Both Sides on Same-Sex Marriage Issue Focus on the Next State Battlegrounds
Published: June 27, 2013 - New York Times
With the expected addition of Californians after
Wednesdayfs Supreme Court ruling, some 30 percent of Americans will live in
states offering same-sex marriage.
Now the two sides of the marriage wars are gearing up
to resume the costly state-by-state battles that could, in the hopes of each,
spread marriage equality to several more states in the next few years, or reveal
a brick wall of values that cannot be breached. There is wide agreement from
both sides on where the next battlefields will be.
Proponents of same-sex marriage were already energized
by victories in six states over the last year, bringing the total number
authorizing such unions to 12 states, before California, and the District of
Columbia. They are hoping for legislative victories this fall or next spring in
Illinois and possibly New Jersey and Hawaii.
Twenty-nine states — not including California —have
constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Some
advocates expect that in the November 2014 elections, Oregon and perhaps Nevada
or Ohio could become the first states to undo their amendments. At the same
time, a court case in New Mexico could extend marriage rights.
These strategists agree they are unlikely to win over
more conservative states in the South and the West in the foreseeable future.
But, looking at the historical experience with issues like bans on interracial
marriage, which the Supreme Court outlawed only in 1967, they feel confident
that if equality spreads to more states and public attitudes continue shifting,
a future Supreme Court will find that marriage is a right for gay men and
lesbians as well as heterosexuals.
gBuilding a critical mass of states and a critical
mass of public support — thatfs how social movements succeed,h said Evan
Wolfson, the founder of Freedom to Marry. gWefll pursue this strategy until we
finish the job,h he said, gand I think it will be a matter of years, not
decades.h
The opponents of same-sex marriage, while unhappy that
the Supreme Court struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act and
opened the door to gay marriage in California, are taking heart that the court
did not declare same-sex marriage a constitutional right.
After a recent succession of stinging defeats in
Delaware, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Washington State — after
political campaigns in which they were heavily outspent — the groups have also
vowed to step up fund-raising for advertising and mobilizing supporters.
gThese court decisions could be a real boon to our
fund-raising,h said Frank Schubert, a conservative political consultant and vice
president of the National Organization for Marriage. gPeople tend to react when
the wolf is at the door.h
The conservatives also think their opponents have
harvested the glow-hanging fruith of liberal states and are nearing a limit.
gThe lines are being drawn between states that stand
with natural, traditional marriage and states that redefined it,h said Tony
Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian
organization. He predicts that more Americans will turn against same-sex
marriage when they see what he called its pernicious consequences — like
introducing teachings in school that parents consider immoral or forcing
Christian business owners like florists and caterers to participate in gay
marriages against their will.
Perhaps the most immediate battle will be in Illinois,
a populous state with a Democratic legislature where the Senate has already
approved same-sex marriage. Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, urged legislators on
Wednesday to gredouble our efforts to make it happen.h
Many had expected the marriage bill to be adopted in
May. But at the last minute, its House sponsor did not offer it for a vote,
apparently fearing that the bill could lose. Gay rights groups say they think
the votes are there for a victory at a brief legislative session this fall. But
they, and the National Organization for Marriage on the other side, are raising
funds for an all-out public campaign over the next few months.
The New Jersey Legislature enacted same-sex marriage
in 2012, but the measure was vetoed by Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, and
the Legislature has not taken further action. Gay rights groups are working to
gain votes, but they are also hopeful that Wednesdayfs Supreme Court decision to
strike down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act, thus extending federal
benefits to same-sex married couples, will gain them a rapid victory in state
courts or the Legislature.
New Jersey, like six other states, offers legal civil
unions but not marriage to gay couples. According to a 2006 decision by the
State Supreme Court, such unions must provide legal protections equal to those
offered heterosexual couples. But even after Wednesdayfs decision, the federal
government will not recognize civil unions, said Troy Stevenson, executive
director of Garden State Equality — bolstering the argument that unions and
marriage are not equal.
In broader ways, the end of the Defense of Marriage
Actfs ban on federal benefits for same-sex spouses will strengthen the
gay-marriage cause nationally by highlighting inconsistencies and unfairness
among the states, said Fred Sainz, a vice president of the Human Rights Campaign
in Washington.
Wednesdayfs rulings, he said, will shine a light on
the gtwo Americas: one in which legally married gay couples live and the other
in which unmarried gay families live,h with basic protections still out of
reach.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 27, 2013
An earlier version of this article gave a misleading description of events in
New Jersey. The Legislature enacted same-sex marriage in 2012 and Gov. Chris
Christie vetoed the measure. The Legislature has not taken further action; up to
now it has not, as the article suggested, tried and failed to override the
veto.