Gay Nuptials in the Bay State
Planning a wedding is tough under pretty much any circumstances, but for thousands of gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts hoping to marry this week, the path to the altar has been littered with lawsuits, constitutional amendments, and other legal bric-a-brac.
When the Massachusetts high court sanctioned same-sex marriage last November, it gave the state six months to brings laws into line. Opponents of the ruling used that time to attempt to block the measure, first by crafting a civil-union plan like Vermont's, then, when that failed, initiating an amendment to the state's constitution that would define marriage as solely between a man and woman. This amendment passed the legislature once but must take another pass in the 2005-6 session before going to the voters, in the fall of 2006. Gov. Mitt Romney asked for a stay on the gay- marriage decision until the 2006 vote, but the state's attorney general refused.
Wedding bells. So barring an 11th-hour appeal, Massachusetts will probably be issuing same-sex marriage licenses this week. Marriages performed in Oregon, California, New Mexico, and New York are still clouded by litigation. For his part, President Bush is backing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would limit marriage to heterosexual couples, but it's apt to be a tough sell.
Romney, meanwhile, has cited an obscure 1913 miscegenation law to make marriages for out-of-state couples, who would not be legally recognized in their home states, illegal. Defiant clerks in Provincetown, Worcester, and Somerville say they will nevertheless marry all comers, despite the governor's threat of legal action. "I think there're still statutes against witches in the books," says Worcester Mayor Timothy Murray. "Why don't we enforce those?" -Caroline Hsu
This story appears in the May 24, 2004 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.
advertisement
