Gay marriage bans in Idaho, Nevada struck down

AP Photo/Jeff Chiu

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld gay marriage in Idaho and Nevada, saying bans on the practice in those states violate same-sex couples' equal protection rights.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in its ruling that laws that treat people differently based on sexual orientation are unconstitutional unless there is a compelling government interest.

Neither Idaho nor Nevada offered any legitimate reasons to discriminate against gay couples, Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel.

“Idaho and Nevada's marriage laws, by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages celebrated elsewhere, impose profound legal, financial, social and psychic harms on numerous citizens of those states,” Reinhardt wrote.

He rejected the argument that same-sex marriages will devalue traditional marriage, leading to more out-of-wedlock births.

“This proposition reflects a crass and callous view of parental love and the parental bond that is not worthy of response,” Reinhardt wrote. “We reject it out of hand.”

State and federal court judges have been striking down bans at a rapid rate since a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year. The 9th Circuit ruling comes a day after the nation's top court effectively legalized gay marriage in 11 more states, for a total of 30, when it rejected a set of appeals.

The appeals court panel did not rule on a similar case in Hawaii, which legalized gay marriage in December. Hawaii's governor had asked the court to toss out a lawsuit challenging the state's ban and an appeal to the 9th Circuit filed before Hawaii lawmakers legalized same-sex marriage.

All three judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents. President Bill Clinton appointed Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould. President Jimmy Carter appointed Judge Stephen Reinhardt.

During oral arguments in September, the debate in the appeals court over Idaho and Nevada bans focused on harm to children.

Lawyers seeking to invalidate the bans argued children of gay couples are stigmatized when their parents are prevented from marrying. Attorneys supporting the bans said gay marriages devalue traditional marriages, which will lead to fewer weddings and more single-parent homes.

Though the high court last year declared unconstitutional a federal law limiting marriage to a man and woman for determining benefits, the justices didn't address whether states could ban gay marriage.

On Monday, the Supreme Court unexpectedly rejected appeals from five states seeking to preserve their bans. The decision cleared the way for a dramatic expansion of gay marriage in the United States and might have signaled that it's only a matter of time before same-sex couples can marry in all 50 states.

Deborah FergusonSame-sex marriageUSUS Supreme Court

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

Asian American youth report anger, sadness and fear over surge in racist behavior

Survey finds about 80 percent experienced bullying or verbal harassment

Catholic church leads protest of COVID-19 restrictions

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone led march from City Hall, outdoor masses

Court prevents Trump administration from blocking WeChat pending hearing

Late Saturday night, a federal judge in San Francisco issued a preliminary… Continue reading

San Francisco Symphony, Opera musicians settle contracts

Performers’ salaries modified due to inability to play live

The first ever virtual Emmys were the perfect awards for our times

By Meredith Blake Los Angeles Times “Succession,” “Watchmen” and “Schitt’s Creek” were… Continue reading

Most Read