This morning the Connecticut Supreme Court made a landmark decision for the state of Connecticut and same-sex couples around the nation. The Court’s decision rested on the “equal protection of rights” provision found in the Connecticut Constitution. While many are applauding the decision as a victory for gay and lesbian couples, some are saying that this activist decision is one more reason why a constitutional amendment defining marriage (and the benefits associated with marriage) as between a man and a woman.
- “The Connecticut Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the Connecticut Constitution requires that same-sex couple be allowed to marry. In a 4-3 decision, the court reversed a lower court’s judgment, concluding that state statutes discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, that such a classification is “quasi-suspect” under the equal protection provisions of the state constitution and is therefore subject to heightened judicial scrutiny, and that the state failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same-sex couples from marriage. In an 85-page opinion, the majority wrote…” – from Connecticut Supreme Court strikes down same-sex marriage ban, at JURIST: Paper Chase
- “Today the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage in Kerrigan v. Commisioner of Public Health. Four years ago, eight same-sex couples sued the state of Connecticut, arguing that the statutory prohibition against same-sex marriage violated their rights to substantive due process and equal protection under the state constitution. The trial court held that because the state allowed civil unions, the plaintiffs had not suffered a “constitutionally cognizable harm”, and therefore found for the state.” – from Connnecticut court overturns state ban on same-sex marriage, at New Hampshire Family Law Blog
- “By a 4-3 vote, the Connecticut Supreme Court today overturned the state’s prohibition of same-sex marriage, joining Massachusetts and California in extending the institution of marriage beyond the union of one man and one woman. Justice Richard Palmer, writing for the majority, said, “Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice.”” – from Connecticut Supreme Court OKs Same-Sex Marriage, at The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times
- “The Connecticut Supreme Court today joined the highest courts in Massachusetts and California in deciding that their state constitutions prohibit a legislative ban on same-sex marriages.” – from Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right Under CT Constitution, at TalkLeft
- “With this ruling, says the NYT, Connecticut joins Massachusetts and California as the only states that allow same-sex couples to marry. Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and New Jersey all protect civil unions, and Maine, Washington, Oregon and Hawaii have passed domestic partnership laws that allow same-sex couples to receive “some of the same benefits granted to those in civil unions.”” – from Connecticut Supreme Court: Marriage Can’t Discriminate, at Daily Kos
Comments