Rhode Island Voted 26-12=Gay Marriage } The Supreme Court Needs to Fix The Federal Part of The Injustice
Rhode Island’s Senate — including all five Republican members — voted 26-12 on Wednesday in favor of legislation to allow same-sex couples to marry. Once Gov. Lincoln Chafee signs the bill, which is expected to happen next week, marriage equality will be the law in every New England state (Rhode Island plus Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine) — a meaningful victory for civil rights and a proud distinction for the region.
Rhode Island’s advance adds to the building sense of momentum for marriage equality. But it in no way obviates the need for action from the Supreme Court, which is of course currently weighing decisions on California’s Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
No matter what’s happening in certain states, the Supreme Court has a duty to enforce the Constitution’s promise of equal protection with a broad ruling establishing a nationwide right of same-sex couples to wed.
It is impossible to know where the justices are heading on the issue. But at the argument in one of the marriage cases, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. took note of the growing political support for same-sex marriage and seemed to be toying with the idea that because gay people wield so much power, they do not need or deserve the heightened protection of their rights that the court affords other minorities.
It is impossible to know where the justices are heading on the issue. But at the argument in one of the marriage cases, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. took note of the growing political support for same-sex marriage and seemed to be toying with the idea that because gay people wield so much power, they do not need or deserve the heightened protection of their rights that the court affords other minorities.
The obvious problem with such logic is that, despite recent gains, there are still huge swaths of the country where there’s virtually no chance of reform.
Thirty-one states have enacted Constitutional amendments barring same-sex marriage and undoing those could take a lifetime or more. For the Supreme Court to leave the issue to the political process would be wrong legally and morally — basic rights of minorities should not be subject to a majority vote. And the result would be the perpetuation of existing injustice against gay couples and their families.
Comments