GA. AMENDMENT IN COURT: From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Justices of the Georgia Supreme Court on Tuesday asked pointed questions about the language of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, indicating they might rule on issues beyond jurisdiction in the case.

The justices heard oral arguments for less than an hour in a lawsuit attempting to stop a scheduled Nov. 2 referendum on the question. The jurists did not say when they expected to issue a ruling, but both sides anticipate one before Nov. 2.

...Justice Leah Ward Sears asked Stefan Ritter, a senior assistant attorney general representing the state, to explain a sentence in the amendment that reads: "No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage."

Ritter said "union" is used as a proxy for "marriage."

Opponents of the proposed constitutional amendment argue that "union" can be interpreted to mean same-sex relationships other than marriage.

Justice Robert Benham asked whether a phrase prohibiting the court from considering or ruling on issues with respect to any "such relationship" would apply to contractual arrangements between same-sex partners.

Ritter replied that the term "such relationship" refers to a civil union or marriage but would not cover all contractual arrangements. He said the language is not so broad that it eliminates all rights.

more

posted by Eve at 7:44 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home