Federal Lawsuit Challenges Gay-Marriage Ban
TULSA, Okla. -- Four women have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a constitutional amendment passed by voters this week that bans same-sex marriage.
The women filed a civil rights lawsuit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Tulsa that seeks to do away with the state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
The ban also prohibits giving the benefits of marriage to unmarried couples in Oklahoma. Same-sex marriages in Oklahoma are not recognized.
Broken Arrow residents Mary Bishop and Sharon Baldwin and Tulsans Susan G. Barton and Gay E. Phillips filed the lawsuit.
Kay Bridger-Riley, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said she was proud to represent what she called “their really important lawsuit.”
In addition to seeking to overturn the state constitutional amendment, the case challenges the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states to ignore gay weddings performed in other states. [...]
Attorney General Drew Edmondson, Gov. Brad Henry, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and President George W. Bush are all listed as defendants in the lawsuit. (source)
3 Comments
Leave a comment
My partner and I live in Stillwater, about 60 miles west of Tulsa. She's a native-born Oklahoman and I'm from southern California (See? Love can make people do the strangest things, like move from a liberal climate to its polar opposite!). In 2001 we were joined in a Holy Union service at College Hill Prebyterian Church, in Tulsa. This is a "More Light" church, a church which welcomes all persons, including gays and lesbians, into the life, membership and leadership of its congregation on an equal basis.
I'm frankly suprised that this lawsuit is happening here in OK, which is, after all, in the buckle of the Bible Belt. Thanks for sharing this story. It's a light in an otherwise bleak time here.
When is someone going to challenge the hateful law in Virginia? It should be easy to topple.
Is this the first lawsuit to directly challenge the 1996 DOMA? It is clear that the 96 DOMA violates the Full Faith and Credit clause, but I was not sure if a lawsuit had ever challenged it before.