FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 20, 2001

Major Step Toward Resolving Suit Seeking Civil Marriage

GLAD Takes Major Step Toward Resolving Suit Seeking Civil Marriage for Lesbian and Gay Couples

New England’s Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) today took its next major step in the pending legal suit seeking civil marriage for gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts by serving a motion for summary judgment with the Attorney General’s Office. The suit was filed in April, 2001 in Suffolk Superior Court on behalf of seven couples from five counties across the Commonwealth.

Asserting that there are no facts in dispute, GLAD seeks to raise the clear issue of equality under law regarding access to state-created civil marriage.  The Attorney General answered the suit in May, and GLAD has now moved to the more fundamental questions of law surrounding the provisions of the Massachusetts Constitution and the legitimacy of the State’s reasons for prohibiting civil marriage for qualified lesbian and gay couples.  It is anticipated that once the Attorney General opposes GLAD’s motion for a summary judgment, the case could be heard in state Superior Court by early next year.

The 69-page legal brief specifically argues that any interpretation of the marriage laws as prohibiting civil marriage between same-sex couples is unconstitutional and, furthermore, if the state chooses to discriminate and deny gay and lesbian couples the right to marry, that position violates basic guarantees of equal treatment under the law.  This is the first document in the case which lays out the plaintiff couples’ position in seeking civil marriage for same-sex couples.

      “The seven couples who filed suit are simply asking that their government treat them equally and fairly,” said Mary Bonauto, Civil Rights Director for GLAD and an attorney on the case.  “The heart of this case is the love and commitment these couples share for each other and for their children. The legal issue is that same-sex couples and their children do not have access to the protections provided through marriage which give them strength and security in times of illness, hardship and crisis or recognize them as an emotional and economic unit.  It’s time for our Commonwealth to live up to the equality guarantees of our state Constitution, and not single out gay and lesbian couples by denying them alone access to civil marriage.”

Among the arguments laid out in GLAD’s motion on behalf of the seven couples are the following:

·    That denying civil marriage to gay and lesbian couples violates the plaintiffs’ rights to equality under the Massachusetts Constitution.

·    That access to civil marriage is a fundamental right under the state constitution, and that the state has no justification for excluding same-sex couples alone from access to marriage.

·    That the legislatively- and judicially-accorded rights and obligations of married couples demonstrate the importance of marriage to the individuals involved, the wider community and the Commonwealth as a whole, and that these couples’ exclusion from marriage immeasurably harms them and their children.

·    That there is simply no legitimate secular justification for excluding qualified same-sex couples from the institution of state-created civil marriage.

The plaintiff couples in the case are: Hillary and Julie Goodridge of Boston who are the parents of a five-year-old daughter; Michael Horgan and Ed Balmelli of Boston, who are both from large families in Central Massachusetts; Maureen Brodoff and Ellen Wade of Newton who have a 12-year-old daughter; Gloria Bailey and Linda Davies of Orleans who have been a couple for 30 years; Richard Linnell and Gary Chalmers of Northbridge who are the parents of an eight-year-old daughter; Heidi Norton and Gina Smith of Northampton who have two young sons; and Robert Compton and David Wilson of Boston, who are each parents of grown children.  David is also the grandfather of four grandchildren.

GLAD is New England’s legal rights organization working through the courts and public education to achieve equality and justice under law for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and people with HIV/AIDS.

Visit GLAD’s home page for biographies of the plaintiff couples and other materials about the case.  Copies of the summary judgment filings are also available on request.

Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, Suffolk Super. Ct. No. 01-1647-A