Top Stories of 2004: 4,000+ Homosexual 'Marriage' Licenses Nullified by California High Court

by Allie Martin and Jody Brown
December 28, 2004

(AgapePress) - The California Supreme Court has permanently barred the mayor of San Francisco from issuing same-sex "marriage" licenses, and has also invalidated the thousands of licenses that have already been issued.

Earlier this year, Mayor Gavin Newsom and his staff began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, even though California law bans homosexual "marriage." A lawsuit was quickly filed and the case ended up before California's Supreme Court. That court's ruling, handed down on Thursday morning, upheld the state's marriage law -- which defines marriage as between one man and one woman -- and invalidated more than 4,000 marriage licenses that had been issued to homosexual couples.

Defenders of traditional marriage across the country appear to be overjoyed at the decision handed down in the Golden State, where the homosexual agenda has experienced numerous victories over the past several years. Bob Knight with the Washington, DC-based Culture and Family Institute (CFI) was blunt in his assessment.

Bob Knight

"This means sanity has prevailed in the Golden State, something we weren't sure was possible anymore," the pro-family activist says. "But the high court could find no justification for issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples when California law was very clear." He points out that in March 2000, more than 60 percent of the voters in California passed Proposition 22, which established marriage as the union of only one man and one woman. "So [the court] really had no place to go legally," he says.

Knight compares Mayor Newsom's pro-homosexual actions with the activities of young hoodlums. "What the mayor of San Francisco did was illegal -- it was destructive; sort of a form of legal vandalism -- and he got his hand caught in the cookie jar; so the court struck it down," he says.

A pro-family leader on the West Coast agrees with Knight. "The high court had no choice but to follow the plain and clear reading of the law that marriage is only for a male and female, a husband and wife," says Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for California Families, a reference to Proposition 22.

Randy Thomasson

But Thomasson's crusade on behalf of families and marriage is not over. This is only "one down and three to go," he says.

"Next year, the State Supreme Court will decide whether to create 'gay marriage by another name' and full-blown gay marriage," the CCF executive director explains. "The year after that, the high court may decide whether the Democrats' homosexual-marriage bill violates marriage and the people's vote."

For that reason, Thomasson urges families in his state to remain alert and continue to pressure judges and Democratic politicians who he asserts are "scheming to overturn their vote and the sacred institution of marriage."

More in Store for the Mayor?
Steve Crampton, chief counsel with the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy (CLP) in Mississippi, says Thursday's ruling by the California Supreme Court is a major victory for traditional family values.

Steve Crampton

"The opinion is extraordinarily long and, I think, even gives undue attention to many of the creative arguments of the homosexual activists in the city," Crampton says. "But in the end, they turned every single claim away and went so far as to declare those bogus licenses as of no legal effect."

According to Crampton, Mayor Newsom could face additional hurdles for his action. The attorney says Newsom clearly violated established law, so "criminal prosecution [of the mayor] is still an option [because] the statute of limitations on his criminal actions has not yet run."

CFI's Bob Knight also believes the mayor owes lots of people lots of money. "Mayor Gavin Newsom owes all these couples a refund for these worthless pieces of paper that the city issued," he says, "and he owes the state taxpayers of California a refund for all the legal work that had to be done for this frivolous claim."

Although Crampton sees the victory as a milestone, the CLP attorney notes that California is just one of many states where the biblical concept of marriage is under attack.

"Even there, I am confident that our opponents will never cease in their attempts to overturn traditional marriage laws," he says. "The fact of the matter is the next state up now is Oregon, where the supreme court there has already accepted the case -- and a decision will be forthcoming in a couple of months there."

Crampton says it is vital for each state to adopt a constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage. Missouri most recently accomplished that with more 70 percent of voters voting in favor of such an amendment. Other states considering constitutional amendments this fall to defend traditional marriage are Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah. Marriage initiatives are pending in three other states -- Michigan, Ohio, and North Dakota.