---

Activist Massachusetts Judge Declares NY Same-Sex Marriages Valid Prior to 2006 Ban

Judge has record of supporting homosexual activism in his rulings

By Gudrun Schultz

BOSTON, Massachusetts, May 17, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Massachusetts judge ruled that homosexual couples from New York who were “married” in Massachusetts before New York definitively banned same-sex marriages are validly married, in a decision handed down May 10.

Suffolk Superior Court Judge Thomas Connolly, who has a record of supporting homosexual activism in his rulings, declared that homosexual couples from New York were validly married if their marriages took place before the New York Court of Appeals ruled that New York law only recognizes marriages between a man and a woman, on July 6, 2006.

When homosexual marriages were legalized by Massachusetts in 2004, former Gov. Mitt Romney barred out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their home states prohibited same-sex marriages, citing a 1913 law banning out-of-state marriages where the union would not be permitted in a couples’ home state.

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders challenged that law in 2004, seeking Massachusetts marriage licenses for same-sex couples from six New England states.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld Romney’s directive, saying the 1913 statute could be used to ban same-sex couples from  marrying in Massachusetts when their home states carried an “express prohibition” against homosexual marriages. The court did not include New York and Rhode Island in the decision, saying it was unclear if those state constitutions banned same-sex marriages.

Judge Connelly ruled in September 2006 that Rhode Island couples could be married in Massachusetts, on the grounds that Rhode Island does not have a constitutional amendment explicitly banning homosexual marriages.

Connelly rejected arguments by the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office pointing to the use of gender-specific terms in Rhode Island law, referring to “bride” and “groom” as evidence of an intention to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Michael Long, the leader of New York’s Conservative Party, told the Boston Herald it is unlikely Thursday’s ruling will hold up in New York.

“It’s wishful thinking by some homosexual couples that the interpretation of a particular judge will change their status,” Long said. “The law in the state of New York is very clear--marriage is between a man and a women.”

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:

Activist Mass. Judge Grants Marriage Licenses to Same-Sex Rhode Island Couples
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/oct/06100303.html

New York's Highest Court Rules 4-2 In Favor Of Traditional Marriage
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jul/06070601.html

 Back to Top   |   Send Letter to Editor

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.