Supreme Court ruling sparks passionate responses all over Virginia

The legacy of Loving v. Virginia, a 1967 federal court case that invalidated state bans on interracial unions, rang loud and clear in Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's majority opinion in the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling Friday that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

“The court has long held the right to marry is protected by the Constitution. In Loving v. Virginia ... a unanimous court held marriage is 'one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,' " wrote Kennedy, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan in 1988.

Almost five decades after the Loving case, Virginia Attorney General Mark R. Herring, a Democrat, said it has been one of the highest honors of his career to "help the commonwealth lead the nation on this fundamental civil rights issue, after past fights on the wrong side of issues like school desegregation, interracial marriage bans, and equal opportunity for women."

Same-sex marriage became legal in Virginia in October, when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the lower court's ruling striking down the state's 2006 ban on same-sex marriage.

Friday's ruling by the high court has no immediate impact on the unions of the nearly 2,000 same-sex couples who have since married in Virginia, their adopted children and the thousands of more couples who had their marriages from other states recognized in the commonwealth.

"Nothing will change in Virginia," Herring said. "But what this means is that now, (same-sex marriage) is the highest law of the land. No matter where they travel, they are going to have their relationships recognized and that’s going to be a source of stability for them in the future."

Republican leadership in the state legislature on Friday announced that it would no longer oppose changes to the state law to reflect legalization of gay marriage.

Speaker of the House William J. Howell, R-Stafford, once a strong supporter of Virginia's now unconstitutional gay marriage ban, said he and Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment, R-James City County, are asking the Virginia Code Commission to assess any changes required in state law to abide by the high-court's ruling.

“While many are understandably disappointed, I expect Virginia will fully comply with today’s ruling," Howell said.

Howell also expressed concern with a possible impact of the court's decision on the religious liberties of Virginians.

"While we must and will abide by the law, we must also ensure that the God-given and constitutionally guaranteed right to the free exercise of religion is not diminished in light of this ruling," Howell said. "The House of Delegates will fight to uphold this principle."

A.E. Dick Howard, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Virginia and the principal author of the modern Virginia state Constitution, said Kennedy's opinion combines "a powerful constitutional argument with sensitivity to the way these cases play out" in the lives of ordinary people.

"What struck me about the opinion was the strong human dimension about it. Kennedy is clearly moved by the stories that the petitioners tell," Howard said.

"It’s not an abstract look at a legal argument; he recounts the problems each of the petitioners have encountered and clearly empathizes with those claims."

Democratic lawmakers hailed the ruling.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe said the opinion represents "a profound moment in the history of our nation and our commonwealth."

Virginia must be open and welcoming to everyone, McAuliffe said, adding that "there is no room in our commonwealth for putting up walls that separate individuals from that right based on whom they love."

Virginia's U.S. senators, Democrats Timothy M. Kaine and Mark R. Warner, praised the court's decision.

“By recognizing the constitutional right of all people to marry the person they love, the Supreme Court has guaranteed that, across the country, same-sex couples will have their relationships treated with the full legal dignity and respect that they deserve," Kaine said.

Warner said in a statement: “This is a remarkable day for our nation. This decision ends the debate about whether states can deny the licensing or recognition of same-sex marriages and ensures that all loving couples will now be treated equally under the law. Respecting every American’s constitutional right to marry strengthens our families and our communities."

Opponents decried the court's decision, fearing the erosion of religious liberties and of traditional family values.

“Marriage expresses the reality that men and women bring distinct, irreplaceable gifts to family life, especially for children who deserve both a mom and a dad,” said Victoria Cobb, president of The Family Foundation of Virginia.

The Supreme Court "stripped all Americans of our freedom to debate and decide marriage policy through the democratic process," Cobb said. "The freedom to democratically address one of the most important social issues of the day is the heart of liberty. The court took that freedom from the people."

In 2006, 57 percent of Virginians adopted a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William, the amendment's sponsor in the House of Delegates, said Friday that the court has "issued a farce appropriate for theatrical comedy," not a reasoned decision on marriage or the U.S. Constitution.

"In the majority’s gushing decision, judicial will purports to nullify real marriage. The same arguments the court used today for 'same sex marriage' also justifies 'marriages' between three or more people," Marshall said in a statement.

And E.W. Jackson, a conservative grassroots activist and the 2013 Republican nominee for lieutenant governor, said that Friday's ruling will go down in history as one of the "most irrational and destructive" in American jurisprudential history.

"By doing so the court has undermined its own legitimacy, usurped a role reserved to the states, defied the will of the American people and declared war on the First Amendment, Bible believing Christians and God," Jackson said.

Virginia's Catholic bishops, Paul S. Loverde of the Diocese of Arlington and Francis X. DiLorenzo of the Diocese of Richmond, said in a joint statement that they are "deeply distressed by this decision which fails to uphold marriage as the union which unites one man and one woman. This fundamental institution, grounded in natural law, predates any religion or nation."

Supporters of marriage equality, however, celebrated Friday as they did in October, when same-sex marriage was legalized in Virginia.

James Parrish, executive director of the gay-rights group Equality Virginia, said that the law of the land finally reflects the beliefs and values held by the American people.

"Thousands of dedicated and passionate people fought for decades to ensure that loving lesbian and gay couples have the freedom to marry the person they love, many of whom are no longer here to see the fruits of their labor," Parrish said.

"America is finally on the right side of history when it comes to marriage. Love won. Let’s use this love to build true and lasting equality for all."

Claire Guthrie Gastañaga, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, said that just as 48 years ago in the Loving case, when the Supreme Court rendered Virginia’s laws prohibiting interracial marriage unconstitutional, the court "reminded America that laws denying equal marriage rights have no place in the commonwealth or any other state."

U.Va.'s Howard said that in spite of signs of deep division on the issue today, he believes future generations will look at same-sex marriage just as most Americans now see desegregation and interracial marriage.

"Most people will be saying that it seemed like the right and natural thing to do, and they’ll think of it in terms of consequence and not the role of the Supreme Court," Howard said.

"I think by large, this week’s opinion will be absorbed into the common consciousness 20 years from now."