Jehovah's Witnesses Aided Prop 8 Reversal Ruling

California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex couples from marriage, was deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge, as Mike Jones wrote here earlier. While the decision has been stayed pending appeal, it will likely have implications not only for same-sex couples in California, but also for marriage-equality ballot measures in other states. A case protecting the rights of a group opposed to marriage equality, however, may have an unexpected positive influence here.

In his ruling, Judge Vaughn Walker wrote, "That the majority of California voters supported Proposition 8 is irrelevant, as 'fundamental rights may not be submitted to [a] vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.'" Sam Stein over at HuffPo calls this, "Perhaps the most important political finding" that Walker made.

He's right. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me this hits directly at the right-wing argument that marriage equality should be a matter for voters. They are continuing to push that stance even now in Iowa, one of five states (plus the District of Columbia) that allows same-sex couples to marry.

The background of Walker's citation is worth a note, however. He was referencing West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, a 1943 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment meant that students could not be forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school. It had been brought by two parents who were Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion forbids them from bowing down to or serving any images such as the flag.

In its ruling, reversing a previous decision (Minersville School District v. Gobitis), the Supreme Court wrote:

The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.

The Jehovah's Witnesses, interestingly, do not believe same-sex couples should marry and feel that "homosexual practices" are against God's will. Now a decision that protected their rights is also protecting the rights of those who believe just the opposite.

That, my friends, is why we have a Constitution. And the fact that the Supreme Court in Barnette reversed an earlier decision tells me that equality will always win in the end.

Photo credit: Bev Sykes