At a press conference in Phoenix on Friday, Oct. 17, Arizona’s ban on same-sex marriage ended not with a bang but with a whimper.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Idaho were unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Using the court’s ruling as precedent, judges from the circuit court’s 15 districts have been ruling similarly in local cases.
On Thursday, Oct. 16, U.S. District Judge John Sedwick handed down a similar ruling involving several lawsuits filed against the state of Arizona.
The following morning, Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne announced at a press conference that he would not appeal Sedwick’s decision, and then informed superior court clerks that they could no longer treat marriage exclusively as “a union of one man and one woman” under Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution and could immediately issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples who applied.
Horne’s announcement also means same-sex marriages conducted in other states were immediately recognized in Arizona, granting marriage rights to thousands of couples married elsewhere. Arizona is now one of 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia to recognize same-sex marriage.
The news appeared to be only slowly spreading as many people I spoke with over the weekend, gay and straight, seemed mostly unaware of the ruling. One of my straight friends — recently divorced — joked that everyone has the right to be miserable however they so choose.
Nearly all agreed that local wedding businesses, restaurants and resorts should encourage couples around the state to hold their weddings in Sedona and the Verde Valley.
The push for marriage equality has spread rapidly over the last few years as more than half the country’s population now lives in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, reflecting changing attitudes — a national Gallup poll in May found 55 percent in favor of same-sex marriage and 42 percent against. Even Pope Francis is pushing for more acceptance of gays and lesbians in the Catholic Church.
While a judge’s ruling is one way for civil rights to be granted, a victory at the polls would have been more celebratory, although Arizona voters are fickle. In 2006, Arizona voters became the first in the country to reject a constitutional same-sex marriage ban by defeating Proposition 107, 51.8 percent to 48.2 percent, even though same-sex marriage was already illegal under state statute. Two years later, voters passed the virtually identical Proposition 102, 56.2 percent to 43.8 percent, reinforcing that statutory ban but not actually changing any state laws.
According to a statewide poll conducted this March, 49 percent of respondents would be in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, 41 percent would be opposed. Without a proposition on the ballot to repeal Amendment 30, we can only speculate how the electorate would have decided.
Whether a wedding is between a bride and a groom, two brides or two grooms, a promise made by two human beings in front of their friends and family to love and cherish each another until death is a sacred oath, selfless and beautiful.At a press conference in Phoenix on Friday, Oct. 17, Arizona’s ban on same-sex marriage ended not with a bang but with a whimper.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Idaho were unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Using the court’s ruling as precedent, judges from the circuit court’s 15 districts have been ruling similarly in local cases.
On Thursday, Oct. 16, U.S. District Judge John Sedwick handed down a similar ruling involving several lawsuits filed against the state of Arizona.
The following morning, Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne announced at a press conference that he would not appeal Sedwick’s decision, and then informed superior court clerks that they could no longer treat marriage exclusively as “a union of one man and one woman” under Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution and could immediately issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples who applied.
Horne’s announcement also means same-sex marriages conducted in other states were immediately recognized in Arizona, granting marriage rights to thousands of couples married elsewhere. Arizona is now one of 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia to recognize same-sex marriage.
The news appeared to be only slowly spreading as many people I spoke with over the weekend, gay and straight, seemed mostly unaware of the ruling. One of my straight friends — recently divorced — joked that everyone has the right to be miserable however they so choose.
Nearly all agreed that local wedding businesses, restaurants and resorts should encourage couples around the state to hold their weddings in Sedona and the Verde Valley.
The push for marriage equality has spread rapidly over the last few years as more than half the country’s population now lives in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, reflecting changing attitudes — a national Gallup poll in May found 55 percent in favor of same-sex marriage and 42 percent against. Even Pope Francis is pushing for more acceptance of gays and lesbians in the Catholic Church.
While a judge’s ruling is one way for civil rights to be granted, a victory at the polls would have been more celebratory, although Arizona voters are fickle. In 2006, Arizona voters became the first in the country to reject a constitutional same-sex marriage ban by defeating Proposition 107, 51.8 percent to 48.2 percent, even though same-sex marriage was already illegal under state statute. Two years later, voters passed the virtually identical Proposition 102, 56.2 percent to 43.8 percent, reinforcing that statutory ban but not actually changing any state laws.
According to a statewide poll conducted this March, 49 percent of respondents would be in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, 41 percent would be opposed. Without a proposition on the ballot to repeal Amendment 30, we can only speculate how the electorate would have decided.
Whether a wedding is between a bride and a groom, two brides or two grooms, a promise made by two human beings in front of their friends and family to love and cherish each another until death is a sacred oath, selfless and beautiful.
