Allan Lichtman: Another Chance for Same-Sex Marriage
[Allan Lichtman is a professor of history at American University and a national political analyst.]
It is not well known, but in 1973 Maryland became the first state in the nation to ban same-sex marriage legislatively with a Family Law clause (Section 2-201) stating that, "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State."
Attorney General Douglas Gansler has ruled that Maryland can recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. However, such marriages cannot take place in our state.
In 2004, the Maryland ACLU and Equality Maryland filed a lawsuit claiming that Family Law Section 2-201 violates Article 46 of the Maryland Constitution, which states, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex."
Three years later, the Maryland Court of Appeals in Deane & Polyak v. Conaway ruled 4-3 against the plaintiffs, leaving the statute in place. The majority concluded that, "Article 46 was not intended ... to reach classifications based on sexual orientation," and therefore Maryland law "does not draw an impermissible sex-based distinction."...
Read entire article at Gazette.net (MD)
It is not well known, but in 1973 Maryland became the first state in the nation to ban same-sex marriage legislatively with a Family Law clause (Section 2-201) stating that, "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State."
Attorney General Douglas Gansler has ruled that Maryland can recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. However, such marriages cannot take place in our state.
In 2004, the Maryland ACLU and Equality Maryland filed a lawsuit claiming that Family Law Section 2-201 violates Article 46 of the Maryland Constitution, which states, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex."
Three years later, the Maryland Court of Appeals in Deane & Polyak v. Conaway ruled 4-3 against the plaintiffs, leaving the statute in place. The majority concluded that, "Article 46 was not intended ... to reach classifications based on sexual orientation," and therefore Maryland law "does not draw an impermissible sex-based distinction."...