Monday, August 07, 2006

Pouting Time In Hartford

Dear me, the Connecticut Supreme Court told ultra-conservative busybodies to buzz off. The justices sensibly ruled today that the Family Institute of Connecticut had no standing to enter the case on the constitutionality of the marriage laws there.

Seven same-sex couples are suing for the right to marry in this civil-union state. According to the Hartford Courant's first article on this, Justice Flemming L. Norcott Jr. (great judge name, eh?) wrote:
We conclude that the institute has not identified any interest of direct and immediate character that will cause it to gain or loose anything as a result of the judgment in this case. Indeed, the institute has not alleged, much less demonstrated, that a judgment in this case will affect any specific right or interest possessed by its members.
We must say that in this time when judges from Boston to Albany to Olympia are trembling before conservative litigants, this is refreshing and sensible. However, the Connecticut court will let the losers file an amicus brief.

The FIC nutmeggers argued in February along the lines of the findings of both the subsequent New York State and Washington State high courts. Their attorney, Vincent J. McCarthy, argued before the high court Feb. 9th that central to the case was the issue of children. He said he was prepared to show by expert testimony that children in same-sex-parent families "are disadvantaged at every level of growth and maturation.''

On the other side was GLAD, which represents the couples denied marriage licenses two years ago. “Every credible child expert and every parent knows one thing: it’s the quality of the parent-child relationship that matters in raising happy, healthy kid. To conclude that sexual orientation is a key factor is just not rational," said GLAD's Civil Rights Project Director Mary Bonauto.


Tags: , , ,

1 comment:

Laurel said...

They're not boohooing too hard. Based on NY and WA, they've found other ways to influence the court.

UpTweet