Skip to main contentMultnomah County Circuit Court Judge Frank Bearden's decision on gay marriage last week was so complicated that each side claimed victory in his ruling, at the same time fretting about the treacherous roadmap he'd handed them.
Bearden's decision did three things: (1) It ordered Multnomah County to stop issuing marriage licenses to gay couples; (2) it forced the state to recognize existing same-sex marriage licenses; and (3) it told the state Legislature to find a way to offer gay couples the 500-plus tangible benefits of marriage.
As the legal fight for same-sex marriage climbs the ladder to the Oregon Supreme Court, gay-rights advocates and their opponents have a lot of strategizing to do. Both sides know that certain events could have disastrous effects on their chances of victory. So what's the worst that can happen?
Yes on Gay Marriage
Gay-marriage advocates desperately want to keep this issue off the ballot and in the courts. While polls show that voters aren't ready to approve gay marriage, every legal opinion issued by government lawyers in Oregon has come to the same conclusion: Banning gay marriage is unconstitutional in this state.
Team Yes' chances in court are excellent, which is why the Defense of Marriage Coalition--its arch-enemy--is working like hell to put a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on the ballot. Just getting a ban on the ballot would be bad news for the Yes side, slowing the legal process while judges wait to see how the public votes on the amendment (which would trump any judicial ruling). Plus, gay advocates would have to divert considerable resources to defeat the measure.
So will it make the ballot? A measure can get there through two routes: signature gathering or legislative referral. Team Yes and its allies are doing everything in their power to prevent both, by stalling the ballot title in court to take away time needed to collect signatures before the July 2 deadline and by trying to keep the Legislature from its scheduled June special session.
No on Gay Marriage
A month ago, Tim Nashif, head of the Defense of Marriage clan, was urging the state Legislature to take up gay marriage immediately. Team No wanted lawmakers to refer a ban on gay marriage to voters.
Now, Nashif's not so sure he wants the Legislature to meet. Bearden's order wouldn't prevent lawmakers from referring the constitutional amendment to the November ballot, but it would, in effect, require them to approve civil unions--something the Naysayers oppose. Worse yet, Bearden gave lawmakers a deadline: They've got 90 days from the start of the next session to provide gay couples equal benefits; if they don't, Multnomah County must be allowed to resume the gay wedding parade. Hence, the No side would prefer to put the amendment on the ballot without getting the Legislature involved.
Team No is also hoping the appeal of Bearden's ruling will skip the gay-friendly Court of Appeals and go directly to the state Supreme Court, which hasn't heard a substantial case involving equal civil rights for 20 years. This is highly unlikely, as cases almost never skipa court.
YES ON GAY MARRIAGE
Petitions qualify for ballot, constitutional amendment passes.
Legislature refers to ballot, constitutional amendment passes.
NO ON GAY MARRIAGEC. Goes to the Legislature, civil unions are approved. Or, lawmakers deadlock and MultCo resumes hitching queers.D. Goes to court, civil unions or marriage approved.
WWeek 2015