|
by Ann
Rostow
Gay.com / PlanetOut.com
Network
|
The 137-53 vote killed the amendment, and made it virtually impossible for anti-marriage conservatives to pre-empt a future marriage ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), the highest court in the state.
A freedom-to-marry case is working its way through the Massachusetts courts, and will eventually be heard by the SJC. As soon as the case was filed in April of 2001, conservatives began the lengthy process to amend the state Constitution, the same tactic that precluded the legalization of same-sex marriage in Hawaii in the late1990s.
But amending the state Constitution is a more difficult process in Massachusetts than it is in Hawaii. After a petition drive, the amendment must be approved by 25 percent of the combined Legislature in both the current and following sessions. Only then can it reach the ballot for a popular vote.
Earlier this year, anti-marriage activists successfully qualified their petition, albeit under a cloud of suspicion and charges of fraud. Nonetheless, they proceeded to the next step, which failed Wednesday and cannot be revived for the 2001-2002 session. Technically, Gov. Jane Swift can recall the convention before the session ends July 31, but her spokesman has already told the press that she opposes the amendment and is unlikely to act, the Associated Press reports.
By avoiding a vote this year, this particular amendment is dead. In theory, conservatives can go back to the drawing board, and start collecting signatures all over again. But even then, a new amendment would have to be ratified both in the 2003-2004 session, and again in 2005-2006. At the earliest, voters would see the marriage ban on their November 2006 ballot. But it's almost certain that the Supreme Judicial Court will have already issued an opinion at that time.
More importantly, said Josh Friedes, political director of equalmarriage.org, it's unlikely that the Massachusetts voters will pass an anti-gay measure in 2006, even if they find themselves facing one.
"I'm confident that there's no way, shape and form that the public will support this ballot initiative by then," said Friedes. The experience of fighting this campaign, he said, brought gay and lesbian families out of the closets and into the halls of the capital, into their churches and into the public eye, where they found "overwhelming support that we frankly didn't expect."
Friedes called the bipartisan vote on Wednesday "an enormous step," that "sent a very strong message that the Legislature will not tolerate attacks on gay and lesbian families in the commonwealth."
Posted July 17, 2002
Close Window to Return to TBC Web Site