
*
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — NEW ORLEANS (AP) ? A gay couple in New Orleans is suing over being denied a marriage license in Louisiana, claiming their rights are being violated by a state constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.
*
Kristoffer Bonilla, 33, and John Thomas Wray, 18, are asking a federal judge to strike down the constitutional amendment, which lawmakers and voters overwhelmingly approved in 2004. The men filed the lawsuit against several state and local officials on April 2, the same day they said they were denied a marriage license. It claims the state's marriage amendment violates the First Amendment "by curtailing the right to marry based upon a religious interpretation of the nature and purpose of marriage itself."
Kristoffer Bonilla, 33, and John Thomas Wray, 18, are asking a federal judge to strike down the constitutional amendment, which lawmakers and voters overwhelmingly approved in 2004. The men filed the lawsuit against several state and local officials on April 2, the same day they said they were denied a marriage license. It claims the state's marriage amendment violates the First Amendment "by curtailing the right to marry based upon a religious interpretation of the nature and purpose of marriage itself."
*
Health and Hospitals Secretary Alan Levine, who is named as a defendant, said he believes this is the first case of its kind in Louisiana. Advocates on both sides of the issue also said they weren't aware of another case like it in the state. "This has the potential to be a pretty important case," said Levine, who received a copy of the lawsuit on Monday.
*
In Louisiana, after 78 percent of voters approved the "Defense of Marriage" amendment, a state district judge struck it down because it violated another provision of the state constitution ? the requirement that an amendment cover only one subject. In January 2005, however, the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed that ruling and reinstated the amendment.
*
Randy Evans, an attorney for Forum for Equality, which had challenged the amendment, said the case decided by the state Supreme Court in 2005 didn't delve into any federal constitutional issues. "The earlier case really has no controlling effect on this lawsuit," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment