BY BTL STAFF
WASHINGTON D.C. – The four states seeking to uphold states' bans on same-sex marriage told the Supreme Court of the United States March 27 that the democratic process should decide the issue, not a judicial ruling.
Attorneys for Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Kentucky submitted briefs to the high court stating that the 14th Amendment that guarantees equal protection under the law and due process for all citizens does not define marriage.
"The 14th Amendment does not dictate any particular marriage view, so the courts are not in a position to impose one," Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette argued in the 59-page brief. "Voters have a legitimate interest in promoting their own view, and while not all voters agree, the marriage view adopted since before the country's founding is constitutional."
Schuette argues that the case is not specifically about banning same-sex marriage but about who decides the question. The state brief says the U.S. Constitution does not clarify marriage, so defining who can get married is left to states or their voters.
From the brief's summation:
"This case is not about the best definition of marriage or any stereotypes about families. Families come in all types, and parents of all types — married or single, gay or straight — love their children. This case is about whether the 14th Amendment imposes a single marriage view on all states such that the people have no right to decide. It does not."
Michigan approved the Michigan Marriage Amendment in 2004 which defined marriage as between one man and on woman. April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, the lesbian couple challenging that ban, state that it violates their equal protection rights and the equal protection rights of the children that they are raising together. They cannot jointly adopt due to the 2004 marriage ban which defines marriage as one man and one woman.
Several of the briefs include specific arguments to appeal to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has provided the decisive vote in previous gay rights cases and who wrote the high court's decision in 2013 striking down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act.
On page two of the brief, Michigan cites Kennedy's decision from last year upholding Michigan voters' right to prohibit affirmative action in university admission. Ohio concludes with a Kennedy citation from another case decided in 2014 that upheld the rights of government bodies to open their meetings with prayers.
Challengers of the states' bans filed their briefs in late February. Within a week more than 70 friend-of-the-court briefs were filed by supporters of same-sex marriage.
Currently, 37 states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage; however, more than half of them were a result of court orders as opposed to the democratic process.
"Reasonable people of good will might think it is at least debatable that this definition advances Michigan's interest in encouraging parents to stick together to care for and raise their children," the state wrote. "And if it is at least debatable, then federal courts have no authority to overturn the people's legislative choice."
Cases from the four states were combined for oral argument April 28. Michigan and Kentucky will answer the court's first question on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage and Tennessee, Kentucky and Ohio will argue against recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states. A decision from the high court is expected before the end of June.
