Gay Marriages on Hold While Ruling Is Appealed

Gay couples who want to get married in Hawaii will have to wait at least several more months, until the state Supreme Court reviews a landmark case, under a ruling Wednesday by Circuit Judge Kevin S.C. Chang.

Chang, author of Tuesday’s opinion legalizing same-sex marriage, agreed to suspend his order while the state attorney general’s office appeals the case--even though both sides agreed it was unlikely the state would prevail.

“I will admit to the court the likelihood of success is not tremendous in this case,” said Rick J. Eichor, deputy attorney general, at a hearing Wednesday.

The judge agreed to grant a stay of the order even as gay men and lesbians in Hawaii and on the mainland were celebrating his decision as a signal of equality.

“It’s blatant discrimination to deny anyone the right to be happy in this country,” said Michelle Moore, 27, of Toluca Lake--one of many gays around the country who have closely followed the case. Marriage, she said, “gives you peace of mind and some security for the future.”

For now, though, it will remain out of reach for gays.

Allowing same-sex marriages only to have the high court later reverse them “would be unfair and prejudicial to both sides,” Chang said Wednesday. “Given the long history and importance of the issues in this case, I believe the receipt of a final decision from the Hawaii Supreme Court is in order.”

The state has 30 days to file a notice of appeal after Chang’s judgment is filed. Opening briefs and reply briefs would follow over the next few months. The state Supreme Court could rule at that point, or choose to hold oral arguments, which could delay the case for a year or more. Plaintiffs’ attorney Daniel R. Foley said he would ask for an expedited appeal.

The state faces an uphill battle in trying to reverse the lower court ruling. “He didn’t just disagree with us in that opinion, he buried us,” Eichor said of Chang’s decision.

Chang said in his ruling Tuesday that the state had failed to prove that allowing gay couples to marry would harm children, and noted that the state’s own witnesses testified that gay couples can make fine parents. He also chided the state’s attorneys for introducing little or no evidence on the benefits of traditional marriage to society or on the implications of non-recognition of Hawaii’s marriages by other states.

A former prosecutor and corporate lawyer, Chang is known as a middle-of-the-road justice. He had to operate, however, within the narrow confines of a 1993 state Supreme Court ruling in the case and the evidence presented at trial. The high court ruled that denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples discriminates improperly on the basis of gender, unless the state could show a compelling interest in doing so.

Three of the five members now sitting on the Supreme Court concurred in that earlier ruling. In this appeal, the high court will review evidence presented in Chang’s courtroom, but no new evidence can be offered by the state. High courts seldom second-guess lower courts on factual findings, Foley noted.

State House Judiciary Chairman Terrance Tom vowed to renew his push for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in the next legislative session, which starts in January. The amendment passed the House last year, but stalled in the Senate. In this fall’s elections, opponents of same-sex marriage helped unseat several incumbent legislators who had voted against the amendment. The Senate, however, also lost two powerful incumbent senators who had strongly opposed same-sex marriage.

Meanwhile, the possibility has never been greater that homosexuals may be able to engage in that most heterosexual of institutions, one that for all its tarnishing continues to hold a revered place in society.

Gay men and women have come to this point not out of an organized effort from the gay community, for there has been dissent and argument over whether marriage is a goal worth pursuing at all, much less at this point in the gay rights movement.

Rather, the drive for gay marriage rights has been propelled by the dreams of individual couples who yearn for the day when they can have a wedding snapshot on the mantle and a wedding certificate in the safe deposit box.

In Los Angeles Wednesday, even the gay men and women who do not share that dream were cheered by the Hawaii decision. And for those who want to walk down the aisle someday, the ruling brightened their hopes.

“We’ve been wanting to do that for a long time,” said Patricia Martinez, 25, of Downey--the “we” being she and partner Anna Harris. Why? “It feels more real,” she explained. “It’s a psychological thing, knowing that you are married to someone you care about.”

“Puppy,” a 22-year-old lesbian with neither a partner nor a home, is no less eager. “To me it’s like the ultimate way you can show your love--by marrying someone and promising them you’ll be there forever.”

To Randall Nicholson, 30, of Hollywood, marriage “is respectability and a symbol of stability. . . . The fact that it’s two men or two women is irrelevant.”

Jon Tadros has a much different view. He considers marriage an anachronism, one that he has no interest in. “It’s meaningless to me and hypocritical. It . . . was never a good idea,” said the 31-year-old Venice man.

But that doesn’t mean he’s not excited by the prospect of same-sex marriage.

“I think it’s hugely important because of the value of the institution of marriage in America,” Tadros said. “As gays and lesbians we should have the right to participate in that institution if we choose.”

Marriage’s value is not just emotional, it also carries an array of tangible benefits, from tax write-offs to hospital visitation, inheritance and child custody rights.

“The ceremonial part of it is of less interest to me than the benefits and the legal ramifications,” said Don Fitch, 31, who would like his partner of seven years, Dennis Sparks, 33, to be eligible for spousal benefits.

While the Malibu couple said matrimony would not affect their emotional commitment--”For us it’s not going to change anything,” Sparks said--they thought it would benefit the gay community as a whole.

To have the government officially recognize gay unions, Sparks said, would confer a “validation” that he never experienced as a teenager. “I think that validation is very important for self-esteem.”

Essoyan, a Times special correspondent, reported from Hawaii and staff writer Boxall from Los Angeles.