pro-equality ruling in the consolidated litigation surrounding
same-sex couples’ access to civil marriage in the state.
Attorneys on behalf of the couples argued that California violates
the equal protection clause of its own constitution by denying
same-sex partners the right to marry. The Court ruled [in favor
of] that argument, finding that same-sex couples in California
should be given access to full civil marriage. According to the
U.S. Census, California has the highest number of same-sex couples
in the nation. This decision both affirms the dignity of the many
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)-headed families in
California and will have tremendous impact on those families and
the ongoing national marriage equality debate.
Statement of Jennifer Chrisler, Executive Director, Family Equality
Council:
“Every day thousands of LGBT-headed California
families wake up, ready their children for school, participate in
their communities, and worry about bedtime and bath time. Until
today these moms, dads, sons and daughters cared for and supported
each other without the full protection of California law. With
the court’s decision LGBT-headed families in California will
finally have access to the same benefits and protections other
married California families have,” said Jennifer Chrisler,
executive director of Family Equality Council. “In terms of
guaranteed protections, there is no other legal institution as
powerful as marriage in this country. With this historic and
fair-minded ruling, the California Supreme Court has taken a
tremendous step in moving equality forward for California
families. Though we recognize that it does not take a marriage to
make a family, we understand that thousands of same-sex couples and
their families in California and beyond desire to marry and are in
critical need of the legal protections that marriage affords. The
Family Equality Council is overjoyed by this ruling that
appropriately recognizes LGBT-headed families who have too long
struggled to support, protect and provide for one another despite
the lack of legal family recognition.”