DC appeals court hears arguments in same-sex marriage case

[JURIST] The District of Columbia Court of Appeals [official website] heard arguments Tuesday on whether DC voters should be allowed to decide on same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive] in the city. While appeals are normally decided by a three-judge panel, the full nine-member court convened for Tuesday's arguments. The appeal comes after a judge for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] in January that a law allowing Washington DC to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere is not subject to a public referendum [JURIST report]. Reverend Harry Jackson had urged the court to force the DC Council to allow the public to vote on a measure defining marriage as between a man and a woman. The judge refused, affirming a November decision [text, PDF; JURIST report] by the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics [official website], which held that putting the act to a public vote would violate DC's Human Rights Act [text]. Jackson's lawyer argued [AP report] Tuesday that the law should be subject to referendum. DC's solicitor defended the law, arguing that the city's charter doesn't guarantee referendums for specific issues.

DC began recognizing same-sex marriages in March after the US Supreme Court [official website] denied an emergency appeal to block the law from taking effect. DC has now become the sixth US jurisdiction to recognize marriage between same-sex couples, joining five US states: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and New Hampshire [JURIST reports]. Same-sex civil unions are currently recognized in Washington, New Jersey, Oregon, and Nevada [JURIST reports].

 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.