September 2004: Castle v. State Of Washington

In September there’s another win-lose pair.

The
Castle/Bauers

While Louisiana enacts a constitutional amendment, Thurston County Judge Hicks delivers a strong verdict in Washington State’s Castle case, filed in April, 2004. He rules in favor of the right of same-sex couples to marry, with particularly strong words about the issue of sex discrimination.

Singer and Barwick
magazine article, 1971

The judge refers to the Singer case, Washington State’s precedent marriage case from 1974, decided by the state Court Of Appeals. He calls the Singer decision “weak” and writes,

“One difficulty is that Singer assumes the point that is in contention. They conclude that although one can not discriminate on the basis of sex, that there is no discrimination in forbidding same-sex marriage because there is no such thing as same-sex marriage, so on what basis is there any discrimination? If this kind of reasoning were acceptable then Loving would never have struck down Virginia’s anti-miscegenation laws since by ‘definition’ there was no marriage allowed between different races, so as long as each race could marry, what discrimination was there if they could not marry each other?”

“Although the Singer case cries out for reexamination by a higher court this trial court is not that higher court.”

Referring to Loving and Turner, he writes,

“The question, then, is not whether marriage is a fundamental right – it is. The question is whether inter-race marriages can be banned, or, whether inmate marriages can be banned, or, whether same sex marriages can be banned?”

And finally, referring to the special right that opposite-sex couples have to marriage,

“The clear intent of the Legislature to limit government approved contracts of marriage to opposite sex couples is in direct conflict with the constitutional intent to not allow a privilege to one class of the community that is not allowed to the entire community.”

Like its companion case Andersen v. King County, the Castle ruling is stayed pending appeal to the state supreme court.

Also, the Smelt v. Orange County case is filed in US District Court for California. Unlike the previous cases filed in District Courts, this is the first to challenge the federal DOMA.

Timeline key: progress (green), no progress (red), pending court cases (purple),
events that are neutral, not directly related, or with both positive and negative effects (black)