Romney warns of 'legal limbo'

LEXINGTON -- Governor Mitt Romney said yesterday that his lawyers are exploring ways to prevent a "legal limbo" that would allow gay couples to get married before a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage could take effect.

While one proposal defeated in the Legislature this week would have reclassified gay marriages as civil unions after 2006, the effective date of a constitutional amendment, Romney and his aides declined to discuss which options they are looking at.

They added that no decisions will be made until after the Legislature resumes its deliberation of constitutional amendments next month.

But the governor, an opponent of both gay marriages and civil unions, did not rule out one widely mentioned idea: ordering the state Department of Public Health not to issue marriage licenses to gay couples after the SJC ruling takes effect May 17. Romney ducked a question on that issue, saying simply that any move he takes would be "in the bounds of the law."

"Our legal team [is working] on a wide range of options we have with regards to amendments or provisions," Romney told reporters in Lexington, where he attended a media event with several members of Congress on behalf of Hanscom Air Force Base.

"One [possibility] is that there will be no amendment, in which case there's no particular legal limbo," the governor said. "Another is an outcome that will cause potentially some confusion and disruption. And if that were the case, you'd look to see if there were a way to reduce that, and I'll be open to suggestions about how one might accomplish that."

Romney's remarks were his first public comments on the gay marriage issue since the Legislature concluded its two-day constitutional convention Thursday night. The House and Senate are set to reconvene March 11 to continue consideration of an amendment to ban gay marriage. Romney has kept in close contact with GOP lawmakers during the session, reminding them he does not support civil unions. He does not have veto power over the proposed amendments, however.

Because the SJC found that gay couples have a right to marry under the state constitution, only a constitutional amendment can invalidate the ruling. But the earliest any amendment can be added to the constitution is November 2006, because amendments must be approved by two consecutive sessions of the Legislature and then be adopted on a statewide ballot.

By that time, under the SJC decision, gay couples will have been getting married in Massachusetts for 2 1/2 years. Many lawmakers want to avoid that confusion. Last week, House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran suggested that the Legislature could find a way to stop gay marriages from commencing in May, either by delaying the implementation of the court ruling or by some other maneuver. One proposed amendment considered by lawmakers this week would reclassify gay marriages that took place between May 2004 and November 2006 as civil unions.

Under the SJC rulling, denying gay couples marriage licenses would violate the state constitution, said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus.

"The notion that the highest elected official in Massachusetts would even consider abrogating the constitution is stunning," Isaacson said. "We just want to be left alone. We have our marriage rights. We intend to marry. And the day we marry, nothing in the world is going to change for 95 percent of the population."

Romney's communications director, Eric Fehrnstrom, reiterated his statement that he will not violate the law. Fehrnstrom said it was too early to discuss possible steps the governor could take, because any steps depend on the constitutional convention.

Romney supports a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and does not want to establish civil unions as part of any such amendment. Still, he was diplomatic about the action in the Legislature yesterday, saying it reflects the democratic process in action. The convention ended at midnight Thursday with lawmakers unable to draw a majority.

"Having the various legislators express their views and vote on various measures is the right way to proceed," Romney said. "Regardless of what comes out of the process, the fact that we have a process that involves the elected representatives of the people is a very laudable thing."

Yesterday, the governor appeared on a stage next to US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Democrat who faced off against him in the 1994 Senate election. Both men were at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Lincoln Laboratory, to highlight the work being done in conjunction with Hanscom Air Force Base.

Kennedy said he didn't closely follow the constitutional convention proceedings, but said he thinks the state constitution shouldn't be altered to take away rights.

"I have fought against discrimination in all of its forms since I have been in the United States Senate," Kennedy said. "I do support a civic marriage that will ensure that those basic federal rights that are not provided in the civil union will be available and give those rights to individuals."

An aide to Kennedy said that the senator believes that civil marriage should be available to couples of the same sex, but that he opposes any effort to force religious institutions to recognize gay unions.

Kennedy spoke out earlier in support of the SJC ruling, but this was his first comment on the issue since it led to the legislative stalemate on Beacon Hill this week.

Rick Klein can be reached at rklein@globe.com.