On February 27, 2004, New Paltz Mayor Jason West married 25 same-sex couples before a cheering crowd, in front of the Village Hall. Not long thereafter, an Ulster County Court judge charged West with two dozen misdemeanors in connection with these marriages. A court later dismissed the charges against West, a ruling which the state appealed. Ulster County Court Judge J. Michael Bruhn ruled in favor of the state, reinstating the charges against West, arguing that that this criminal case did not concern whether the state constitution mandates same-sex marriage, but rather whether West violated his oath of office in performing allegedly illegal marriages. The May 2005 charges against West were reinstated; these were dropped by the prosecutor on July 12. After Liberty Counsel filed a civil lawsuit challenging the validity of the marriages, a state court judge issued a permanent injunction barring Mr. West from solemnizing same-sex marriages.^[7] Mr. West was subsequently voted out of office in 2007.^[8]

These weddings, coming on the heels of San Francisco's mayor Gavin Newsom led other New York mayors to act. On February 27, 2004, Nyack mayor John Shields announced that he would recognize the New Paltz marriages and on March 1, 2004, Ithaca's mayor Carolyn K. Peterson declared that she would recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Several months later, 25 same-sex couples sued Ithaca for having denied their requests for marriage licenses.

Two days later, then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who supports same-sex marriage, issued an “informal opinion” stating that municipal clerks should not issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples since the New York state legislature had not intended, according to Spitzer, that same-sex couples be covered under the Domestic Relations Law.

[edit] Civil suits for same-sex marriage

[edit] Hernandez case

March 5, 2004: Five same-sex couples, backed by Lambda Legal, file suit challenging the constitutionality of limiting marriage to only opposite-sex couples. The complaint relied on both equal protection and due process claims.

February 4, 2005: New York County Supreme Court Judge Doris Ling-Cohan issues an opinion in Hernandez v. Robles ruling that the New York State Constitution guaranteed basic rights to gays and lesbians, rights which the state violates when it prevents them from marrying. Ling-Cohan stayed her ruling for a 30 day period, giving the state time to appeal. See Judge Ling-Cohan's ruling in Hernandez v. Robles (trial)

September 13, 2005: Oral arguments are heard by the Appellate Division (First Judicial Department).

December 8, 2005: The Appellate Division (First Judicial Department) reverses the trial court with one dissent in a 4-1 decision that said the issue should be handled by the legislature. See Appellate ruling in Hernandez v. Robles (appellate)

May 31, 2006: Oral arguments are heard by the New York State Court of Appeals (New York's highest court).

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals issues a 4-2 decision upholding New York's existing marriage statutes and declining to judicially mandate the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York. The Court's ruling states that same-sex partners do not have the right to marry each other under the New York Constitution. [9]

[edit] Shields case

March 11, 2004: Ten same-sex couples file suit to obtain an order requiring their town clerk to issue them marriage licenses and the Department of Health to recognize them. If the statutory argument fails, the suit challenges the constitutionality of the Domestic Relations Law. John Shields, Mayor of Nyack, is one of the parties to the suit.

October 18, 2004: Rockland County Supreme Court Judge Alfred J. Weiner issues an opinion in Shields v. Madigan rejecting the statutory interpretation and constitutional challenges for same-sex marriage. The Domestic Relations Law was determined to allow only opposite-sex marriages, and equal protection and due process claims were both denied. See Judge Weiner's ruling in Shields v. Madigan (trial)

March 28, 2006: Oral arguments are heard by the Appellate Division (Second Judicial Department).

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals issues a 4-2 decision in the four other marriage cases. This case is now effectively moot.

[edit] Samuels case

April 7, 2004: Thirteen same-sex couples, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, file suit to have declared unconstitutional a state law that denies them marriage. Daniel O'Donnell, New York State Assemblyman, is one of the parties to the suit.

December 7, 2004: Albany County Supreme Court Judge Joseph C. Teresi issues an opinion in Samuels v. New York State Department of Health rejecting the four constitutional claims for same-sex marriage. Equal protection based on sexual orientation, equal protection based on gender, due process, and free speech were all argued to be violated by New York's Domestic Relations Law, but none was found to have merit. See Judge Teresi's ruling in Samuels v New York State Dept. of Health (trial) <--- PDF

October 17, 2005: Oral arguments are heard by the Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department).

