UPDATED: Judge Strikes Down Virginia Marriage Ban

By Lisa Keen

Keen News Service

A federal judge in Norfolk, Virginia, Friday struck down the state's ban on same-sex couples marrying but stayed the execution of her order, that the state stop enforcing the law, pending appeal to the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

The decision marks the first time a judge in a southern state has struck down a ban on same-sex couples marrying. Whatever the Fourth Circuit's decision, it will apply to Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, and West Virginia.

"Equality isn't something that happens just up north," said American Foundation for Equal Rights executive director Adam Umhoefer, at a press conference Friday morning.

Judge Arenda Wright Allen (an Obama appointee) opened her 41-page decision with a quote from a book by Mildred Loving, the African American woman who, with her white husband, won a lawsuit striking down bans against interracial couples marrying.

"We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn't that what marriage is?" wrote Loving in Loving for All.

In an eloquent, history-laden opinion, Allen acknowledged that a "spirited and controversial debate is underway" regarding same-sex couples marrying, but added, "Our Constitution declares that 'all men' are created equal. Surely this means all of us." She said the ban violates the rights to due process and equal protection and deprives same-sex couples of the fundamental freedom to choose to marry.

"Although steeped in a rich, tradition- and faith-based legacy, Virginia's Marriage Laws are an exercise of governmental power," wrote Allen. "For those who choose to marry, and for their children, Virginia's laws ensure that marriage provides profound legal, financial, and social benefits, and exacts serious legal, financial, and social obligations. The government's involvement in defining marriage, and in attaching benefits that accompany the institution, must withstand constitutional scrutiny. Laws that fail that scrutiny must fall despite the depth and legitimacy of the laws' religious heritage."

The case, Bostic v. Virginia, was argued by Ted Olson, David Boies, and a team supported by the American Foundation for Equal Rights which pressed the successful challenge against California's statewide ban, Proposition 8.

The decision was dated 9 p.m. Thursday but entered into the record Friday, February 14, Valentine's Day. At a press conference in Norfolk Friday morning, plaintiff Tim Bostic read from the decision an excerpt from a letter by President Lincoln in 1860 regarding the need to end slavery: "It can not have failed to strike you that these men ask for just. . . the same thing--fairness, and fairness only. This, so far as in my power, they, and all others, shall have."

Casey Mattox, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom which represented a northern Virginia county clerk who intervened in the case to defend the ban, was out of the office today and could not be reached for comment. But Family Research Council leader Tony Perkins called the decision "another example of an arrogant judge substituting her person preferences for the judgment of the General Assembly and 57 percent of Virginia voters."

Interestingly, however, judges have struck down only eight of the 21 state and D.C. bans since 2004. Nine of the reversals were done by legislatures, three by voters, and one by a combination of court and legislature. Three of the eight court decisions finding state bans unconstitutional are pending review by federal appeals courts and, along with many other lawsuits, are expected to find their way to the U.S. Supreme Court for a final decision.

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, who took office in early January and decided the ban was unconstitutional and that his office would not attempt to defend it, called the decision "a victory for the Constitution and for treating everyone equally under the law."

Judge Allen examined the Virginia ban using "strict scrutiny," the highest level of judicial review, because it infringed upon the fundamental right to marry. Laws violating fundamental rights can pass constitutional muster only if they are narrowly drawn to serve a compelling state interest.

Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe released a statement Friday morning, applauding the decision. And while he said he would continue to enforce the ban as long as it is "on the books," he considers the decision "a significant step forward in achieving greater equality for all of our citizens."

In a telephone call with reporters Friday morning, attorney Ted Olson praised the "eloquent" and "beautiful" decision written by Judge Allen, saying it should be read by every American.

"Judge after judge after judge has determined we cannot any longer withhold the fundamental right to marriage and the right to be treated equally," said Olson. "We feel confident in outcome of this case" on appeal, ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Olson said he thinks the Supreme Court was constrained by the Proposition 8 case because of an issue involving standing. But he said the high court could take up the merits on any of the several dozen cases percolating through the federal court system now as soon as next session.

Tim Bostic and Tony London have been together for 24 years; Mary Townley and Carol Schall have been together for nearly 30 years, and have a teenage daughter Emily.

Schall remarked that the decision being issued on Valentine's Day has many special meanings for her. She noted that Virginia's marketing motto has for many years been, "Virginia is for Lovers," and that she and Townley celebrated their 29th anniversary this week."

"The steady march toward equality continues today with this historic decision," said Joshua Block, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. "Support for the freedom to marry has seen an amazing increase in the past few years, and we will continue to work to ensure that all couples have access to the dignity and protection that only comes with marriage."

The ACLU and Lambda Legal have teamed up in another federal court challenge to Virginia's ban. That case, Harris v. Virginia, is in the Western District federal court in Harrisonburg and is proceeding as a class action suit on behalf of all same-sex couples in Virginia who wish to marry.


MI Marriage Trial

Michigan Same Sex Couples Demand Respect And Equal Treatment

Michigan Leaders React To Feds Recognition Of Marriages

MI Marriage: Schuette Asks For Full Appeals Court Review

The Stay Delayed Allows 315 Couples To Wed In State

Gay Marriage Defines Schuette's Reelection Campaign

Snyder Says Schuette Going Against Trend

Sixth Circuit Continues Stay

Michigan Marriage Ban Struck Down

Michigan Makes History With First Marriages

Elected Officials, Advocates Petition Schuette To Drop Marriage Aappeal

Pictures from Ingham County - Getting Married

Pictures from Oakland County Clerk's Office - Part 1

Pictures from the Oakland County Clerk's office - Part 2

Pictures from the Oakland County Clerk's Office - Part 3

Pictures from Washtenaw County

White Nationalist Group Files Brief Supporting AG's Appeal In Marriage Ruling

Discredited Witness Part Of Right-Wing Cabal

Schauer Celebrates Overturn Of Michigan Marriage Ban

Equality Michigan Circulating Petition to Drop Appeal

Why Are Governor Rick Snyder and Attorney General Bill Schuette Wasting Michigan Taxpayer Dollars On A Costly Appeal?

Michigan Marriage Ban Co-Author Goes 'Moral'

BTL's Wedding Expo: Like Pride in April

Snyder Says Marriages Invalid

Elected Officials, Advocates Petition Schuette To Drop Marriage Appeal

Request To Remove Stay Based On Process And Substance

Schuette Lies To Satisfy Political Base

DOCUMENTS: The decision, the stay, and more

BREAKING: Holder Asked To Recognize Michigan Marriages

Michigan Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

BREAKING: Sixth Circuit Court Of Appeals Issues Temporary Stay On Michigan Case

BREAKING: Same-Sex Couples Across Michigan Get Hitched

BREAKING: Judge Friedman Declares Michigan's Same-Sex Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

Judge Could Rule Late Today In Mich. Marriage Ban

Michigan Marriage Trial: And Now We Wait

Editor's Viewpoint: Our Long Journey To Justice

Federal Marriage Case Decisions Outside Michigan In Circuit Court of Appeals

Peers Distance Themselves As Regnerus Takes The Stand

Marriage Supporters, Protestors Brave Cold At Courthouse

Highlights From Michigan Same-Sex Marriage Hearing

Brown Says Schuette Instructed Clerks To Defy Court

Michigan Marriage Equality Trial Begins Second Week

Marriage Equality Trial Opens : Science v. Fear

Michigan Marriage Center Prepares State For The Possibility!

Michigan Marriage Case Begins

A Trial Full of Experts: Incredible and Not So Credible, In Hazel Park Case

like us on facebook follow us on twitter follow us on google+