Same-sex marriage is making great strides in Wisconsin. District Judge Barbara Crabb lifted the ban on marriage equality in June, but chose to stay the decision pending the appeal by Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen. The appeal was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the presiding judges were Richard Posner, Ann Claire Williams and David Hamilton. In their decision, which also applied to nearby Indiana, Posner vigorously defended the decision claiming, “It is apparent that groundless rejection of same-sex marriage by government must be a denial of equal protection of the laws.”
Van Hollen has already appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, though he probably will not be in office to make his case. Last October, Van Hollen announced he would not seek re-election for a third term. District Attorney for the conservative Jefferson County Susan Happ won the nomination for the Democrats. The Waukesha County District Attorney Brad Schimel is running on behalf of the Republican Party. No surprise here, the conservative Schimel has stated that he would continue with the appeal to the Supreme Court whereas Happ has stated she would not. According to the most recent Marquette poll, Happ is in the lead, projected to win about 43 percent of likely voter support to Schimel’s 32 percent. However, more than 70 percent of those polled admitted they did not know enough about either candidate, and the results of this election could simply follow the outcome of the tight gubernatorial election between Gov. Scott Walker and challenger Mary Burke.
Appeals court finds Wisconsin, Indiana same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional
Burke has stated that she, like Happ, does not want Van Hollen’s appeal to reach the Supreme Court, saying it would simply be wasting taxpayer money. Walker, on the other hand, did not address Van Hollen’s decision to appeal directly, saying he had an obligation to uphold the constitution as it is. Though, he should understand that as the constitution now stands, same-sex marriage is legal. The only reason couples cannot continue to marry in Wisconsin is because the decision is stayed, pending the appeal to the Supreme Court; if Walker chose to redact that appeal, Wisconsin would be in the clear. Walker cited the 2006 statewide referendum where 59 percent of Wisconsin still supported the ban. Perhaps Walker should examine the most recent Marquette poll, which shows 55 percent now support lifting the ban.
Regardless of what Wisconsin decides to do with the appeal to the Supreme Court, it seems more and more likely that the highest court in the land will have to address same-sex marriage. The Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, making the federal interpretation of marriage applicable to same-sex couples as well. The 9th Circuit Court, the same court that struck down Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage in California in 2012, is currently hearing cases from Nevada, Idaho and Hawaii on the same issue. Oklahoma, Utah and Virginia have also appealed to the Supreme Court. Currently 14 states have had their restrictions struck down, and are simply awaiting appeals. It is worth noting that Louisiana is the lone state that has upheld a ban on same-sex marriage when it was brought before court. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg predicted that the Court would not avoid the issue.
Joey Reuteman/The Badger Herald
The first openly gay United States senator was elected in 2012. She was the first female in her state to be elected to the Senate. She is also from Wisconsin. Democrat Tammy Baldwin left her seat as a representative for Wisconsin’s second congressional district to run for the Senate. Another Democrat, Mark Pocan, succeeded her. He is also openly gay. The times, well they are a-changing, folks. Wisconsin has such a rich history of progressive ideas, let’s not be remembered as a state that so strongly fights what will be a regular institution in the U.S. in a few decades – same-sex marriage.
We can debate healthcare or foreign policy objectives. To say a gay couple cannot get married is blasphemous. Religious reasons, traditionalist approaches, the “sanctity of marriage” are all meaningless arguments. Same-sex marriage does not endanger children, it does not threaten tradition (Crabb’s initial ruling even mentioned how polygamy could be considered “traditional”), and denying this right is blatant discrimination. It is shocking to me that the gay marriage question is still up for debate. Let’s end it and move on to more pressing issues.
Omer Arain ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in political science and economics.
