By Andrew Gumbel
Los Angeles, California, Mar. 13— San Francisco’s
“Winter of Love” is over, at least for the moment. Just when
it seemed the momentum towards gay marriage was unstoppable, city officials
were forced back on to the defensive yesterday following a ruling from
California’s state Supreme Court ordering a halt to the ceremonies
pending a full review of their legality.
“Effective immediately, we are stopping the issuance and recordation
of same-sex marriage licenses,” the city’s assessor-recorder,
Mabel Teng, announced at a news conference following the court ruling.
Couples lining up in City Hall when the ruling came down, at 2:33pm
on Thursday afternoon, were both devastated and angry as their special
moment was whipped out from under them.
“The word is jilted,” one frustrated “fiancée,”
Mara Feeney, told the San Francisco Chronicle. “I feel jilted.
Not by my partner but by the state of California.” Many of the
would-be spouses joined a candle-lit march from the Castro district,
epicenter of San Francisco’s gay community, to the state Supreme
Court building. Hundreds of protesters held up banners reading “You
can’t stop love.” Many who tied their knot during the city’s
tumultuous 29-day exercise in mass civil disobedience brandished blown-up
copies of their marriage licenses.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is far from the end of the road for
San Francisco but legal experts agreed that the signs did not look good.
The court has called a hearing for May or June in which arguments will
be presented on the legality of Mayor Gavin Newsom’s sanctioning
of gay marriage in his city. If the case goes against him, there is
every chance the 4,126 licenses issued to date will be declared void.
A ruling is expected within 90 days of the hearing.
Mayor Newsom acknowledges California state law defines marriage as being
between a man and a woman, but argues the law is a violation of the
equal protection provisions of the US constitution. However, the state
Supreme Court, in effect, froze out that line of argument, saying the
constitutional question needed to be addressed in a separate lawsuit.
The mayor’s “personal view,” the justices said, should
not weigh on the case at hand.
The court ruling was hailed by traditional “family-values”
advocates. Pete Knight, a conservative Californian state legislator
who sponsored a successful referendum four years ago to restrict marriage
to heterosexual couples, said it was “an overdue day, but a good
day.”
Earlier this week, State Senator Knight’s own son, David, married
his boyfriend in San Francisco -- a family entanglement that only highlights
the complex emotions surrounding the issue. Other gay newlyweds include
the television talk-show host Rosie O’Donnell and at least two
of California’s more prominent lesbian elected officials.
Mayor Newsom put a brave face on the setback. “I believe confidently
that when we get to the constitutional question, I will prevail,”
he said. “This is the beginning of a struggle, hardly the end.”
San Francisco is not the only place where the sudden enthusiasm for
gay marriage ceremonies is being challenged. Yesterday the state legislature
in Massachusetts voted in favor of a resolution that would outlaw gay
marriage in exchange for sanctioning same-sex civil unions. Originally,
it was a ruling by the high court in Massachusetts last autumn, declaring
gay marriage to be permissible under the constitution, that triggered
much of the current controversy. However, yesterday’s development
takes Massachusetts one step closer to approving President Bush’s
proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage once and for
all.
Source: Independent (UK)
