Federal judge strikes Nebraska anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment

[matt_mcl]

[

(Lincoln, Nebraska) A federal judge Thursday struck down Nebraska’s ban on gay marriage, saying the measure interferes not only with the rights of gay couples but also with foster parents, adopted children and people in a host of other living arrangements. …

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon said the ban “imposes significant burdens on both the expressive and intimate associational rights” of gays and lesbians and “creates a significant barrier to the plaintiffs’ right to petition or to participate in the political process.”

](http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/05/051205nebAmend.htm)

I knew this was coming eventually. Enjoy.

[Miller]

Yay!

[Campion]

For clarification, the ruling does not implicate gay marriage. See the ACLU’s press release explaining the impact:

The Court noted in its ruling that the plaintiffs in the case had not requested any recognition of their relationships through marriage or any other legal status, but merely sought an equal opportunity to persuade legislators of the need for protections.

<snip>

The anti-gay-union law, Section 29 of the Nebraska constitution, was passed in November 2000 in a heavily debated election. Promoted to voters simply as protection of marriage, the law went far beyond restricting the right to marry to heterosexual couples. The law explicitly barred any legal recognition of a same-sex couple in a “civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship.”

It is, however, an important ruling because the constitutional amendment appears to have attempted an end run around the right to lobby for gay rights. In addition, if you read the decision (warning: PDF), the court has some very good language about gay unions:

Without determining where on this spectrum a potential domestic partnership, civil union or other “same-sex” relationship would fall, let it suffice to say that associations or living arrangements affected by Section 29 are closer to the end of the continuum that deserve Constitutional protection.

[Campion]

@Campion

For clarification, the ruling does not implicate gay marriage.

I should clarify: the ruling doesn’t implicate gay marriage in the sense that the ruling does not mean that gay marriages are now legal in Nebraska. The ruling simply says that the Constitution of Nebraska cannot bar people from lobbying the government for gay rights.

[exastris]

closer and closer!

[matt_mcl]

Yeah. I knew it didn’t mean gay marriage, but it was perfectly clear from the outset that the constitutional ban on gay marriage was absolutely ludicrous and beyond the pale.

[if6was9]

And in the current climate, how long til this Federal Judge or his family are the victims of some terrible crime of retribution? Thank you Congressman Cornyn and DeLay!

[Bear_Nenno]

Awesome! Little baby steps are ok, as long as they’re in the right direction!!!