November 21st, 2009
 

365 Gay: News

Texas judge clears way for gay divorce


(Dallas)  A Texas judge cleared the way for two Dallas men to get a divorce, ruling Thursday that Texas’ ban on same-sex marriage violates the constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said he’d appeal the ruling, which he labeled an attempt to strike down the ban approved by voters in 2005.

“The laws and constitution of the State of Texas define marriage as an institution involving one man and one woman,” Abbott said in a written statement. “Today’s ruling purports to strike down that constitutional definition – despite the fact that it was recently adopted by 75 percent of Texas voters.”

Abbott has argued that because the state doesn’t recognize gay marriage, its courts can’t dissolve one through divorce.

District Judge Tena Callahan’s ruled Thursday, however, that the court “has jurisdiction to hear a suit for divorce filed by persons legally married in another jurisdiction.”

Jennifer Pizer, marriage project director for the New York-based gay rights group Lambda Legal, said it is too early to predict the ultimate implications of the lawsuit, in which neither man is identified.

But Cathy Adams, president of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum, characterized the decision as a judicial overreach.

“Judicial activism is what they’re after, and it sounds as if they found someone in Dallas to participate in their endeavor,” she said. “The people of Texas have spoken very strongly in opposition to same-sex marriage.”

Peter Schulte, an attorney for the man who filed for divorce, told The Dallas Morning News that he and his client are “ecstatic” over the court’s ruling. Schulte said the decision was a surprise, and that he hoped to have the judge sign a divorce order in a few weeks.

Gov. Rick Perry said state lawmakers and voters have repeatedly affirmed marriage as being between a man and a woman.

“I believe the ruling is flawed and should be appealed,” Perry said.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, said she also supports Abbott’s decision to appeal. Hutchison, who is challenging Perry in the GOP gubernatorial primary, said she has “consistently voted to preserve the sanctity of marriage and as governor I will continue to defend traditional marriage.”

A phone message left by The Associated Press at court offices for Callahan was not immediately returned late Thursday. Callahan’s ruling was first reported in The Dallas Morning News.

Pizer predicted an eventual end to bans on gay marriage in Texas and across the country.

“Most people do recognize that, eventually, American law will treat gays and lesbians the same as every other American,” she said. “What we don’t know is how may chapters that story will be.”


Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • James M. Martin Said: October 14th, 2009 at 8:16 am
    • Why is it that whenever bigots don’t like a court ruling, they label it “judicial activist” but when conservative justices really do it, it’s called “sound judicial thinking” re: Bush v. Gore?

  • vanndean Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 pm
    • The Attorney General of the State of Texas is not telling the “rest of the story” when he states that “Today’s ruling purports to strike down that constitutional definition – despite the fact that it was recently adopted by 75 percent of Texas voters.” The part of the story which he is not telling is that he is referencing a bit of “fuzzy” math since the amendment to the constitution of the State of Texas was approved in an off year election in which less than 27 percent of eligible voters in the state even bothered to go to the polls and cast a ballot. While it may be true that 75 percent of THOSE voters did approve the question it does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination that Texans approve of the constitutional amendment denying marriage equality to its citizens. As a person voting against the amendment, I am appalled at the “white lies” told about the large percentage of people in Texas who approved the amendment. The truth of the matter is that the amendment was approved and installed into the constitution by 75 percent of 27 percent of eligible voters. Is it possible that the august Attorney General of the State of Texas is another liar for Jeeezus?

  • DaveW Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 2:25 pm
    • Ms. Hutchison pledges to defend the sanctity of marriage. I thought we had separation of church and state (I know, how naive I am….).

      I would not want my governor or any public official defending the sanctity of anything…its illegal.

      I wish these public figures would get a backbone and pledge to defend the sanctity of the constitution, if they want to get all sanctimonious on us.

      Sancitity and marriage do not belong in the same sentance unless you are talking about church (the way I understand how that word is used). We need to start talking about defending civil marriage from sanctity!

  • Stuff Queer People Need To Know Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
  • Raymond H. Clark Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 12:24 pm
    • Won’t it be ironic if this case joins Lawrence et al. v. Texas as one of the biggest gay equality cases in history?

      Sooner or later, Full Faith and Credit is either going to have to be enforced or repealed. It cannot be applied selectively.

  • JC Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    • Hah. Who would have ever thought that opponents of gay marriage would be working to keep gay marriages intact?

  • Jessica K Said: October 2nd, 2009 at 11:08 am
    • So Texas, which doesn’t allow gay marriage, is having a problem making sure that two men are not married? WTF!?!

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook