Same-sex marriage: What now?

Glen Lavy questions the power of courts to create personal rights by going around the democratic process. Jon W. Davidson warns of the dangers of allowing the majority to decide others’ rights.

Jon W. Davidson says the state has a compelling legal interest in regulating marriage and fully including same-sex couples. Glen Lavy agrees that marriage ought to be regulated, but argues that the state has ample reasons not to include homosexuals.

Glen Lavy says that the California Supreme Court’s legal reasoning could be applied to polygamous and incestuous marriages. Jon W. Davidson replies that the slippery-slope argument is a dodge to avoid the civil-rights issues behind same-sex marriage.

Jon W. Davidson says the California court’s decision will influence judicial and legislative proceedings across the country but probably won’t affect the presidential election. Glen Lavy predicts that the court’s ruling will spark a multi-state backlash similar to the one in 2004.

Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund questions the state Supreme Court’s authority to alter marriage laws. Lambda Legal’s Jon W. Davidson predicts that more Californians will accept same-sex marriage before the November vote.