On Wednesday, a federal judge overturned Proposition 8, California’s gay marriage ban, saying there was no state interest that could validate treating homosexual couples differently.
"Rather than being different, same-sex and opposite-sex unions are, for all purposes relevant to California law, exactly the same,” the judge wrote in his 136-page decision, according to an article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
According to the Los Angeles Times, this is the first time a gay marriage ban has been struck down based on federal grounds. The judge said Proposition 8 violated the equal protection and due process sections of the Constitution.
The Los Angeles Times reports the judge added that “moral disapproval” is not a good enough reason either. The Associated Press writes that supporters of the ban said it was important to protect traditional views on marriage and to encourage responsible childbearing.
According to the Los Angeles Times article, Andy Pugno, the lawyer for Proposition 8 supporters, said the judge’s “invalidation of the votes of over 7 million Californians violates binding legal precedent and short-circuits the democratic process.”
Pugno said he believes the ruling will be overturned on appeal, and, according to the Los Angeles Times, lawyers on both sides expect the case to reach the Supreme Court in the next few years.
Did the judge who overturned California's gay marriage ban make the right choice?