February 16, 2006: The Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department) affirms the trial court in a 5-0 decision that consolidated all three cases (Samuels, Seymour, and Kane) on appeal in its jurisdiction. See Appellate ruling in Samuels v New York State Dept. of Health (appellate)

May 31, 2006: Oral arguments are heard by the New York State Court of Appeals (New York's highest court).

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals issues a 4-2 decision upholding New York's existing marriage statutes and declining to judicially mandate the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York. The Court's ruling states that same-sex partners do not have the right to marry each other under the New York Constitution. [10]

[edit] Seymour case

June 2, 2004: Twenty-five same-sex couples, backed by the city of Ithaca, file suit to have the Domestic Relations Law include same-sex marriage. If the law is determined not to apply to same-sex couples, the suit challenges the prohibition on a constitutional basis.

February 23, 2005: Tompkins County Supreme Court Judge Robert C. Mulvey issues an opinion in Seymour v. Holcomb rejecting Ithaca's standing to sue, the statutory claim, and the constitutional claims based on equal protection, due process, and free expression. See Judge Mulvey's ruling in Seymour v. Holcomb (trial)

October 17, 2005: Oral arguments are heard by the Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department).

February 16, 2006: The Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department) affirms the trial court in a 5-0 decision that consolidated all three cases (Samuels, Seymour, and Kane) on appeal in its jurisdiction. See Appellate ruling in Seymour v. Holcomb (appellate)

May 31, 2006: Oral arguments are heard by the New York State Court of Appeals (New York's highest court).

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals issues a 4-2 decision upholding New York's existing marriage statutes and declining to judicially mandate the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York. The Court's ruling states that same-sex partners do not have the right to marry each other under the New York Constitution. [11]

[edit] Kane case

June 16, 2004: Two same-sex couples file suit to obtain marriage licenses that would make official their marriage ceremonies from three months earlier. The ceremonies were held by a Unitarian Universalist Minister on March 27, 2004.

January 31, 2005: Albany County Supreme Court Judge E. Michael Kavanagh issues an opinion in Kane v. Marsolais rejecting both statutory and constitutional claims. The opinion also rejected the notion that their marriages were valid because of a section of the Domestic Relations Law that recognized marriages solemnized by ceremonies even if the couple failed to obtain a license. This section of the law was held only to apply to those who were legally qualified to be married. See Judge Kavanagh's ruling in Kane v. Marsolais (trial) <--- PDF

October 17, 2005: Oral arguments are heard by the Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department).

February 16, 2006: The Appellate Division (Third Judicial Department) affirms the trial court in a 5-0 decision that consolidated all three cases (Samuels, Seymour, and Kane) on appeal in its jurisdiction. See Appellate ruling in Kane v. Marsolais (appellate)

May 31, 2006: Oral arguments are heard by the New York State Court of Appeals (New York's highest court).

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals issues a 4-2 decision upholding New York's existing marriage statutes and declining to judicially mandate the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York. The Court's ruling states that same-sex partners do not have the right to marry each other under the New York Constitution. [12]

[edit] Official recognition of unions performed in other states

In October, 2004, State Comptroller Alan Hevesi indicated that the state’s retirement system would recognize same-sex marriages performed outside New York State for purposes of state retirement and pension benefits. Not long thereafter, mayor Michael Bloomberg stated that he would ask that the city’s five pension systems recognize domestic partnerships, civil unions and same-sex marriages of city employees performed in other jurisdictions (such as Massachusetts, Canada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Vermont, Oregon, Maine, Hawaii, Connecticut, California, the District of Columbia and Washington). These decisions are being challenged in court.

In February 2008, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department ruled that a same-sex marriage in Canada should be recognized in New York. In Martinez v. County of Monroe, the court reasoned that because out-of-state opposite-sex marriages that would not have been legal in New York nonetheless are recognized unless such recognition would violate the public policy of the state, out-of-state same-sex marriages must be similarly recognized. The Appellate Division reversed a trial judge's ruling in 2006 that Monroe Community College did not have to extend health benefits to an employee's same-sex spouse. Monroe County subsequently announced its intention to move for leave to appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals.[13] However, the Court of Appeals refused to hear the case on May 6, 2008, allowing the lower court's ruling to stand for the time being.[14] [15] The case could be re-appealed once the trial court has made a determination regarding the amount of money damages to be awarded.[16]

