# Washington State superior court judge tosses state DOMA, rules SSM = legal **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 5, 2004, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383 "2004-08-05T00:55:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/1 "2004-08-05T00:55:54Z")
[Article](http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001996456_webgaymarriage04m.html). It’s unsurprising that he stayed his ruling, preventing any change in enforcement or issuance of marriage licenses or anything like that, pending review by the state’s Supreme Court. What _is_ surprising is the unambiguous ballkick he delivers to the arguments from the anti-SSM side, particularly to the “threat to marriage” angle. [Here’s the text of his ruling](http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/local/gaymarriage/downing_opinion.pdf). 26 pages, double-spaced, brief. Lots of judicial philosophizing sprinkled throughout. Good read. Of course, the “reader comments” link includes gems like this one: _Some religions have recently decided that the bible is incorrect and that being gay is OK, but just because you want it to be doesn’t make it right._ Uh, yeah. Bozo. Anyway. Small steps, people. Small steps. Thus is the longest journey made. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/2 "2004-08-05T01:38:57Z")
Félicitations! An excellent and cogent ruling, containing a very interesting point I hadn’t seen before (which is saying something): > [@](#): > > The Court is inclined to offer this perhaps gratuitous observation. If there is indeed any outside threat to the institution of marriage, it could well lie in legislative tinkering with the creation of alternative species of quasi-marriage. With the creation of “civil unions”, “domestic partnerships” or other variations on the theme including, worst of all, something like a “five year plan with opt-out”, there could be a real danger. When cohabiting heterosexual couples can sign up for a renewable or revocable fixed term contract to define the terms of their state-recognized relationship, then marriage, as an institution, could be weakened. Better, perhaps, (in terms of simplicity, fairness and social policy) to allow all who are up to taking on the heavy responsibilities of marriage, with its exclusivity and its “till death do us part” commitment, to do so – not lightly, but advisedly. ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/3 "2004-08-05T01:52:35Z")
Very nice. A much needed counterpoint to the vote in MO. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/4 "2004-08-05T04:24:44Z")
I’d feel much, much better if the ERA included sexual orientation - not just gender. Also, I think Nethercutt just became the junior senator, Rossi the governor, and w.r.t. the presidency, Washington might no longer be a swing state. ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/5 "2004-08-05T08:21:19Z")
And with this good news, TeaElle and family cancel their planned vacation to St. Louis and pick up brochures for Seattle instead. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/6 "2004-08-05T13:01:56Z")
One part of the decision is unclear to me. Does this mean that no marriage licenses will be issued in King County until the WA Supreme Court wrestles with the problem? _Not even the traditional, heterosexual kind?_ ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/7 "2004-08-05T20:20:19Z")
Just to make things clear, IANAL, I am not gay, I am already married, and I am not even an American, so I have no horse in this particular race. But, damn, that’s a well-written legal judgement. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/8 "2004-08-05T21:43:23Z")
> [@](#): > > Does this mean that no marriage licenses will be issued in King County until the WA Supreme Court wrestles with the problem? _Not even the traditional, heterosexual kind?_ Heh. That would be kind of darkly amusing. “No soup for any of you!” But no, he stayed his ruling only, which means the status quo continues for the time being. And for the record, court-watching types in the state figure the odds are better than even that the WA Supremes will affirm, given a previous ruling that homosexual partnerships cannot be denied inheritance rights and certain other benefits. It’ll be several months, but fingers are certainly crossed. P.S. **TeaElle** , if you do come visit, be sure to let us all know. We PNW dopers are a friendly and receptive bunch. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2004, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/9 "2004-08-05T22:08:21Z")
I’m in Oregon, not Washington, but rulings like this are one of the reasons I moved here from Tennessee. I love the Pacific Northwest. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/washington-state-superior-court-judge-tosses-state-doma-rules-ssm-legal/258383/10 "2004-08-06T02:24:09Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > And for the record, court-watching types in the state figure the odds are better than even that the WA Supremes will affirm, given a previous ruling that homosexual partnerships cannot be denied inheritance rights and certain other benefits. It’ll be several months, but fingers are certainly crossed. Pretty please, WA supreme court, wait until _after_ the general election?