|
The case hinges on how nine Supreme Court justices interpret 34 words in the state constitution. (story) The key passage is Article 1, Section 12, which says, “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen ... privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.” If the court rules that the ban is unconstitutional Washington could become the second state in the nation to legalize same-sex nuptials. "Many of the justices clearly understand that same-sex couples are being discriminated against because they cannot marry, and that this discrimination deserves their attention," said Jennifer C. Pizer, Senior Counsel at Lambda Legal. Lambda and the Northwest Women's Law Center represented the couples involved in the case. "Many of the justices clearly understand that same-sex couples are being discriminated against because they cannot marry, and that this discrimination deserves their attention," Pizer said. "This is clearly a moderate court that's looking very closely at the issues in front of it. Based on today's arguments, we have every reason to believe that the justices' minds are open and that they're taking this case very seriously. Pizer went on to say that she felt that the justices clearly understand the human dimensions of why same-sex couples need the protections only marriage provides. "From their questions, we can tell that a good number of the justices understand who gay people are, and they seem to know gay people personally. They understand that real people are harmed by the state law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying. They see that this isn't an abstract question -- that we're talking about real families." There is no timetable for a ruling from the court. "Now they're engaged in a process of grappling with what those rights look like and whether the legislature violated them by passing a law prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying. They're grappling with what our rights look like, not whether we have rights," said Pizer. "Unlike some courts before them, they're starting with an understanding that these are serious questions." But, Pizer said she is hopeful. "We're hopeful because when judges appreciate the human dimensions of our cases, we often have good results. Once judges understand the human impact, they can fully determine what the state Constitution's guarantees of liberty and equality require -- and that's exactly what these justices are doing. The questions the justices asked today suggest that there is a range of legal issues they're struggling with that will likely take them some time to sort out. What matters is that they appreciate the human dimension of the case, and we saw today that a good number of them do." |
