|
|
Iowa Supreme Court strikes down gay marriage ban
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
04.03.2009 10:10am EDT
(Des Moines, Iowa) In a unanimous ruling, the Iowa Supreme Court Friday said that the state law banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional - upholding a lower court ruling.
“The Iowa statute limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution,” the justices said in the 69-page ruling.
The court also discounted civil unions as an alternative to marriage.
“A new distinction based on sexual orientation would be equally suspect and difficult to square with the fundamental principles of equal protection embodied in our constitution,” the ruling said.
The decision means that gay and lesbian couples may immediately obtain marriage licenses and be allowed to marry under Iowa law in 21 days.
Read the rest here:
http://www.365gay.com/news/iowa-supreme-court-strikes-down-gay-marriage-ban/
(\\__/) And if you don't believe The sun will rise
(='.'=) Stand alone and greet The coming night
(")_(") In the last remaining light. (C. Cornell)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to say that is welcome news indeed. I am a little confused about mention of the 'Constitution' is it the case that each state has a seperate and not always identical constitution? Being a simple Brit I just don't know how it works.
Paul Jamison.
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
Yes, Paul, not only does the country have a constitution but also each state does. I'm not certain but it is likely that some states don't call it a constitution, perhaps a charter or such. Like the federal government the states' constitutions define how the state operates, the rights of the state and it's citizens, the rights and obligations of counties and cities, etc.
Making it even more complicated, counties and cities have a similar document that may also be called a constitution. The federal constitution specifically defines certain areas of law that are the right of the states to determine; otherwise the federal constitution rules. An area of current conflict between the two is legal use of marajauna (sp?) for medical purposes since some states have passed laws that allow it while the federal government does not.
I hope this helps, but I've likely made things even more confusing. LOL
JimB
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|