Same-sex marriage foes sue lawmakers
Lawyers from a group opposing gay marriage filed a $5 million federal lawsuit against 109 state lawmakers yesterday accusing them of violating the US Constitution when they refused to decide whether to put a ban on gay marriage on the 2008 ballot.
Proponents of the same-sex marriage ban collected a record 170,000 signatures in December 2005 in hopes of getting the amendment on the ballot. But to qualify for a statewide referendum, the measure requires the support of at least 50 legislators in two consecutive sessions.
On Nov. 9, when the Legislature met in joint session as Constitutional Convention lawmakers voted, 109 to 87, to recess before taking a vote on whether to put the proposed amendment on the ballot.
VoteOnMarriage.org, the group that filed the suit, wants the US District Court to hold each of the 109 legislators liable for "intentionally and repeatedly failing to perform their constitutional duties," according to court documents.
"They should be held accountable," said Kris Mineau , president of the Massachusetts Family Institute and spokesman for VoteOnMarriage.org. "They are the ones we believe who are liable under the federal Constitution."
The group wants the court to declare that the legislators violated the group's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and to order the defendants to vote on the ballot initiative, according to court documents. If they refuse again, the suit asks that the measure be put on the ballot anyway.
VoteOnMarriage.org also requests a monetary judgment against the legislators that would force them to pay damages in the amount of $500,000, the cost of the campaign to get signatures, and at least $5 million in punitive damages, said Glen Lavy, a lawyer for the group.
The Legislature, however, still has one more day to vote on the ballot initiative, Jan. 2. If they vote on the measure then, Mineau said, his group's lawsuit will be dismissed as moot.
Still, some legal specialists said yesterday that the lawsuit is a baseless attempt by the group to push its agenda.
"This is not the kind of issue the federal court wants to get involved in, policing the boundaries of the operations of the state government." said Renee M. Landers , who teaches constitutional law at Suffolk Law School.
John Reinstein, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, called the suit "frivolous" and said the Supreme Court ruled 50 years ago that state lawmakers are immune to such lawsuits. "The flavor of the suit is really found in the claim that they want monetary damages," said Reinstein. "What they want is not input into the process; they want control over the outcome."
But Lavy said the lawsuit was necessary to get the lawmakers to vote. "This is not about money," Lavy said. "This is about citizen initiatives and the Legislature ignoring the initiatives they don't like."
The federal lawsuit resembles the legal action taken by Governor Mitt Romney and 10 other residents last month, except that it names individual legislators as legally responsible.
Romney, an outspoken opponent of gay marriage, filed a suit against the Legislature with the Supreme Judicial Court, accusing lawmakers of violating the state constitution when they did not vote on the marriage ban.
