Home » Campus » Ohio plans to appeal ruling on same-sex marriage

Ohio plans to appeal ruling on same-sex marriage

Though a federal judge ruled Ohio must recognize same-sex marriages from other states, the state plans to fight back by appealing the decision, something one recently married same-sex Columbus couple said was no surprise to them.

U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Black ruled Monday that not recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states is unconstitutional, however, Ohio doesn’t have to allow same-sex marriages to take place in state.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, a Republican, plans to appeal the ruling on the basis that the state has a sovereign right to ban same-sex marriage. Voters had approved that ban with about 62 percent of votes cast in 2004.

Rob Nichols, spokesman for Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a Republican, told the Associated Press Kasich supports the plan to appeal.

“The governor believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, he supports Ohio’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, and we’re glad the attorney general is appealing the ruling,” Nichols said in a statement.

Ed FitzGerald, the leading Democratic nominee for Ohio governor this year, however, said he agreed with Black’s ruling.

“Today’s statement by Federal Judge Timothy Black that his ruling will require that Ohio must legally recognize the marriages of gay couples who wed in other states is an important first step to full marriage equality,” he said in a released statement. “As governor, I will support marriage equality and work to move Ohio forward for all its residents. Who you love and commit yourself to should not be prohibited by governments.”

Ohio Republican Sen. Rob Portman changed his stance on gay marriage, becoming the first GOP senator to openly support it last year, and a poll for The Columbus Dispatch last year showed that 54 percent of Ohioans would support an amendment that would repeal the state’s ban on gay marriage.

While advocates with FreedomOhio have talked about getting an amendment on the November ballot, the group, which aims to bring marriage equality to the Buckeye State, plans to hold its petition “in a state of readiness for filing” while gathering signatures on a new petition with revised language, according to its website.

Jennifer Lape, an OSU Ph.D. student in health and physical activity behavior, legally married her partner Leah Kaiser this past weekend in Chicago.

The decision from Black and Ohio’s plan to appeal is no surprise, Lape said.

“We knew that a stay would likely be placed on the decision and that further, there would be an appeal,” Lape said. “Because of this, I took the ruling by Judge Black to be more of a symbolic gesture indicative of what is to come in the future.”

Lape said getting legally married wasn’t just for the two of them.

“Leah and I took this as an opportunity to get out there for all of the couples for whom legal marriage in Ohio is absolutely necessary to protect themselves and their families,” Lape said.

Kaiser said the decision is an important one for OSU students to see.

“For the OSU population, it’s great for them to be able to see what their future may offer them,” Kaiser said. “Everyone can have the same things in life.”

3 comments

  1. Same sex or same gender “marriage” is merely one of numerous acts of lawlessness foisted upon the American people by unconstitutional actions of activist rogue judges and self-serving politicians. Marriage, for all of recorded human history, has been both a sacred and a “legal” union. God makes clear His standard in the “marriage” of Adam and Eve, and throughout all of nature. God also leaves no room for doubt as to His condemnation for all sexual intimacy outside of marriage, and specifically for “same-sex” intimacy. Common sense is all that is required to know that “marriage” had a legal, constitutional meaning at the founding of our constitutional republic. Any change in that meaning requires not judicial activism nor legislative activism, but rather a constitutional amendment. “Marriage,” specifically its meaning, may not be a “State’s” issue beyond age of maturity or consent, divorce, child custody, and inheritance issues. Federal precedent was irrefutable when every existing State required the Utah territory to abandon polygamy in order to join the “perpetual union styled as the United States.” “Civil unions,” may be the only sane and constitutional accommodation, but even those present unique problems. How does one State administer the end of a civil union which it has never allowed? Must partners to such “unions” return to the State of origin to end their union?

    Just as our republic was torn asunder over slavery, a century later it was politically torn asunder when judges tried to play God and Legislator in declaring not a married couple’s “right to choose,” but a woman’s right to murder unborn children. Now our perpetual union is again being torn asunder by unconstitutional judges and legislators over the settled legal definition of “marriage.”

    Our constitution, with its only legal amending process, may be slow but it guarantees that we change our “supreme” law as one nation. Even with that we passed and repealed Prohibition, but we did both together. It is never to late to return to obeying our constitution as the way back to uniting our people. People, both people of faith and secular people, must agree that we are a “nation of laws rather than of men.” Lawlessness is running amok in our republic. Unless that is reversed our republic will fall and our liberty will end.

  2. Who is this GOD you speak of and why is he dictating laws.

  3. To anon: I gave you BOTH a faith-based AND Legal explanation. Enough Said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.