Clerks Get Go Ahead for Gay Marriages

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to block the nation’s first state-sanctioned gay marriages from taking place in Massachusetts starting next week.

The justices declined without comment to intervene and block clerks from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. The state’s highest court had ruled in November that the state Constitution allowed gay couples to marry and declared that the process would begin Monday.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, in an emergency appeal filed Friday by gay marriage opponents, does not address the merits of the claim that the state Supreme Judicial Court overstepped its bounds with the landmark decision.

A stay had been sought by a coalition of state lawmakers and conservative activists. The stay request had been filed with Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter, a Massachusetts native who handles appeals from the region. He referred the matter to the full nine-member court.

Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which sought the stay, said he was disappointed by the ruling. He said he was still looking forward to arguing the case next month before the federal appeals court, and then this fall before the Supreme Court.

Advocates for same-sex couples were relieved that the Supreme Court did not intervene.

“Couples who aren’t tied in to the recent legal and legislative actions have been nervous wrecks about whether they could marry starting Monday,” said Arline Isaacson, co-chairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. “Now they can all breathe a sigh of relief.”

A federal judge ruled against a coalition of state lawmakers and conservative activists, including groups in Boston, Michigan, Florida and Mississippi, on Thursday. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston upheld that decision Friday, setting up the Supreme Court appeal. The appeals court agreed to hear arguments on the request to bar same-sex unions in June, after several weeks of legal gay marriages.

“This is a setback. This is certainly not the end of the road,” Staver said, adding that the Supreme Court rarely issues emergency injunctions. “We’re going to continue to the next step, and after that, we look forward to arguing the case before the Supreme Court, whether we win or lose -- that’s where the case will ultimately end.”