URLs:

http://www.ACLUSC.org/MarriageAmendment/

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/10/post_54.html


November 1, 2006

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

COLUMBIA, SC – The American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina applauds the unanimous decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court, on Wednesday, October 25, 2006, in the matter of Lewis and Winslow et al. v. Harris, holding that it is unconstitutional for the state to maintain “an unequal legal scheme of benefits and privileges that disadvantages same-sex couples.”

The New Jersey decision should give pause to citizens of South Carolina as they are poised to consider voting discrimination into our State Constitution. If ratified, Amendment 1 would open our state up to costly lawsuits to challenge such an unconstitutional measure.

“The ACLU is not in the business of telling people how to vote. Our client is the Constitution. In that regard, we cheer the decision by the New Jersey Court to uphold the Constitution’s equal protection mandate. On the other hand, we (ACLU of SC) shall initiate all necessary preparations to defend the Constitution against the violation of that mandate should S.C.’s Amendment 1 pass on November 7th,” Kevin Gray, president of ACLU of SC, said today.

According to Mr. Gray, “The ACLU of South Carolina opposes Amendment 1 on many fronts.”

The ACLU of SC holds that using the term “marriage” to describe a function of government – the establishment of the legal status of a civil union – confuses the matter. The civil-liberties organization supports the right of churches or religious organizations to establish their own rules regarding their own memberships, and asserts that their right to make such rules – including rules governing the joining of members in religious union or marriage – rests upon constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of association and of religion.

Where the civil-liberties group differs with those religious groups and/or church organizations which support Amendment 1 is that it believes that religious membership rules cannot lawfully be imposed on governmental functions such as offering or denying persons the legal status of civil union or civil marriage. “To do so,” said Mr. Gray, “blurs the line between church and state.”

Like the New Jersey and Massachusetts courts, ACLU of SC believes that denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts serves no legitimate governmental purpose and meets no legitimate public need. Under the equal protection guarantee of the Constitution, same-sex couples must be accorded, on equal terms, the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes. “The name to be given to a uniform statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to all couples, whether ‘civil marriage’ or ‘civil union’ or some other term,” said Mr. Gray, “is a matter best left to the democratic process.”

“There are some in the ‘marriage’ debate who use catchphrases or political wedge terms in referring to the efforts to discriminate in favor of heterosexual marriage,” said Mr. Gray, “terms such as ‘protecting moral values’ or ‘mobilizing values voters.’ The American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina supports the values advanced by the Founding Fathers, who placed a greater value on protecting the rights of individuals than on extending privileges to factions.”

Mr. Gray stated that the ACLU of SC believes that next Tuesday’s ballot provision, Amendment 1, conflicts with the following provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights:

U.S. Constitution, Article 4, Section 2, Clause 1:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1:

… No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

42 U.S.C. §1981: Equal Rights under the Law:

(a) Statement of equal rights – All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.

(b) “Make and enforce contracts” defined – For purposes of this section, the term “make and enforce contracts” includes the making, performance, modification, and termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship.

(c) Protection against impairment – The rights protected by this section are protected against impairment by non-governmental discrimination and impairment under color of State law..

Mr. Gray went on to cite the holding of the New Jersey Court:

“Other than sustaining the traditional definition of marriage, there is no legitimate public need for depriving committed same-sex couples of the host of benefits and privileges that are afforded to married heterosexual couples. There is, on the one hand, no rational basis for giving gays and lesbians full civil rights as individuals while, on the other hand, giving them an incomplete set of rights when they enter into committed same-sex relationships. The issue is not about the transformation of the traditional definition of marriage, but about the unequal dispensation of benefits and privileges to one of two similarly situated classes of people.

“Equality of treatment is a dominant theme of our laws and a central guarantee of our Constitution. The Constitution protects not only the rights of the majority but also the rights of the disfavored and the disadvantaged. As the New Jersey opinion stated, they too are promised a fair opportunity for pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.”

“The American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina supports the equal rights of same-sex couples in South Carolina and denounces Amendment 1, which, if enacted and enforced, would ban same-sex civil unions,” said Gray. “We believe that constitutional guarantees of individual rights should not be put up for popular vote. If Amendment 1 is ratified, we shall rigorously defend the individual’s right to choose and we shall legally challenge South Carolina’s efforts to establish yet another class of second-class citizens.”


FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Primary contact: Kevin Gray
Telephone: (803) 799-5151

Charleston: Barbara Joslin
Telephone: (843) 853-3199

Columbia: Katherine Macedon
Telephone: (803) 798-2278

Greenville: Neil Caesar
Telephone: (864) 676-9075

Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it