Gay couples entitled to marry - US court

The Massachusetts high court declared that gays are entitled to nothing less than marriage and that civil unions will not suffice, setting the stage for the first legally sanctioned same-sex weddings in the US.

The court issued the advisory opinion yesterday at the request of legislators who wanted to know whether civil unions would be enough to satisfy the court after its November ruling that said gay couples are entitled to all the rights of marriage. That decision had been written in such a way that it left open the possibility that civil unions might be allowed.

But the opinion by the Supreme Judicial Court left no doubt: Only marriage would pass constitutional muster.

“The history of our nation has demonstrated that separate is seldom, if ever, equal,” four justices wrote. “For no rational reason the marriage laws of the commonwealth discriminate against a defined class; no amount of tinkering with language will eradicate that stain. The (civil unions) bill would have the effect of maintaining and fostering a stigma of exclusion that the Constitution prohibits.”

Paul Martinek, editor of Lawyers Weekly USA, said that the blunt opinion erases any confusion.

“The fat lady has sung and she’s singing the wedding march,” Mr Martinek said. “It’s clear from reading the majority opinion that there’s no basis on which the (court) will OK anything other than marriage.”

The much-anticipated opinion came a week before next Wednesday’s Constitutional Convention, where the Legislature will consider an amendment backed by Republican Governor Mitt Romney that would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

But the soonest a constitutional amendment could end up on the ballot would be 2006, meaning that until then, the high court’s decision will be Massachusetts law. Gay couples could get married in Massachusetts as soon as May.

The case represents a significant milestone in a year that has seen broad new recognition of gay rights in the US, Canada and abroad, including a June US Supreme Court decision striking down a Texas ban on gay sex.

President George W. Bush, in a written statement, called the Massachusetts ruling “deeply troubling”.

He said: “Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. If activist judges insist on redefining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.”

The president stopped short of endorsing a Constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages, but conservative activists said they had received assurances from the White House that he would push for an amendment.