US judge strikes down Texas gay marriage ban as 'state-imposed inequality'

Texas is the fourth conservative state since December to have a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage struck down by a federal judge, joining Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia.

|
Jerry Lara/San Antonio Express-News/AP
Gay couples from left, Cleopatra De Leon and Nicole Dimetman, and Mark Phariss and Victor Holmes, give a news conference in San Antonio on Wednesday, Feb. 26 after US Federal Judge Orlando Garcia declared a same-sex marriage ban in deeply conservative Texas unconstitutional.

A federal judge in San Antonio Wednesday struck down a Texas constitutional amendment and state statutes barring same-sex couples from marrying or having their out-of-state marriages officially recognized, saying such laws violate the couples’ right to equal treatment.

US District Judge Orlando Garcia announced his decision two weeks after hearing arguments by lawyers for two same-sex couples challenging the Texas measures and by state officials defending those measures.

“This Court holds that Texas’ prohibition on same-sex marriage conflicts with the United States Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and due process,” Judge Garcia declared in his 48-page opinion.

“Texas’ current marriage laws deny homosexual couples the right to marry, and in doing so, demean their dignity for no legitimate reason,” he wrote.

“Accordingly, the Court finds these laws are unconstitutional and hereby grants a preliminary injunction enjoining [Texas officials] from enforcing Texas’ ban on same-sex marriage.”

The judge said he would stay implementation of the injunction pending resolution of expected appeals.

Garcia is the fourth federal judge to strike down a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage since December. Judges in Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia have issued similar decisions.

The decisions are significant because they come in conservative states that took the extra, burdensome step of enacting amendments to their state constitutions limiting marriage to one man and one woman.

All four judges who struck down the constitutional amendments were appointed by Democratic presidents. Judge Garcia was appointed by former President Clinton.

The Texas decision means that the same-sex marriage issue likely will soon be presented as an appeal to the Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals based in New Orleans. The Utah and Oklahoma cases are already on appeal at the Tenth Circuit in Denver, and the Virginia decision is heading to the Fourth Circuit in Richmond.

If the three appeals courts reach conflicting outcomes in the cases it would almost guarantee the intervention of the US Supreme Court.

Judge Garcia’s decision raises the same issues and reaches the same conclusions that each of the three other judges decided. He said the Texas ban violates the same-sex couples’ right to equal treatment and violates what he said was a fundamental right to marry regardless of gender orientation.

He did not cite a Supreme Court case explicitly recognizing such a right.

The judge rejected the state’s justifications for limiting marriage to one man and one woman. Texas had argued that limiting marriage to heterosexual couples would increase the likelihood that children would be raised by their own father and mother in a stable household. The state also argued that the limit would help encourage “responsible procreation” among heterosexual couples.

The judge said he found no rational basis supporting to the state’s claims.

Lawyers for Texas had argued that the fundamental right to marry does not include a right to marry someone of the same sex.

The judge said the Supreme Court’s rulings in gay rights cases and a decision striking down a ban on interracial marriage established that the right to marry could not be limited.

“The Court finds that Texas cannot define marriage in a way that denies its citizens the freedom of personal choice in deciding whom to marry, nor may it deny the same status and dignity to each citizen’s decision,” he said.

Judge Garcia acknowledged that his ruling was invalidating actions by Texas voters and Texas lawmakers. But he said his role was to uphold the rights of all Texans.

“Today’s Court decision is not made in defiance of the great people of Texas or the Texas Legislature, but in compliance with the United States Constitution and Supreme Court precedent,” he said.

“Without a rational relation to a legitimate government purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuge in our United States Constitution,” he said.

The case is Cleopatra De Leon v. Rick Perry (13CV982). It was heard in the San Antonio division of the Western District of Texas.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to US judge strikes down Texas gay marriage ban as 'state-imposed inequality'
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2014/0226/US-judge-strikes-down-Texas-gay-marriage-ban-as-state-imposed-inequality
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe