Arkansas judge strikes down state ban on same-sex marriage

LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas Fri May 9, 2014 7:53pm EDT

LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (Reuters) - An Arkansas state judge struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage on Friday saying it violates equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution, a ruling that adds to the push to expand marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza did not issue a stay of the decision, opening the door for same-sex couples to apply for marriage licenses.

"Arkansas's marriage laws discriminate against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause because they do not advance any conceivable legitimate state interest necessary to support even a rational basis review," Piazza wrote in a 13-page finding filed on Friday.

The state's attorney general intends to appeal and will ask for a stay "so as not to create confusion or uncertainty about the law while the Supreme Court considers the matter," spokesman Aaron Sadler said.

Seventeen states plus the District of Columbia allow same-sex couples to marry. That number would increase sharply if federal court rulings striking down bans in several states are upheld on appeal.

Judge Piazza wrote that the state's defense of the gay marriage ban was "eerily similar" to arguments made a half-century ago banning interracial marriage.

"The issue at hand is the fundamental right to marry being denied to an unpopular minority. Our judiciary has failed such groups in the past," Piazza wrote.

The ban, approved overwhelmingly by Arkansas voters in 2004 as Amendment 83 to the state constitution, defined marriage as solely between a man and a woman. It denies legal recognition of same-sex marriages performed legally in other states.

"I'm thrilled. It's long overdue and I'm just real proud of Arkansas. And I hope there's no backlash on it," said John Rankine, 59, an artist from Eureka Springs who was one of the plaintiffs in the suit.

The legal challenge was brought by 21 same-sex Arkansas couples who said the gay marriage prohibition violated their rights under both the U.S. and state constitutions.

The Family Council, a conservative education and research organization that pushed for the ban, said the judge was undermining the will of the people.

"This fight isn't over and I look forward to a more sensible ruling from the Arkansas Supreme Court," said Jerry Cox, the council's president.

(Reporting by Steve Barnes; Writing by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Cynthia Johnston, Chris Reese and Andre Grenon)

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 (12)
AIslander wrote:
Fantastic news! The avalanche of equality continues unabated!

May 09, 2014 7:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
LordCavendish wrote:
“Arkansas’s marriage laws discriminate against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause because they do not advance any conceivable legitimate state interest necessary to support even a rational basis review,” Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza wrote in a 13-page finding filed on Friday.

Rational basis arguments simply don’t work with Republicans.

Also, I’m hungry for pizza right now.

May 09, 2014 7:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:
No one went into spontaneous combustion when interracial marriages were made legal, and no one will when all states make same-sex marriages legal.

@gaybird, your argument is silly. Do you understand the difference between killing a spider and a dog? I do. Do you forgive/understand soldiers who kill in a war and someone who murders a stranger on the street? I do. I can very easily make that distinction. A no-brainer. A legal marriage between two consenting, unrelated adults is vastly different from a mother marrying her son, etc.

But you may be onto something with a one-year marriage contract. That is an interesting concept!

May 09, 2014 8:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.