Judges Extend High Court Same-Sex Ruling
By ASHBY JONES
Just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of a federal law that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, judges in lower courts are citing and even building on the ruling in battles over state laws concerning same-sex marriage and other issues affecting gays and lesbians.
A federal judge in Cincinnati cited the June ruling in U.S. v. Windsor in finding Ohio's 2004 law banning the recognition of same-sex marriages from other states "likely" to be unconstitutional, at least in regard to the couple that brought the suit. Another federal judge, in Detroit, relied partly on the Windsor case to temporarily strike down a Michigan law denying domestic benefits for gay and other unmarried couples. Days later, a different federal judge in Detroit cited the Windsor case in allowing a lawsuit challenging Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage to move forward, over the state's objections.
So far, all of the rulings have come during preliminary stages of cases, so they might not lead to state laws being upended. But they show how the Supreme Court's decision could quickly reshape state law on marriage even though it only addressed a single part of a federal statute.
(snip)
Both sides pointed to the ruling in Ohio last month to support their positions. That case involves two Cincinnati men, one of whom, John Arthur, is, according to court papers, dying of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, known as Lou Gehrig's disease. In July, the couple got married in Maryland, then returned to Ohio and sued the state, asking that it recognize the marriage so Mr. Arthur would be considered "married" at the time of his death, thus making James Obergefell his surviving spouse.
The judge in the case, Timothy Black, cited Windsor extensively before ruling that Ohio's "scheme has unjustifiably created two tiers of couples," and was likely unconstitutional, at least in regard to the plaintiffs.
(snip)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323971204578630261068093272.html
(If you cannot open on the link, copy and paste the title onto google)
= new reply since forum marked as read
