awaiting wedding dates, sued to overturn the state laws that prohibit them from marrying.

The hastily drafted lawsuit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court less than a day after the California Supreme Court ordered city officials to stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, at least for now. The court is expected to rule sometime this summer on whether Mayor Gavin Newsom had the authority to defy the state's marriage law because he considers it unconstitutional.

Until now, the conflict over the weddings authorized by Newsom a month ago has been fought by the city, the state and opponents of same-sex marriage -- parties affected indirectly, at most, by the California law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. On Friday, the battle was joined by six couples with something much more personal at stake.

"This case puts a face on the discrimination,'' American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Tamara Lange said at a news conference announcing the suit.

The faces in the suit include those of Pali Cooper, 48, and her partner Jeanne Rizzo, 57, of Tiburon, who were on the steps of City Hall on Thursday preparing to tie the knot after 15 years together when they learned their wedding was off.

Myra Beals, 61, and Ida Matson, 68, of Mendocino, also are plaintiffs. The couple, together for two years, planned to be married Friday. They say in the suit that they have had to buy expensive insurance policies to make up for Beals' ineligibility for Matson's health coverage and retirement benefits, a consequence of their inability to marry legally.

A third couple, Jewelle Gomez, 55, and Diane Sabin, 51, of San Francisco, partners for 11 years, have had to pay thousands of dollars for estate planning to make sure each would be protected if the other died. They've also had difficulty with hospital visitation during Gomez's recent surgery, the suit says.

"I'm a full human being who pays full taxes, and I'm entitled to the rights every other adult has,'' Sabin said at Friday's news conference.

The lawsuit moves the legal dispute out of the realm of abstract principles into a human dimension, said Vikram Amar, a professor of constitutional law at UC's Hastings College of the Law.

"The introduction of these six couples, I think, makes clear that sooner or later we will get resolution of the question that needs to be resolved,'' the constitutionality of the marriage laws, he said. "The people who want to get married are the most appropriate people to talk about equal protection and due process.''

Lawyers for the city had asked the state's high court to address the constitutional issue if it took up the case, but the court declined the invitation Thursday and said the validity of the marriage laws should be litigated in Superior Court. That means it will likely be a year or more before the issue returns to the state Supreme Court on that constitutional question.

Friday's suit claiming that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional was the second filed against the state since the Supreme Court's order Thursday afternoon. The first came from San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who filed shortly after the court intervened.

Friday's suit was joined by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the gay rights group Lambda.

It, like the city's suit, contends that the state marriage law violates the California Constitution by discriminating on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. Similar arguments persuaded Massachusetts' top court to invalidate the state's marriage law and authorize same-sex weddings starting this May.

One difference between the two new lawsuits is that the couples clearly have legal standing -- the right to sue -- because they are directly affected by the law. Legal analysts say the city may have trouble establishing its right to sue; Herrera's suit says the city has its own interests at stake because it has an active dispute with the state over the validity of the law and might be violating the rights of same-sex couples if it refused to marry them.

Although the Supreme Court froze other pending Superior Court suits on same-sex marriage in Thursday's order, the ACLU's Lange said lawyers in Friday's case would seek an early hearing and a ruling that would apply statewide.

A lawyer for groups opposing same-sex marriage said a suit by aggrieved couples is preferable to "municipal anarchy'' -- a mayor defying state law - - but is still problematic.

"They're just trying to create as many fires as they can in the hopes that we won't be able to put them all out,'' said Richard Ackerman of the Pro- Family Law Center, attorney for the Campaign for California's Families, which sued Newsom last month to block the weddings.

Ackerman said the couples' suit and Thursday's suit by the city should be consolidated with opponents' lawsuits and delayed until the Supreme Court ruling this summer. Otherwise, he said, a judge in one of the new suits might authorize same-sex marriages and create a conflict with Thursday's Supreme Court order that halted those marriages.

But he said he is confident that the new suits will fail and that "marriage will stay defined the same way it has since the beginning of time.''



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEGAL FIGHT
The court battle is being fought on two fronts:


S.F. SUPERIOR COURT
Gay couples and rights groups sued the state Friday, arguing that they have a constitutional right to marriage licenses. San Francisco filed a similar suit Thursday.


STATE SUPREME COURT
The justices ordered a halt to same-sex marriages Thursday pending a ruling on a suit by the state claiming that Mayor Gavin Newsom exceeded his authority in allowing themarriages.