This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21932682

The article has changed 13 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Hollingsworth v Perry: Supreme Court weighs gay marriage Hollingsworth v Perry: Supreme Court weighs gay marriage
(about 1 hour later)
The justices of the US Supreme Court have questioned the meaning of marriage and the government's role in defining it, as they weigh whether the state of California can ban same-sex nuptials. The justices of the US Supreme Court have questioned the meaning of marriage and the government's role in defining it, as they weigh whether the state of California may ban same-sex nuptials.
The court could uphold the 2008 ban, narrowly overturn it, or invalidate all state same-sex marriage bans in the US. Following Tuesday's arguments, the court could uphold the 2008 ban, narrowly overturn it, or invalidate all state same-sex marriage bans in the US.
But analysts said after Tuesday's arguments the court could also find it has no standing to hear a challenge. The ban's defenders argued the issue should be decided by individual states.
Recent opinion polls have shown a rise in support for same-sex marriage. Recent opinion polls have shown a rapid rise in support for same-sex marriage.
As arguments began on Tuesday, justices discussed whether the ability to procreate was crucial to the legal definition of marriage. Questions on children
"There are lots of people who get married who can't have children," Justice Stephen Breyer said. As arguments began on Tuesday, justices first discussed whether the organisation defending the ban, known as Proposition 8, had legal standing to bring the case to the high court.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, often seen as a swing vote between the four conservative and four liberal justices, suggested that children of same-sex couples would suffer an "immediate legal injury" from the ban. Proposition 8 was approved by California voters in a referendum in November 2008, but the state government declined to defend it in federal courts.
And Chief Justice John Roberts questioned whether the ban's supporters had the right to bring the suit defending it to the US high court. "I don't think we've ever allowed anything like that," Chief Justice John Roberts said.
California case If the justices rule that the ban's supporters have no such standing, they would invalidate only the California law while leaving same-sex marriage bans standing in dozens of other states. That is because lower courts have already overturned the ban.
Analysts say the justices could rule that the ban's supporters have no such standing, a decision that would invalidate only the California law while leaving bans in dozens of other states standing. The Supreme Court justices also discussed whether the ability to procreate was crucial to the legal definition of marriage.
Tuesday's case concerns California's ban on same-sex marriage, known as Proposition 8, which was approved by that state's voters in a referendum in November 2008. "There are lots of people who get married who can't have children," Justice Stephen Breyer said after a lawyer in support of the ban, Charles Cooper, argued that procreation and children-rearing were fundamental to a state's interest in marriage.
Its passage came only after some 18,000 gay marriages had already taken place in the state, following California's legalisation of such unions earlier the same year. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg also brought up a previous Supreme Court case in which justices ruled prison inmates have a right to marry even though they may be prevented from procreating.
Two same-sex couples filed a lawsuit, known as Hollingsworth v Perry, against Proposition 8. Justice Anthony Kennedy, often seen as a swing vote between the four conservative and four liberal justices, suggested that children of same-sex couples would suffer an "immediate legal injury" under the ban.
As the state of California refused to defend it, the organisation that had sponsored Proposition 8 stepped in as defendants. But he also said he feared the court would enter "uncharted waters".
In 2010, a federal court ruled against Proposition 8, saying the state had not demonstrated a good reason for infringing on what the judge saw as the fundamental right of all couples to marry. "We have five years of information to pose against 2,000 years of history or more," he said.
Supporters of the ban appealed against that ruling, but the court of appeals also ruled the amendment unconstitutional. Chief Justice Roberts said he was unsure prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying denied them rights, while Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Mr Cooper what injury same-sex marriage would cause the ban's defenders.
Anti-gay marriage activists then petitioned the Supreme Court to review the case. They want the question of whether marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman to be left up to individual US states.
The Obama administration is not taking part in the case but has filed what is called a "friend of the court" brief asking the Supreme Court to strike down the anti-gay marriage amendment.
Rise in supportRise in support
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear another case on same-sex marriage: a challenge to a federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman only. The 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, denies federal tax and other benefits to same-sex married couples.On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear another case on same-sex marriage: a challenge to a federal law defining marriage as between a man and a woman only. The 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, denies federal tax and other benefits to same-sex married couples.
Both cases are expected to be decided by June.Both cases are expected to be decided by June.
Currently, nine US states and Washington DC permit same-sex marriage. Eight other states allow civil unions or domestic partnerships with virtually all state marriage benefits, but do not allow couples to marry.Currently, nine US states and Washington DC permit same-sex marriage. Eight other states allow civil unions or domestic partnerships with virtually all state marriage benefits, but do not allow couples to marry.
Recent opinion polls have shown a rapid growth in public support for the issue, with most Americans now believing it should be legal.Recent opinion polls have shown a rapid growth in public support for the issue, with most Americans now believing it should be legal.
The Supreme Court cases follow a flurry of declarations in support of gay marriage by high-profile figures, including last week by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.The Supreme Court cases follow a flurry of declarations in support of gay marriage by high-profile figures, including last week by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Days earlier, Ohio's Rob Portman became the first Republican senator to back gay marriage.Days earlier, Ohio's Rob Portman became the first Republican senator to back gay marriage.
And now three Democratic senators - Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Mark Warner of Virginia and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia - have adopted the same stance.And now three Democratic senators - Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Mark Warner of Virginia and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia - have adopted the same stance.