Calif. Supreme Court voids San Francisco gay marriages
Quote:SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday voided the nearly 4,000 same-sex marriages sanctioned in San Francisco this year and ruled unanimously that the mayor overstepped his authority by issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. . . .
The court did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage, ruling instead on the narrow issue of whether local officials could bypass state judicial and legislative branches.
Chief Justice Ronald George noted that Thursday's ruling doesn't address "the substantive legal rights of same sex couples. In actuality, the legal issue before us implicates the interest of all individuals in ensuring that public officials execute their official duties in a manner that respects the limits of the authorities granted to them as officeholders."
. . . Newsom argued to the justices in May that the ability of same-sex couples to marry was a "fundamental right" that compelled him to act. Newsom authorized the marriages by citing the California Constitution's ban against discrimination, and claimed he was duty-bound to follow this higher authority rather than state laws banning gay marriage.
See also:
San Francisco mayor defies 'gay'-marriage ban
Quote:Newsom, 36, who took office Jan. 8, [2004], insists he merely is fulfilling his duty.
"A little more than a month ago, I took the oath of office here at City Hall and swore to uphold California's Constitution, which clearly outlaws all forms of discrimination,'' Newsom said, according to the San Francisco paper. "Denying basic rights to members of our community will not be tolerated.''
If an elected official's "oath of office" requires him to swear to "uphold the Constitution," then how can an official act that the official believes upholds the Constitution be declared an
ultra vires act? After all, the Constitution is superior to and trumps any and all laws that are repugnant to the Constitution. Does the California Supreme Court now require elected officials to enforce unconstitutional laws in defiance of their oath of office? What do you say?