Maryland moves closer to allowing homosexual marriage

By Brian Witte
The Associated Press

Originally published January 20, 2006, 11:48 AM EST

A Baltimore Circuit Court judge today struck down Maryland's 33-year-old law against same-sex marriage, ruling in favor of 19 gay men and women who contended the prohibition violated the state's equal rights amendments.

Anticipating that her decision eventually would be appealed to Maryland's highest court, the Court of Appeals, Judge M. Brooke Murdock stayed action on her ruling pending that appeal.

"After much study and serious reflection, this court holds that Maryland's statutory prohibition against same-sex marriage cannot withstand this constitutional challenge," Murdock wrote in her decision.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Equality Maryland and plaintiffs hailed the decision.

"This is such an exciting moment," said Lisa Polyak, who was one of the plaintiffs in the case along with her partner, Gita Deane. "Our participation in this lawsuit has always been about family protections for our children. Tonight, we will rest a little easier knowing that those protections are within reach."

The Maryland lawsuit was filed in July 2004 against court clerks in Prince George's, St. Mary's, Dorchester and Washington counties and Baltimore City. The clerks denied marriage license applications for same-sex couples and contended that a civil contract of marriage in Maryland could only be made between a man and a woman.

The 1973 law specifying that marriage is a union of one man and one woman was defended by the state attorney general's office.

During arguments in August, Assistant Attorney General Steven Sullivan appealed to Murdock not to interject the courts into what he said is a legislative prerogative. Approving marriage of same-sex couples would change "the essence of the institution as it has always existed," he said at the time.

But in her ruling today, Murdock wrote that the law "discriminates based on gender."

"There is no apparent compelling state interest in a statutory prohibition of same-sex marriage discriminating, on the basis of sex, against those individuals whose gender is identical to their intended spouses," Murdock wrote. "Indeed, this court is unable to even find that the prohibition of same-sex marriage rationally relates to a legitimate state interest."

There is no legitimate state interest, but certainly lots of religious ones... The rest of the article is here.