Michigan begins same-sex marriage ceremonies
Same-sex marriages commenced in Michigan Saturday morning following a federal judge’s ruling Friday that struck down the state’s ban on such unions.
Ingham County Clerk Barb Byrum announced on Twitter that she’d authorized the state’s first legal marriage ceremony, and clerks in at least two other counties said they would open their offices Saturday to conduct weddings.
U.S. District Judge Bernard A. Friedmandismissed the state’s contention, after a two-week trial, that Michigan voters adopted the ban on the premise that heterosexual married couples provided the optimal environment for raising children.
There is no proof that such a premise is true, Friedman wrote, and he declared the testimony of the state’s main witness “entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration.”
Unlike most of the judges who recently struck down bans in other states, Friedman did not stay his decision.
His decision was issued late Friday afternoon as clerk’s offices were closing. Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette (R) immediately appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit and asked for a stay.
But at least three county clerks announced Friday night that they would open their offices for special Saturday hours if a stay is not issued. That could set off a rush to marriage like that in Utah, where a judge struck down that state’s ban. More than 1,000 marriages were performed before the Supreme Court issued a stay.
Schuette said he was confident the appeals court would follow the Supreme Court’s lead. But the question was whether it would act before the marriages could begin.
“In 2004 the citizens of Michigan recognized that diversity in parenting is best for kids and families because moms and dads are not interchangeable,” Schuette said in a statement. “Michigan voters enshrined that decision in our state constitution, and their will should stand and be respected. I will continue to carry out my duty to protect and defend the constitution.”
Friedman, 70, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan and took senior status in 2009, said the state’s defense of the law was misguided. “In attempting to define this case as a challenge to ‘the will of the people,’ state defendants lost sight of what this case is truly about: people.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment