NY Judge's Same-Sex 'Marriage' Decree Highlights Need for Legal Resolution

by Jenni Parker
February 7, 2005

(AgapePress) - The City of New York is appealing the February 4 ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Doris Ling-Cohan, which stated that the State Constitution does not forbid same-sex "marriage" and that marriage licenses must be given to same-sex partners who apply for them.

Justice Ling-Cohan ruled Friday that New York's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, finding in favor of five same-sex couples that were denied marriage licenses by the City of New York. Lambda Legal, a national homosexual rights group, filed suit last year on the couples' behalf, and homosexual rights activists watching the case with interest are applauding this latest court decision.

Ling-Cohan's ruling applies only to New York City, but if upheld by the Court of Appeals, it could be enforced throughout the state. In her 62-page decision, the judge declared unconstitutional the State of New York's Domestic Relation's Law, which has been established since the 19th century. Comparing the law's ban on same-sex marriage to the anti-miscegenation laws that once barred mixed-race marriages in many parts of the U.S., Ling-Cohan ruled that the same-sex marriage ban effectively violates homosexual couples' due process and equal protection rights.

Dissenting Opinions: 'The Judge's Decision Is Wrong'
While NYC's Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he personally believes homosexual marriage should be allowed, he is quoted by the press as saying "if we did not appeal this, I think we would have chaos in this city" (DailyFreeman.com). Bloomberg also said he wants to see the matter settled in the courts or by the legislature because "the public deserves the finality," and he added that he is glad for the ruling which "gets us the ability to get this to the appellate court."

While pro-homosexual groups have expressed disappointment over the mayor's decision to appeal, the office New York's Governor George Pataki issued a statement, saying he strongly believes Ling-Cohan's ruling "is wrong" and that the state's marriage laws "are clear that marriage is between a man and a woman."

William Donohue of the Catholic League agrees that the New York Supreme Court justice is in error. But like Mayor Bloomberg, he is not sorry she ruled the way she did. He believes this court decision will help enormously in the effort to secure a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

At a White House meeting Donohue attended a year ago, he says President Bush addressed a number of public policy issues, including same-sex marriage. On that issue, he notes, Bush said he would support a federal constitutional amendment affirming traditional marriage if it was necessary.

Afterward, Donohue recalls, he and several other religious leaders who attended the meeting told the president's staff the time had come, that a federal marriage amendment is needed now. A week later, he says, President Bush endorsed the need for an constitutional amendment -- an idea the Catholic civil and religious rights activist believes most Americans will get behind when they realize how traditional marriage is being undermined by judicial activism.

"The public is overwhelmingly against the bizarre idea of two men [or two women] marrying," Donohue says, noting that initiatives to legalize homosexual marriage lost in all of the 11 states that had such measures on the ballot last November. "But what the public is reluctant to do," he adds, "is support a constitutional amendment as the right remedy. Their reluctance wanes, however, when they read about judges like Ling-Cohan."

That is why the Catholic League president believes the judge's ruling will "boomerang." He notes that many observers are already calling the decision "historic," which he agrees it is. "Not one New York State judge in history who has read the New York State Constitution has ever been able to find a passage in it that okays gay marriage," the pro-family leader says.

According to Donohue, that would seem to suggest one of two possibilities. Apparently, he asserts, either all of Judge Ling-Cohan's predecessors and her current colleagues on the bench are incompetent, or else "she is another out-of-control judge who is reading into law what her politics dictate."

Donohue feels at least one thing is certain about New York State Supreme Court Justice Doris Ling-Cohan. "Her contribution to judicial imperialism will be duly noted by future historians," he says.