Federal Court’s Continue Striking Down State Marriage Amendments
CAL Ex. Dir. Says Rulings, ‘Travesty of Justice and Trampling of State’s Rights’
By L.A. Williams, Correspondent
Christian Action League
June 26, 2014
DENVER — Wednesday’s 2-1 ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court opens the door to same-sex marriage in Utah, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Wyoming, although it has been stayed pending appeal.
Also this week, a federal judge struck down Indiana’s marriage protection amendment in a decision that immediately allows homosexual couples in the Hoosier state to wed.
Even as the rulings led to celebration among gay forces, conservatives reminded their supporters that the courts don’t have the final say.
“While judges can, by judicial fiat, declare same-sex ‘marriage’ legal, they will never be able to make it right,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. “The courts, for all their power, can’t overturn natural law.”
The Utah attorney general’s office has announced it will appeal the decision by a three-judge panel to uphold a lower court ruling striking down that state’s marriage protection amendment to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it hasn’t announced whether it will ask the entire 10th Circuit to review the ruling in the meantime.
The Utah case is especially significant as it marks the first time an appellate court has interpreted last year’s Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage to mean that states cannot deny gays the right to marry.
“We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right to marry, establish a family, raise children, and enjoy the full protection of a state’s marital laws. A state may not deny the issuance of a marriage license to two persons, or refuse to recognize their marriage, based solely upon the sex of the persons in the marriage union,” the appellate court said.
The Rev. Mark Creech, executive director of the Christian Action League, called the ruling a travesty of justice and a trampling of states’ rights and thereby the rights of the people, agreeing with dissenting Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr.
“If the States are the laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions — contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives — [it] turns the notion of a limited national government on its head,” Kelly wrote. He further warned fellow justices that, “We should resist the temptation to become philosopher-kings, imposing our views under the guise of constitutional interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.”