VOA慢速英语2014 AS IT IS 2014-04-07 US Federal Judges Cancel Same-Sex Marriage Bans 美国联邦法院法官取消了禁止同性结婚的法令

 

AS IT IS 2014-04-07 US Federal Judges Cancel Same-Sex Marriage Bans 美国联邦法院法官取消了禁止同性结婚的法令

From VOA Learning English, welcome to As It Is!  

I’m Christopher Cruise in Washington.

Today we talk about the issue of same-sex marriage.

About one-third of all American states permit marriages between two individuals of the same sex. In recent years, some federal judges have canceled state laws banning same-sex unions. And several states have asked higher courts to overturn those rulings.

More Battles Expected Over Same-Sex Marriages

Some Americans would describe Utah as one of the country’s most conservative states. In December, a federal judge ruled that Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Many same-sex couples got married soon after the ruling was announced.  

Seth Anderson and his partner were the first of hundreds of gay couples to marry in Utah after the judge’s ruling in December.

“We are so happy, and I am so proud to be in Utah right now."

Philip Lott is Utah’s assistant attorney general. He had a different reaction to the judge’s decision.

“The state is disappointed in the ruling.”

The governor of Utah, Gary Herbert, also criticized the legal decision. He said that “an activist¹ federal judge is attempting to override² the will of the people of Utah.” 

 

The federal judge’s ruling was surprising because Utah is home to the Mormon Church -- the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The group strongly opposes homosexuality -- sexual behavior between members of the same sex.

Ari Waldman is a professor at the New York University School of Law. He says the judge in Utah was following an earlier ruling by the United States Supreme³ Court.

“The Supreme Court said that the federal government cannot discriminate⁴ against legally married same-sex couples.”

The Supreme Court found that a law called the 1996 Defense⁵ of Marriage Act was unconstitutional. The law said the federal government could not recognize same-sex marriages. But Professor Waldman adds that the court did not say whether a state could ban such marriages.

Professor Ari Waldman says the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage did have an effect. He says it strengthened legal arguments for ending state bans on such unions. 

But in January, the Supreme Court intervened in the Utah case. It ordered a suspension of same-sex marriages while the state appealed the lower court’s decision. 

Gay couples are fighting for the right to marry in many states that ban gay marriages. And gay-rights groups are working to end bans on same-sex marriage by getting support from legislators or voters. 

Groups opposed to same-sex marriage are still active, but they appear not as strong as they once were. For many years, opponents of same-sex marriage had won the fight. They said states should be able to decide whether they would permit same-sex marriage. But supporters of same-sex marriage believe the US Constitution does not give states the right to ban same-sex marriages. And recently, in federal courts and state legislatures, they have been winning. 

The Utah ruling was one of many legal and political victories for homosexual or gay rights across the nation in 2013. The number of states where same-sex marriage is legal rose to 17, plus the District of Columbia. 

Public opinion surveys show a growing majority of Americans support the right of gay people to marry. 

Two months ago, the Justice Department told its employees to give same-sex couples the same rights as other couples. Attorney General Eric Holder⁶ announced that his office will give people in same-sex marriages “the same privileges, protections and rights as opposite-sex marriages under federal law.” This means same-sex couples will no longer be dealt with differently in federal courts and will have the same federal assistance as other couples.

Also in February, the state government in Nevada decided⁷ to stop supporting a ban on same-sex marriage. The governor of Nevada said he believed the state’s position would not be accepted by a judge as constitutional. Voters in Nevada approved the ban 12 years ago.

Officials in other states have decided against defending their bans on same-sex marriage. They believe federal judges will not accept their arguments that the laws are permitted under the Constitution.

In Virginia, a federal judge cancelled a state law banning same-sex marriages.  Virginia voters approved a constitutional amendment⁸ banning same-sex marriage in 2006. The judge said such a ban was just as unconstitutional as were laws banning interracial marriages. Those laws were cancelled 50 years ago.

Last month, a federal judge canceled a ban on same sex marriage in Michigan. The judge said the ban violates the US Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection under the law. Several hundred marriages were performed in Michigan in late March. Michigan’s governor has said the marriages are legal, but his state will not recognize them. The move blocked some state assistance meant only for traditional married couples.    

Americans are still talking about the US Supreme Court’s ruling in the Defense of Marriage Act. Professor Ari Waldman says the beliefs of Justice Anthony Kennedy have had an effect on the decisions of lower courts. He says Justice Kennedy does not believe that tradition should be used as a reason to keep same-sex couples from being married. 

“There is no doubt that the state bans on same-sex marriage are on thin ice. Justice Kennedy was pretty clear about the guarantee of equality for gay couples. With each decision, more and more people in this country are living in ‘marriage equality’ states, which means that more and more people are going to live in a world where gay couples are getting married.”

Professor Waldman expects courts to rule on same-sex marriage bans in as many as 10 states this year. And he says one or two states may legalize gay marriage either through the legislative⁹ process or by special elections. He says the issue is likely to return to the Supreme Court, but he is not sure when.

1 activist   

n.活动分子，积极分子

参考例句：

• He's been a trade union activist for many years.多年来他一直是工会的积极分子。
• He is a social activist in our factory.他是我厂的社会活动积极分子。

2 override   

vt.不顾，不理睬，否决；压倒，优先于

参考例句：

• The welfare of a child should always override the wishes of its parents.孩子的幸福安康应该永远比父母的愿望来得更重要。
• I'm applying in advance for the authority to override him.我提前申请当局对他进行否决。

3 supreme   

adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的

参考例句：

• It was the supreme moment in his life.那是他一生中最重要的时刻。
• He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。

4 discriminate   

v.区别，辨别，区分；有区别地对待

参考例句：

• You must learn to discriminate between facts and opinions.你必须学会把事实和看法区分出来。
• They can discriminate hundreds of colours.他们能分辨上百种颜色。

5 defense   

n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩

参考例句：

• The accused has the right to defense.被告人有权获得辩护。
• The war has impacted the area with military and defense workers.战争使那个地区挤满了军队和防御工程人员。

6 holder   

n.持有者，占有者；(台，架等)支持物

参考例句：

• The holder of the office of chairman is reponsible for arranging meetings.担任主席职位的人负责安排会议。
• That runner is the holder of the world record for the hundred-yard dash.那位运动员是一百码赛跑世界纪录的保持者。

7 decided   

adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的

参考例句：

• This gave them a decided advantage over their opponents.这使他们比对手具有明显的优势。
• There is a decided difference between British and Chinese way of greeting.英国人和中国人打招呼的方式有很明显的区别。

8 amendment   

n.改正，修正，改善，修正案

参考例句：

• The amendment was rejected by 207 voters to 143.这项修正案以207票对143票被否决。
• The Opposition has tabled an amendment to the bill.反对党已经就该议案提交了一项修正条款。

9 legislative   

n.立法机构，立法权；adj.立法的，有立法权的

参考例句：

• Congress is the legislative branch of the U.S. government.国会是美国政府的立法部门。
• Today's hearing was just the first step in the legislative process.今天的听证会只是展开立法程序的第一步。