As a result of the governor's directive, New York may become the first state that does not allow same-sex marriages but requires its state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. In addition, since California does not have a residency requirement for marriages [17], same-sex couples in New York may now have the option to travel to California to get married and have their marriages fully recognized by New York State agencies. However, the governor's directive has been challenged as both premature and unconstitutional in an Article 78 proceeding filed by the Alliance Defense Fund against Governor Paterson on behalf of five state legislators and several pro-family leaders in New York.[18]

[edit] Post-2006 election

Eliot Spitzer was elected to become governor of New York on 2006-11-07; he stated that he would introduce legislation to legalize same-sex marriage,^[2] and did so on 27 April 2007.^[3] This legislation passed the State Assembly on June 19, 2007, but died in the State Senate and was returned to the Assembly.[19] On March 12, 2008, Eliot Spitzer resigned his position as Governor of New York.[20]

Following Spitzer's resignation, David Alexander Paterson (then Lieutenant Governor of New York) was sworn in as the 55th Governor of New York, at the New York State Capitol on March 17, 2008, by New York Chief Judge Judith Kaye. On April 9, 2008 the new governor pledged that he would continue to push for full marriage equality for LGBT New Yorkers. The new governor said he was "proud to have run on a ticket with now former Gov. Eliot Spitzer that was the first in the country to advocate for marriage equality and to win on that premise."

"We will push on and bring full marriage equality in New York State," Paterson said. [21] [22]

[edit] Timeline

Wikinews has related news:

Interview with gay marriage movement founder Evan Wolfson

February 26, 2004: Jason West, mayor of the village of New Paltz, announces that the village would start performing same-sex civil weddings. Although the village would not attempt to issue licenses for such weddings, couples in New York State have six months from the wedding to seek such a license, and weddings are not invalid solely for not having a license. [23]

February 27, 2004: John Shields, the mayor of Nyack, New York, announces that his Village would recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. [24]

March 2, 2004: West is charged with 19 misdemeanor counts of "solemnizing marriages without a license" by Ulster County District Attorney Donald Williams. West announces that he intends to continue performing same-sex ceremonies.

March 3, 2004: Shields announces that he will begin officiating at same-sex marriages, and that he and his fiancé would join other gay and lesbian New Yorkers in seeking marriage licenses from municipal clerks' offices. [25]

March 3, 2004: The Office of Attorney General Eliot Spitzer issues an "informal opinion" that clerks should not issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples as the state legislature had not intended same-sex marriages to be covered by the domestic relations law. [26] The same opinion states that same-sex marriages performed elsewhere were recognizable in New York state under a recent judicial decision recognizing the validity of a Vermont civil union as granting the benefits of marriage, Langan v. St. Vincent's Hospital, 196 Misc. 2d 440 (N.Y. Misc., 2003).

March 5, 2004: New York state judge Vincent Bradley issues a temporary restraining order barring West from performing any such ceremonies for a month. West indicates that he will abide by the judicial order while evaluating his legal options.

March 15, 2004: Two Unitarian Universalist ministers who had been performing same-sex weddings in Mayor West's stead are charged with 13 counts of solemnizing a marriage without a license by District Attorney Williams.

March 20, 2004: Six Unitarian Universalist ministers — including one of the two ministers charged earlier — defy the District Attorney by performing 25 more same-sex marriage ceremonies in New Paltz.

March 22, 2004: Following an opinion requested in January from their attorney, the Rochester city council announces that Rochester will recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Rochester is across Lake Ontario from Toronto, where same-sex marriages have been legal since 2003.

June 6, 2004: An Ulster County Supreme Court judge makes the temporary restraining order against Mayor West permanent.

June 10, 2004: A New Paltz Town Court Justice dismisses the charges against Mayor West, ruling that the district attorney had failed to show that the state had a legitimate interest in preventing the marriages, or that the law under which West was charged was constitutional. The district attorney said that he would appeal the ruling, and also indicated that he intended to continue forward with charges against the Unitarian Universalist ministers.

July 13, 2004: Another New Paltz Town Court Justice dismisses all of the charges against the Unitarian Universalist ministers, for essentially the same reasons.

Mayor Carolyn K. Peterson of Ithaca, New York, in conjunction with her city clerk, has planned to provoke a court hearing by sending marriage applications from five local gay couples to the New York State Department of Health, while offering the backing of Ithaca's legal resources if their applications are denied.

