l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Federal Judge Upholds Right of Louisiana Citizens to Preserve One Man-One
Woman Marriage
via Breitbart Feed
For the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year
overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal judge has
upheld the rights of citizens of a state to preserve its law defining
marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
As ABC News reports, Judge Martin Feldman of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana upheld the wishes of Louisiana’s voters and
the state’s constitution in his 32-page opinion released Wednesday.
“Louisiana’s laws and constitution are directly related to achieving
marriage’s historically preeminent purpose of linking children to their
biological parents,” Feldman, a Reagan appointee, wrote. “The court is
persuaded that a meaning of what is marriage that has endured in history for
thousands of years, and prevails in a majority of states today, is not
universally irrational on the constitutional grid.”
The judge cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor,
which struck down DOMA, and quoted Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion,
observing that it relied upon the principles of federalism.
Additionally, Feldman expressed concern about the use of equal-protection
language in other parts of the Windsor decision:
For example, must the states permit or recognize a marriage between an
aunt and niece? Aunt and nephew? Brother/brother? Father and child? May
minors marry? Must marriage be limited to only two people? What about a
transgender spouse? Is such a union same-gender or male-female? All such
unions would undeniably be equally committed to love and caring for one
another, just like the plaintiffs.
The Family Research Council (FRC) noted also that Feldman wrote, “[t]he
State of Louisiana has a legitimate interest under a rational basis standard
of review for addressing the meaning of marriage through the democratic
process.”
“This ruling is a victory for children, each of whom need and desire a mom
and dad, something our public policy should encourage,” said FRC president
Tony Perkins. “This decision is a victory for the rule [of] law, and for
religious liberty and free speech which are undermined anywhere marriage is
redefined.”
"We commend Judge Feldman for refraining from judicial activism and
recognizing that Louisiana voters are free to uphold natural marriage in
their state's public policy,” Perkins added. “He rightly declared that the
Courts have no authority to unilaterally change the definition of our most
fundamental social institution.”
Ian Millhiser of ThinkProgress, however, was quick to condemn Feldman’s
ruling.
“After a disastrous losing streak in the federal courts – every single
federal court to consider the question after the Supreme Court struck down
the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 2013 has sided against
marriage discrimination,” Millhiser said, “Team Anti-Gay finally found a
single court in Louisiana that was willing to stand up for the principle
that same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry.”
However, Byron Banione of Alliance Defending Freedom praised Feldman’s
decision.
“The people of Louisiana – and the people of every state – should
continue to have the authority to affirm marriage as the union of a man and
a woman in their laws,” Banione said. “The district court in this case was
right to conclude, as the U.S. Supreme Court did in its Windsor decision
last year, that marriage law is the business of the states.”
The case will likely be appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Last month, a Tennessee county circuit court ruled that the state’s
amendment banning legal recognition of same-sex marriage is constitutional.
Citing the 1972 decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the case Baker v.
Nelson that the Constitution does not protect “a fundamental right” for
same-sex couples to get married, Roane County Circuit Court Judge Russell E.
Simmons, Jr. wrote, “Baker holds that a state’s law on same-sex marriage
does not violate the equal protection or substantive due process rights
under the United States Constitution.”
“Although the United States Supreme Court has had opportunities to overrule
the Baker decision, it has refused to take that position even in the
decision on which the plaintiff relies, which is United States v. Windsor,”
Simmons continued.
“The Court finds that marriage is a fundamental right,” the judge added.
“However, neither the Tennessee Supreme Court nor the United States Supreme
Court has ever decided that this fundamental right under a state’s laws
extends beyond the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one
(1) man and one (1) woman.” |
|
