Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:51 AM ET, 07/15/2010

Court upholds D.C. same-sex marriage

By Tim Craig

The D.C. Court of Appeals has upheld the District same-sex marriage law, ruling in a 5-4 decision that opponents do not have the right to put the issue before voters, the Post's Tim Craig reports.

We'll update as more information becomes available.

By Tim Craig  | July 15, 2010; 9:51 AM ET
Categories:  DC  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Md. medics rush to give aid -- to a dog
Next: West plea deal in Md. weapons case

Comments

if we get to vote on gay marriage, i want to vote on remarriage.

Posted by: newagent99 | July 15, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Another affront to democracy by a court that is acting as a legislature versus judiciary. Since this issue could effect every man, woman and in the future child in the District, it should be put before the public for a vote.

Posted by: stout1 | July 15, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Stout1 - Unless every man woman and future child plans on marrying someone of the same sex, this issue does not affect them.

Posted by: MsMoon | July 15, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Stout1 - Unless every man woman and future child plans on marrying someone of the same sex, this issue does not affect them.

Posted by: MsMoon | July 15, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

No, stout1, the court is affirming what the legislature already said in the Human Rights Act. This has nothing to do with judicial activism. (though I'm guessing that if an activist court makes decisions you like, you're fine with it).

Meanwhile, I can't wait to hear how my marriage to my husband effects anyone in the District but us.

Posted by: jcburka | July 15, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Stout: that is the misconception. We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic, where we elect people to make decisisons on our behalf. If you don't like the decisions they make, we have this thing called an election and you can vote for someone else. Also, the court has upheld what the duly elected legislature already decided. The real affront would have been an activist court overturning the decision of our duly elected legislature.

Posted by: jdindc | July 15, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

What the people decrying this verdict just don't get is that the issue was not whether same sex marriage is right/wrong, etc. The issue was whether or not the District followed its own laws in deciding that the matter was not eligible for a public vote.

It sounds like the Court of Appeals decided that the District did follow the laws when it invalidated the several petitions to put the law to a vote. Before anyone goes nutso yelling at the Courts or the City Council, go read the laws that are already on the books.

Posted by: redgrifn | July 15, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Thank God! Voting on marriage equality would be a bad as having put the Voting Rights Act on the ballot. When you have majority/minority issues, you have to watch out for tyranny of the majority. Protecting the rights of minority groups, especially when it comes to unpopular beliefs, has been a legal tradition and value since our country's founding. We don't always get it right, but on this issue, we're getting there.

Posted by: TracyDC | July 15, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

http://www.dcappeals.gov/dccourts/appeals/pdf/10-CV-20_JACKSON_MTD.PDF

Posted by: anon82 | July 15, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

It has always struck me that the leading opponents of this measure, do not reside in D.C. With so many "serious" issues facing Maryland, why are there so many residents of that state who wish to interfere with DC politics?
I support the right of gays and lesbians to marry and if given the choice would vote for a law giving such rights.
I applaud the ruling.

Posted by: mgrinage1 | July 15, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Make no mistake about it - those who are against gay marriage are the very same people who have been against equal rights for racial minorities, religious minorities, women, etc. They are bigots through and through.

Posted by: ashafer_usa | July 15, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I want to vote on taxing churches.

Posted by: MarilynManson | July 15, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

This is the right call. Those of you against gay marriage, don't marry someone of your sex. If you think gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriage, then hetero marriage must not be very strong. It's time to grow up and join the 21st century. You want gay marriage on a referendum? Fine, let's put stupid and bigotry on one.

Posted by: jckdoors | July 15, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Congratulation's to the gay movement! Devient behavior is now legaly normal in DC! Thank goodness those pain in the rear voters were left out of the proceess!

Democracy in action!

Posted by: sbf845 | July 15, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

sbf845 and stout1: Please show me the part of the Constitution that says "the people" get to vote on minority rights. "The people" have no such right. That's the whole point of the Bill of Rights -- certain rights are guaranteed, no matter what the people want.

If you don't think equal rights should actually mean "equal rights," start working to repeal the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Posted by: HunteratRandom | July 15, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

yall still nasty.

Posted by: nivla | July 15, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

nivla: please explain yourself. Oh wait, I don't care.

Posted by: SW-Waterfront | July 15, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

LOL @ stout1 ranting about judicial activism.

This just shows the emptiness of the judicial activism claim. From this one-paragraph statement, you cannot tell what the rationale of the court was and thus cannot possible form any kind of opinion about how "activist" the court was.

For stout1, "judicial activism" doesn't mean anything other than "ruling the way I don't like."

Posted by: uh_huhh | July 15, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

For those who think it should be put up to a vote, do you think we should put heterosexual marriage up for a vote? Interracial marriage? Civil rights? How about a vote to ignore the 13th amendment and bring back slavery?

Posted by: TidusNVA | July 15, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company