Differing reactions on supreme court ruling

Friday’s Supreme Court ruling effectively ended Idaho Governor Butch Otter’s efforts to ban same-sex marriage. The 5-4 decision legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states made Otter’s separate appeal moot. “I have maintained from the very beginning that it should be the prerogative of the states – not the courts – to determine whether same-sex marriage is consistent with the values, character, and moral fabric of that particular state,” he said in a press release. In December, Otter appealed a 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals decision to legalize same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage had been legal in Idaho since Oct. 15. Otter asked the Supreme Court to look at his case separately, or in conjunction with the 6th U.S. District Court of Appeals. Instead the Supreme Court looked only at the 6th circuit case. The court’s ruling on the 6th circuit covers Otter’s appeal, said Deborah Ferguson, a civil litigation lawyer in Boise. Ferguson represented four lesbian couples who sued, and won in federal court last year. She said her clients were ecstatic when they called her early Friday morning. “Lots of tears,” she said. “Lots of tears of happiness.” Otter’s 9th circuit appeals focused on state’s rights and family health, specifically child development. “The nation’s citizens — especially our children — benefit from the social reinforcement and encouragement that man-woman marriage provides,” he wrote in the appeal. Northwest lawmakers were divided on the decision. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., called it a “historic moment.” “After decades of fighting for equal rights, LGBT couples finally have the guarantee of marriage equality nationwide and the protections that all married couples enjoy,” Murray said in a press release. “I’m so proud of how far our country has come, and it’s because of the dedication of the LGBT and allied communities that we have seen the tide turn.” Washington’s other Senate democrat, Maria Cantwell, echoed Murray’s statement and also promised future action. “We must continue to fight all forms of discrimination that LGBT people continue to face and ensure that there are comprehensive federal nondiscrimination protections in place,” Cantwell said in a release. Like Otter, Idaho Congressman Raul Labrador denounced the decision as an attack on state and individual rights. In a press release he called for support of his bill, the “First Amendment Defense Act,” which prohibits federal agencies from penalizing any business based on their definition of marriage. “The decision turns the principles of democracy on their head,” Labrador said. “As Justice Scalia correctly states in his dissent, our founding documents gave the citizens of this great nation the ‘freedom to govern themselves. ‘” Washington Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers said she disagrees with the ruling but said it’s important to respect the law of the land. “Every person has the right to be treated with dignity and respect, and Americans should be able to live and work according to their beliefs,” she said in a press release. “The rule of law and equal protection of legal rights applies to everyone.” Jeremy Tedesco, an attorney representing Coeur d’Alene Hitching Post owners Donald and Lynn Knapp, said the Supreme Court ruling doesn’t affect his clients. The Knapps are contesting a Coeur d’Alene City ordinance outlawing sexual discrimination. Tedesco maintains the Knapps have been arbitrarily targeted by the city. In some ways he said the Supreme Court’s decision helps his client because it includes language that protects individuals’ right to define marriage. “We can’t be coerced to agree with that decision, or participate in that,” he said.