October 8, 2004: The state comptroller, Alan G. Hevesi, indicated in a letter to a state employee that the state retirement system will recognize same-sex marriages contracted elsewhere for the purposes of retirement benefits for New York state employees.[27]

February 4, 2005: State Supreme Court Justice Doris Ling-Cohan ruled that New York City could not deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, based on the equal protection clause of the state's constitution. The order was stayed for 30 days, pending an appeal (the Supreme Court is a trial-level court in New York, and the decision could be appealed either to the Appellate Division or directly to the Court of Appeals).

December 8, 2005: The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court overturns Ling-Cohan's decision. ^[28]

May 31, 2006: The New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, hears oral arguments.

July 6, 2006: The Court of Appeals in its Hernandez v. Robles decision declines to judicially mandate the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York. The Court's ruling stated that same-sex partners did not have the right to marry under the New York Constitution.[29]

May, 2007 : A Massachusetts trial court judge rules that marriage licenses obtained by New York same-sex couples prior to the Hernandez v. Robles decision are valid under Massachusetts law. As a result, these couples' marriages are also valid under New York State law. [30]

June 19, 2007: The Democrat-controlled New York State Assembly approves Governor Spitzer's bill to legalize same-sex marriage in New York, in an 85-61 vote.[31] The bill moves to the Republican-controlled Senate; majority leader Joseph L. Bruno said it would not be voted upon in that chamber this year. [32]

December 27, 2007: In Matter of Langan v State Farm Fire & Cas., the Appellate Division, Third Department holds that parties to civil unions from other states are not entitled to make claims as surviving spouses under New York's Workers' Compensation Law; the court also holds that the relevant provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law are not unconstitutional.[33]

January 9, 2008: Governor Spitzer's bill to legalize same-sex marriage dies in the New York State Senate and is returned to the New York State Assembly.[34]

February 1, 2008: In Martinez v. County of Monroe, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department rules that a same-sex marriage in Canada should be recognized in New York, because out-of-state opposite-sex marriages that would not have been legal in New York nonetheless are recognized unless such recognition would violate the public policy of the state. The Appellate Division holds that the same treatment must be applied to out-of-state same-sex marriages, but the ruling could be overturned on a finding that same-sex marriage violates New York's public policy. The decision reverses a trial judge's 2006 ruling that Monroe Community College did not have to extend health benefits to an employee's same-sex spouse.

February 22, 2008: Monroe County announces its intention to move for leave to appeal the Martinez decision to the Court of Appeals.[35]

March 12, 2008: Eliot Spitzer resigns his position as Governor of New York.[36]

March 17, 2008: Following Spitzer's resignation, David Alexander Paterson (then Lieutenant Governor of New York) is sworn in as the 55th Governor of New York at the New York State Capitol by New York Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

April 9, 2008: Governor (David Alexander Paterson) pledges in a speech that he will continue to push for full marriage equality for LGBT New Yorkers. [37] [38]

May 29, 2008: It is widely reported on this day that Gov. David A. Paterson directed all state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. "In a directive issued on May 14, the governor’s legal counsel, David Nocenti, instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere 'should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union.'” [39] [40] Proponents of traditional marriage raised the possibility of a legal challenge. [41]

June 3, 2008: Governor Paterson's directive is challenged as both premature and unconstitutional in an Article 78 proceeding filed by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of five state legislators and several conservative leaders in New York.[42]

[edit] References

[edit] External links

Hernandez v. Robles text [43]
Hernandez v. Robles Analysis
The Road to Gay Marriage After New York, JURIST

[edit] See also

v • d • e Same-sex unions in the United States

Marriage legalized	Massachusetts - California (eff. 2008-6-17)

Civil unions enacted	Connecticut - New Hampshire - New Jersey - Vermont

Domestic partnerships enacted	California - District of Columbia - Hawaii - Maine - Oregon - Washington

Prohibited by statute	Arizona - Connecticut - Delaware - Florida - Illinois - Indiana - Iowa - Maryland - Minnesota - New Hampshire - New York - North Carolina - Pennsylvania - Puerto Rico - Washington - West Virginia - Wyoming

Prohibited by constitutional amendment	Alabama - Alaska - Arkansas - Colorado - Georgia - Hawaii - Idaho - Kansas - Kentucky - Louisiana - Michigan - Mississippi - Missouri - Montana - Nebraska - Nevada - North Dakota - Ohio - Oklahoma - Oregon - South Carolina - South Dakota - Tennessee - Texas - Utah - Virginia - Wisconsin

Marriage undefined	New Mexico - Rhode Island

Categories: Same-sex marriage in the United States | New York law

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.

Same-sex marriage in New York

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] New Paltz marriages