• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Monday’s Superior Court decision in San Francisco that overturned state laws against same-sex marriage could have a strong impact on similar court cases heard in other states, legal experts say.

According to the ruling, two state laws that prohibit same-sex marriage “cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional,” San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer wrote. Supporters of same-sex marriage have hailed the decision as a step forward, while opponents have vowed to appeal.

The decision may have a powerful influence on other state courts simply because of California’s size. California has 12 percent of the country’s population and about 15 percent of the country’s co-habiting same-sex couples, said David B. Cruz, USC professor of law. Should other state judges hear cases similar to San Francisco’s, such statistics may weigh heavily on their minds.

“There are large numbers of people affected by this,” Cruz said.

“The courts that have been dealing with challenges like this have taken to citing decisions from other jurisdictions as precedents, though they’re not binding,” Cruz added.

William Rubenstein, a UCLA professor of law, agreed.

“It’s an important decision because California is such a big state, and the decision will be persuasive to judges in other states,” said Rubenstein, who is also the director of the Williams Project, a think tank on sexual orientation law.

The fact that Kramer was appointed to his position by former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson may also give the ruling “an edge of credibility,” Cruz said.

Only one state – Massachusetts – has legalized same-sex marriages. Trial courts in New York, Washington and Oregon have recently ruled in favor of same-sex marriages.

Kramer’s decision would annul a state law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and Proposition 22, a voter-approved initiative that passed in 2000 which prevents the state from recognizing same-sex couples who were married in other states.

Kramer granted his decision a stay of 60 days to allow opponents time to appeal it. If it is appealed, the California Court of Appeals will hear the case. Analysts say that regardless of what decision the court of appeals reaches, their ruling will also likely be appealed and taken up by the California Supreme Court.

The state Supreme Court has the option of bypassing the court of appeals and hearing the case right away, but both Cruz and Kramer said such a scenario is unlikely.

If the case does eventually go to the supreme court, Cruz said it is possible Kramer’s decision will be upheld.

“They have a very strong legal case on their side, and the precedents are very favorable,” he said.

But Rubenstein declined to predict what outcome could arise from a possible supreme court hearing.

“When it gets to the California Supreme Court, it will be an open question all over again, and it will be interesting to see what they will do,” he said. “It’s hard to predict at this point.”