Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Hears Oral Argument In Case Seeking to Stay Same-Sex Marriage Decision
Tue, May 3, 2005
ANN ARBOR, MI — The Thomas More Law Center participated in oral argument before a packed courtroom of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in a case seeking to stay the court’s decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which legalized same-sex marriage. As a result of that decision, same-sex couples have been permitted to marry in Massachusetts as of May 17, 2004.
Robert Muise, trial counsel with the Law Center handling the case, commented, “This case seeks to preserve the right of the citizens of Massachusetts to have the final say on the issue of marriage. Marriage is a public good. It is a social institution of the highest importance, and it serves as the very basis for the fabric of society. The people as a whole have a real interest in the preservation and protection of this social institution, and it is they who should decide this issue and not four un-elected, justices.”
The case was filed by the Thomas More Law Center, Citizens for the Preservation of Constitutional Rights (CPCR) and others on behalf of C. Joseph Doyle, the executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts. Both Muise and Chester Darling, attorney for CPCR, presented oral argument to the Court on behalf of Doyle, asking the high court to stay its ruling pending the resolution of the process currently underway to amend the Commonwealth’s constitution to reverse this decision and ban so-called “same-sex marriage.” The attorneys argued that the court ought to stay its decision out of respect for and in deference to the constitution, which give the ultimate authority on defining marriage to the citizens of the Commonwealth.
Fight for Traditional Marriage Continues – Date For Oral Argument Set In Case Seeking to Block Massachusetts Same-Sex Marriage Decision
Wed, Apr 13, 2005
ANN ARBOR, MI — The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced that it will hear oral argument on Monday, May 2nd at 9:00 a.m. in a case seeking to block the court’s decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which legalized same-sex marriage. As a result of that decision, same-sex couples have been permitted to marry in Massachusetts as of May 17, 2004. This case, which is the last legal action surviving that is capable of stopping this decision, was filed by the Thomas More Law Center, Citizens for the Preservation of Constitutional Rights (CPCR) and others on behalf of C. Joseph Doyle, the executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts.
Robert Muise, trial counsel handling the case for the Law Center, and Chester Darling, attorney for CPCR, will present oral argument to the Supreme Judicial Court on behalf of Doyle.
According to Muise, “We are extremely pleased to have an opportunity to argue this historic case before the Supreme Judicial Court. The Massachusetts Constitution ensures the people that judges will not use the law to impose their opinion about how society should be ordered regardless of the democratic will. What happens with the legal institution of marriage should ultimately depend on the democratic processes outlined in the Commonwealth’s Constitution rather than by judicial fiat. This case seeks to preserve this proper balance of power for the Commonwealth.”
Fight Not Over – Massachusetts Supreme Court Grants Oral Argument In Case Seeking to Stay Massachusetts Same-Sex Marriage Decision
Thu, Feb 10, 2005
ANN ARBOR, MI — The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in an unexpected move, announced that it will hear oral argument in a case brought by the Thomas More Law Center and others, seeking to stay the court’s decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which legalized same-sex marriage. As a result of that decision, same-sex couples have been permitted to marry in Massachusetts as of May 17, 2004. This case, which is the last legal action surviving that is capable of stopping this decision, was filed on behalf of C. Joseph Doyle, the executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts.
According to Robert Muise, trial counsel handling the case for the Law Center, “We are extremely pleased that the Massachusetts Supreme Court has decided to hear oral argument on this historic case. This last election has shown that the people of this county do not want so-called same-sex marriage and have overwhelmingly supported constitutional amendments to ban it. The citizens of Massachusetts have a constitutional right to be heard on this issue, and now they will have that opportunity.”
In legalizing same-sex marriage, the Massachusetts Court candidly claimed that its decision “marks a change in the history of our marriage law.” The Court acknowledged that this change affected the historic, civil, and legal understanding in Massachusetts and elsewhere that marriage constitutes the union of one man and one woman. On April 20, 2004, the Law Center petitioned a single justice of the court on behalf of Doyle to put the Goodridge decision on hold, pending the constitutional process currently underway to amend the state’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage.
The petition and an ensuing request for an expedited appeal were denied, but the full Court ultimately decided that Doyle’s appeal could “proceed in the ordinary course,” keeping the case alive. As a result, Doyle filed an appeal and the Massachusetts Supreme Court just announced that it has agreed to hear it.
The appeal asks the Court to stay its decision so that the process currently underway to amend the state’s constitution by defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman can proceed unhindered. Noting that the Massachusetts Constitution “ensures the people that judges will not use the law to impose their opinion about how society should be ordered regardless of the democratic will,” the Law Center argued in its brief that “what happens with the legal institution of marriage should ultimately depend on the democratic processes outlined in the Commonwealth’s Constitution rather than by judicial fiat.”
Joining the Law Center in arguing this case before the state’s highest court will be attorney Chester Darling of the Citizens for the Preservation of Constitutional Rights.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel for the Law Center, commented, “The adverse effects of the Goodridge decision are not only being felt in Massachusetts, but throughout the country as well. The fact that the Massachusetts Supreme Court has decided to take up this issue again is remarkable. Clearly, the tide is changing in America—moral values do matter.”