Judge allows suit challenging New York same-sex marriage law

ALBANY, New York Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:05pm EST

Same-sex couple Mishan Moore (L), 39, wipes a tear as her partner Jacqueline Rodriguez, 34, looks on during their wedding ceremony at Queens Borough Hall in New York July 24, 2011.  REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

Same-sex couple Mishan Moore (L), 39, wipes a tear as her partner Jacqueline Rodriguez, 34, looks on during their wedding ceremony at Queens Borough Hall in New York July 24, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Shannon Stapleton

Related News

Related Topics

ALBANY, New York (Reuters) - A conservative religious group may proceed with a lawsuit seeking to overturn New York's new law legalizing same-sex marriage, a state judge has ruled.

New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, a non-profit advocacy group founded by Christian clergy, said that closed-door talks between Governor Andrew Cuomo and Republican State Senators over the hotly-debated law, which passed in June, violated a statute requiring most meetings involving elected officials to be open to the public.

The state's Open Meetings Law exempts "deliberations of political committees, conferences and caucuses," which the state argued included the Senate's meetings with Cuomo. The Christian group said Cuomo's presence made the meetings distinct from legislative conferences.

"Clear arm-twisting by (Cuomo) on the legislature permeates this entire process," Wiggins wrote in a November 18 decision allowing the group to proceed with the Open Meetings claim.

But Wiggins dismissed the remainder of the group's arguments, citing his inability under the separation of powers to weigh in on Senate rules.

New York is the sixth and largest state in the country to allow same-sex couples to wed. The measure easily passed the Democrat-dominated State Assembly, but required weeks of closed-door debate in the Senate, where Republicans hold a two-seat majority. That included one-on-one meetings with Gov. Cuomo, a Democrat and strong supporter of gay marriage. Ultimately, four Republican senators voted in favor of the law.

(Editing by Greg McCune)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
osito3 wrote:
WTF would Jesus do?

Nov 30, 2011 1:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JudyJudyJudy wrote:
“British Anthropologist John D. Unwin conducted an in depth study of eighty civilizations that have come and gone over a period of some four thousand years. He discovered that a common thread ran through all of them. In each instance, they started out with a conservative mind-set with strong moral values and a heavy emphasis on family. Over a period of time, the conservative mind-set became more and more liberal, moral values declined, and the family suffered. In each instance, as the family deteriorated, the civilization itself started to come apart; and in all eighty cases, the fall of the nation was related to the fall of the family. In most cases, that civilization fell within one generation of the fall of the family unit.” Zeiglar, Zig, referencing a book written by Unwin, “Sexual Regulation and Cultural Behavior”, 1935, Oxford University Press, London

This law is an attack on the traditional family, and the bedrock of civilization. Those who passed it were either in willful disobedience to their oath to uphold the Constitution (which will collapse of civilization collapses) or else were lied to about the consequences of this law. Either way, it is a bad law that needs to be taken off the books.

Dec 01, 2011 6:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.