Both sides in same-sex marriage debate see chance to galvanize support after California ruling

A federal judge in San Francisco ruled Thursday that same-sex marriages in California may resume as soon as Aug. 18, but gave opponents until then to seek an injunction from a higher court.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 6, 2010

The decision by a federal judge Wednesday to strike down California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage came at a pivotal time in the debate over the issue, as gay rights groups are embroiled in more than two dozen court cases across the country.

Campaigns are underway to legalize gay unions in Maryland, Rhode Island, Minnesota, New York and elsewhere, and some of the same groups are also challenging the military's "don't ask, don't tell" rule.

Advocates, who celebrated Thursday at rallies from Atlanta to West Hollywood, hope the California ruling will help them build on two other recent victories. This summer, a federal judge in Massachusetts invalidated the federal government's ban on recognizing same-sex marriages in a ruling that will probably be appealed. And earlier this year, the District joined five states in allowing same-sex couples to legally marry.

"What's happening here . . . is the collapsing of the house of cards that the anti-gay opposition has relied on," said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a same-sex marriage advocacy group. "Everyone can now see the emptiness of the arguments they are making."

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker was seen by both sides as one of the most significant in years, although opponents filed papers Thursday indicating plans to appeal it.

Walker's 138-page ruling that Proposition 8 was discriminatory and unconstitutional was not only a victory for gay rights groups on its face, but it also lays out a set of legally binding facts that could help them on appeal. And in striking down a referendum supported by 52 percent of voters, the judge dealt a blow to opponents of same-sex unions who have relied on ballot initiatives as their weapon of choice.

Opponents are spending millions of dollars to try to turn back advances, concentrating on states that allow same-sex marriage but that might offer a receptive political environment, such as Iowa and New Hampshire.

They are also aiming to tap into concern among conservatives that government is going against the will of the people. They think the California ruling will help galvanize opposition, in part because it was made by a judge who overturned the will of the people.

"Even people who may support same-sex marriage, many are very unsettled by the idea that the courts should just unilaterally impose it by fiat," said Brian S. Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage. "You can be for same-sex marriage and still believe that the proper channel is through the court of public opinion and the legislative process."

In anticipation of the ruling, Brown's group embarked on a 22-state tour to end this month in the District that is aimed at spreading the view that heterosexual marriage is the building block of society. The group has stepped up fundraising, Brown said, and expects to nearly double its budget to $12 million this year.

Polls show that Americans have become more accepting of gay marriage in recent years and are about evenly split on whether they support legalizing it. In an ABC News-Washington Post poll conducted in February, about six in 10 adults younger than 40 said they supported legal gay unions, a statistic that suggests a demographic advantage for gay-marriage backers.

Still, every time voters have been asked to cast a ballot on the issue, they have chosen to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Most states have measures that explicitly ban same-sex marriage, including 31 that approved them through direct voter referendum.

Opponents of gay marriage say they can often shift opinion in advance of a vote by plastering the airwaves with ads, putting their experts on radio shows and saying that laws that allow gay marriage infringe on religious freedoms.

"There is no inevitability," said Robert George, a Princeton University law professor and opponent of same-sex marriage. "The other side is doing a very, very good job [reaching out to the public], especially with young people. The evidence that we're doing a good job is the referenda."

Gay rights activists accuse opponents of fear-mongering and say they are undeterred. The decision in California, they say, is the latest victory in a 15-year fight that has pulled public opinion with it. And even in a democratic society, some things are better left to the courts, Wolfson said.

"There are certain inalienable rights that are protected for everyone," he said. "Whether it's freedom of speech or the freedom of religion or the freedom to marry, it's not up to how people feel about other people's choices."

Staff polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta contributed to this report.

© 2010 The Washington Post Company