Great news to end the week: A federal judge just struck down Michigan’s ban on the marriage of same-sex couples! This was a particularly meaningful win for same-sex couples with children because the plaintiffs were two moms, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, who began their legal trek seeking adoption rights, adding marriage later. The judge, Bernard Friedman, was particularly harsh in his criticism of the defendants’ argument that children fare better with a married mom and dad.
Friedman, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his ruling that the marriage ban, “actually fosters the potential for childhood destabilization” because one parent would have no legal rights if something happened to the other.
As for the prominent testimony of sociologist Mark Regnerus, whose discredited study of same-sex parents formed a key part of the defendants’ case, Friedman said, “The court finds Regnerus’s testimony entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration.”
He was also rather pointed in his take-down of the defendants’ general argument that marriage should be reserved for different-sex couples because children do better with a mom and a dad:
The state defendants’ position suffers from a glaring inconsistency. Even assuming that children of same-sex couples fare worse than children raised by heterosexual married couples, the state defendants fail to explain why Michigan law does not similarly exclude certain classes of heterosexual couples from marrying whose children persistently have had “sub-optimal” developmental outcomes. . . . Taking the state defendants’ position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples. Obviously, the state has not adopted this policy, and with good reason. The absurdity of such a requirement is self-evident.
He eviscerates their arguments legal point by legal point, but at the end, brings his ruling back to what matters:
In attempting to define this case as a challenge to “the will of the people,” state defendants lost sight of what this case is truly about: people. No court record of this proceeding could ever fully convey the personal sacrifice of these two plaintiffs who seek to ensure that the state may no longer impair the rights of their children and the thousands of others now being raised by same-sex couples. It is the court’s fervent hope that these children will grow up “to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.” [Citing from Windsor, the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act.]
Congratulations to DeBoer and Rowse and their three children, along with all of the other families in Michigan who will benefit from this ruling.
[Update: Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette has appealed the ruling. Equality Michigan is urging people to donate to support the DeBoer and Rowse case as it moves forward. Personally, I can’t see any court finding any differently, but I suppose the judicial process has to proceed.]