DOMA Challenged in Southern California
The case, one of the last remaining challenges to bans on same-sex “marriages” pending in federal court, focused on fundamental questions regarding the purpose and definition of marriage.
The same-sex “marriage” debate shifted to Southern California Thursday, as a gay couple challenged both federal and state laws prohibiting such “marriages” at the U.S. District court. The case, one of the last remaining challenges to bans on same-sex “marriages” pending in federal court, focused on fundamental questions regarding the purpose and definition of marriage.
The gay couple, Christopher Hammer and Arthur Smelt of Mission Viejo, had a private “union” ceremony in 1997 and applied for a “marriage” license from Orange County last year. They sued after they were rejected.
Their challenged, presented before the U.S. District Judge Gary Taylor, was two-fold: the first challenged the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which protects California from being forced into recognizing “marriage” licenses obtained in other states. The second challenge was against Proposition 22, a state law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman only; Prop 22 passed with the overwhelming support of California voters.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Homosexuals are “the most oppressed minority since slavery," the couple's attorney Richard C. Gilbert said to Judge Taylor. "It now falls to you to uphold the principles of liberty."
However, lawyers for the county, state and federal government and from Campaign for California Families and the Liberty Counsel argued otherwise, saying the couple failed to prove they were victims of unconstitutional discrimination.
Rena Lindevaldsen, attorney for the Liberty Counsel, specifically argued that the state of California has the right to limit marriage to the union of one man and one woman in order to promote the ideal setting to raise children.
According to the Liberty Counsel, the Plaintiff’s entire case eventually rested on their plea “for the court to ignore” the DOMA.
“Plaintiffs told Judge Taylor that the Supreme Court had sent him a telegram in its 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, where the court overturned a law criminalizing same-sex sodomy. Lawrence, however, expressly stated it was not ruling on whether the state must place its stamp of approval on same-sex relationships,” LC stated.
The Liberty Counsel lawyers meanwhile argued that the DOMA challenge should be dismissed because “the plantiffs have no legal, same-sex union from any state” and the DOMA “only applies when one state refuses to accept the validity of an out-of-state, same-sex union.”
Liberty Counsel President Matthew Staver also explained that a constitutional amendment must be passed to protect marriage from future challenges.
"A mother and a father provide the most healthy and stable environment for children. There is a direct correlation between marriage and the security of our community,” said Stave. “Same-sex marriage would destroy marriage, hurt children and cause havoc, as one state law collides with another. Congress should move quickly to pass a bill to amend the U.S. Constitution to preserve traditional marriage."
Taylor said he would not issue an immediate ruling but would take some time to consider the arguments. The only other same-sex marriage case pending in federal court is one in Nebraska that challenges a state law on same-sex marriages. The judge has not ruled yet in that case
