On Tuesday, a federal court upheld a lower court’s reinstatement of the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.

The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling in Perry v. Brown upheld a previous decision by Judge Vaughn Walker which stopped state and local officials from enforcing a ban on same-sex marriage that resulted from the 2008 passage of Proposition 8.

“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples,” the court ruled. “The Constitution simply does not allow for ‘laws of this sort.’”

The case is expected to continue on to the U.S. Supreme Court before the matter ultimately is settled.

Officials who refused to defend the law welcomed the decision.

“The court has rendered a powerful affirmation of the right of same-sex couples to marry. I applaud the wisdom and courage of this decision,” Gov. Jerry Brown said Tuesday morning.

“Today's ruling is a victory for fairness, a victory for equality and a victory for justice," said California Attorney General Kamala Harris. "Proposition 8 denied to gay and lesbian couples the equal protection to which all Americans are entitled. By striking this unconstitutional law from our books, the court has restored dignity, equality and respect to all Californians."

Added Congressman Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), “Today’s ruling on Proposition 8 is a win for California and a win for equality. Laws that deny equality are not only immoral and unjust, but unconstitutional and against our most basic principles. Should they hear this case, I hope the United States Supreme Court follows the 9th Circuit’s example and comes down on the side of marriage equality.

Thompson thanked all of those who fought to make the ruling possible, pledging he will continue to do everything I can to fight discrimination and send Prop 8 to the history books once and for all.”

U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) called the ruling “historic” and “a major step forward in the march toward equality for all Americans. It’s a great day for the millions of Californians who deserve the same rights and recognition as every other family in our state.”

A matter ‘of great debate’

In 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that state laws restricting the right of same-sex couples to marry violated the state constitution.

Later that year, California voters approved Proposition 8 by a margin of 52 percent to 47 percent. The proposition amended the state constitution to provide that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

The California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 against a challenge under the state constitution, but did not consider any challenge on federal constitutional grounds.

Perry v. Brown raised federal constitutional challenges of equal protection and due process that were not considered by the California Supreme Court.

After a full trial on the merits, district court Judge Vaughn Walker concluded that Proposition 8 violated these principles of due process and equal protection. His decision to enjoin enforcement of Proposition 8 was issued in 2011. The Ninth Circuit’s Tuesday ruling upholds that decision.

Court documents state that the case was filed by two same-sex couples, Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier, and Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo, after they were denied marriage licenses in the counties of Alameda and Los Angeles, respectively.

In considering the law, the Ninth Circuit Court questioned whether the law violated the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizens due process and equal protection.

The amendment states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The court concluded that Proposition 8 does violate the 14th Amendment, noting, “Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently. There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted.”

The ruling goes on to state that because under California statutory law same-sex couples had all the rights of opposite-sex couples, regardless of their marital status, Proposition 8 had one effect only – to strip same-sex couples of the ability to marry that they previously had possessed.

The court acknowledges that same-sex marriage is a matter “of great debate in our nation,” and a matter of sometimes strong disagreement.

The ruling also notes, “By emphasizing Proposition 8’s limited effect, we do not mean to minimize the harm that this change in the law caused to same-sex couples and their families. To the contrary, we emphasize the extraordinary significance of the official designation of ‘marriage.’ That designation is important because ‘marriage’ is the name that society gives to the relationship that matters most between two adults. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but to the couple desiring to enter into a committed lifelong relationship, a marriage by the name of ‘registered domestic partnership’ does not.”

The court suggested that it’s implausible to think that denying same-sex couples the right to marry “could somehow bolster the stability of families headed by one man and one woman,” and that such an argument lacks “footing in reality.”

Read the full document below.

Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews, on Tumblr at www.lakeconews.tumblr.com, on Google+, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf and on YouTube at www.youtube.com/user/LakeCoNews .

020712 Perry v. Brown