California: our ‘same-state’ partner?

On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court issued Brown v. Board of Education, arguably the watershed moment of the civil-rights movement.

On May 17, 2004, the first same-sex couple to be married legally in the United States obtained their marriage license in Massachusetts, thanks to the 2003 Supreme Judicial Court decision in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health.

Four years later to the week, on May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court rejected that state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

In a narrow 4-3 ruling, the court declared that the state constitution protects a fundamental “right to marry” that extends equally to same-sex couples.

With this development, Massachusetts and California become “partners” as the only two states that have taken this step.

Yes, history has a way of repeating itself. As in the case of Brown, Goodridge was a breakthrough in the area of equal protection.

And as was the case in Brown, much of the country has failed to appreciate and/or accept what Massachusetts’ highest court did. Along with those who hailed the decision as a triumph, many responded with scorn and even ridicule.

Those in our state know that the logistical chaos predicted by critics, such as then-Gov. Mitt Romney, never happened in the wake of Goodridge.

In fact, the same-sex marriage era in Massachusetts has been like that moment before a couple walks down the aisle on their wedding day: pin-drop quiet.

Nationwide, however, it’s a different story. Instead of taking a cue from Massachusetts, many states have taken steps to make sure that Goodridge does not happen within their borders.

Same-sex marriage has also become a political football, with some saying the case torpedoed the presidential hopes of Sen. John Kerry in 2004.

California can expect much of the same. As was the case in Massachusetts, opponents of gay marriage have mobilized to present a same-sex marriage ban on the November ballot. And, unsurprisingly, the matter is being bandied about by the current presidential hopefuls.

Whether Goodridge came “too soon” remains a vexing question in this state. There are still many people who sharply disagree with what the court did, and some who accept the notion of gay marriage but wonder whether the SJC sprung same-sex marriage on the nation before its time.

But now, at the very least, another American court has done exactly what the SJC did in Goodridge. In each case the judges produced a difficult, bold (and perhaps unpopular) interpretation of their state’s constitution.

Will other states follow, or continue to “strike back”? The California ruling certainly appears a strong victory for advocates of same-sex marriage, but there remains a sentiment among many in the U.S. that the “coasts are crazy,” that these courts are both literally and figuratively on the fringe.

If recent history is a guide, the California court can rest assured that gay marriage will eventually be an accepted, “quiet” part of the state’s fabric.

Whether the vast “middle” of the country ever follows suit remains to be seen. But, for now at least, Massachusetts has a “partner” in this

uncertain landscape.

Till death do us part? {EXA}