Varnum V. Brien, a Case for Equality
Overview
Varnum v. Brien was a lawsuit representing six gay and lesbian couples in the state of Iowa who wanted to marry. The lawsuit argued that under the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Iowa Constitution, it is unlawful to bar gay and lesbian couples from civil marriage. Since the lawsuit was based on state law, the Iowa Supreme Court had the final word on the outcome of this case. The couples in this case have been together for many years. Three of the couples have children to raise, others are planning families, and all wanted the responsibilities and the protections only marriage can provide. With the success of the Varnum case, gay and lesbian couples in Iowa have the rights, benefits and responsibilities of marriage.
Context
Iowa's Constitution promises equal treatment under state law of all persons. The words husband, wife or spouse or some form of the words marriage or marry appear in more than 540 sections of the state's laws. The rights and responsibilities of legal marriage cover many areas of family life including: parenting, insurance, taxes, medical care, end of life decisions and inheritance.
Timeline
December 2005 Lawsuit filed in Iowa District Court for Polk County on behalf of six gay and lesbian couples who wish to be married in Iowa.
April 2006 Twenty-six state legislators represented by an anti-gay organization move to intervene in the case as defendants. This is denied by the court, ruling the legislators have insufficient interests for intervention.
January 2007 Plaintiffs file affidavits from leading child development and other experts who explain the need for marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples. In support of the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion, Iowa faith leaders, scholars and religious groups file friend-of-the-court brief as does the Iowa Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a group of Iowa historians and law professors.
August 2007 The Iowa District Court rules that it is unconstitutional to deny gay and lesbian couples access to marriage. The opposition files for an appeal and a "stay" on the decision the next day, which both are granted. Before the stay is issued, dozens of gay and lesbian couples file for and receive licenses. One couple is able to get married.
March 2008 Lambda Legal files a brief with the Iowa Supreme Court, and is joined by 15 friend-of-the-court briefs from many sectors of society that support same-sex couples' right to marry and the right of their children to have their families treated fairly.
December 2008 Oral arguments are heard before the Iowa Supreme Court.
April 3, 2009 The Iowa Supreme Court released its decision in support of marriage equality for all Iowa couples, regardless of sexual orientation.
Currently Even with the Supreme Court decision, opponents of marriage equality continue to battle to place discrimination into our state's constitution based on their religious beliefs. It is even more important that people of faith balance this perspective and talk with lawmakers about their support of marriage equality. Particularly stating that this is a matter of civil law and should remain separate from any church's doctrine or religious belief.
Selection from the Faith Amici Brief
In court cases, interested and relevant groups may file amicus (friend of the court) briefs to help shed light on the issues involved in the case. These are generally filed by people who are considered experts in their field. This is part of the amicus brief signed by over 160 clergy, religious communities and religion scholars submitted to the court in support of same-sex marriage.
"...Though Amici (friends of the court who signed this brief) represent different faiths and practice in different ways, Amici stand united in support of the dignity of loving, committed same-sex couples, and believe that same-sex couples should be permitted to enter into civil marriage. Amici submit this brief to counter the argument that current marriage laws, to the extent that they discriminate against same-sex couples, must be upheld in deference to the tradtions and religious beliefs of only certain groups of citizens. Amici urge this honorable Court to order the State of Iowa to include same-sex couples under the civil, legal framework of the marriage laws of Iowa."
For More information on the Varnum v. Brien Case
Go to the Lambda Legal website to view a more detailed timeline and read the friend of the court amicus briefs for the case. http://www.lambdalegal.org/our-work/in-court/cases/varnum.html
Iowa's Visionary Civil Rights History
Opponents to marriage equality often cite traditional marriage and morality to justify their denying Iowa's gay and lesbian couples equal access to the rights, responsibilities, and dignity of civil marriage.
Iowa's civil rights history is long and visionary, and has often upheld the notion that "tradition" is not a sufficient argument to deny people rights. To be colloquial, "that's the way it's always been" isn't enough. A forerunner in civil rights, Iowa has often recognized the rights of marginalized people decades before similar federal action.
Like today's courts, early Iowa courts were sometimes called upon to decide cases that involved social or political controversies of the time.
(1839) Re the Matter of Ralph
This case recognized the rights of Ralph, a former slave residing in Iowa whose owner tried to have him recaptured and taken him back to Missouri. The court stated, "No man in this territory can be reduced to slavery." Shamefully, in 1856 (almost two decades later), the federal Dred Scott case maintained the rights of slaveholders. The atrocity continued in many other states until the end of the civil war.
This case shows Iowa's history of taking stands against discrimination, even when national bias is prevalent.
(1869) Arabella Mansfield
Mansfield, an Iowan, was the first woman in the nation to be granted a license to practice law. Later in 1879, the Iowa General Assembly removed the words 'white male' from statutes covering who could practice law. In contrast, a few years later the federal courts chose to uphold Illinois' refusal to allow women to practice law.
Again, the courts recognized the rights of an individual even though those rights were contrary to traditional societal roles of women and the views regarding the equality of women held in many faith communities of the time.
(1873) Coger v. Northwest Union Packet Company
This case recognized the right of Emma Coger, an African American woman, to sit in a dining area with white passengers on a steamboat, despite the carrier's regulations and tradition of segregation.
Almost, 90 years before the US Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended the "separate but equal" Jim Crow laws, the Iowa Court stated, it "cannot be doubted that she was excluded from the table and cabin, not because others would have been degraded and she elevated in society, but because of prejudice entertained against her race, growing out of its former condition of servitude- a prejudice, be it proclaimed to the honor of our people, that is fast giving away to nobler sentiments, and, it is hoped, will soon be entombed with its parent, slavery."
Similarities of Civil Rights Struggles
While some may argue that racial and gender equality are different than recognizing the civil marriage of gay and lesbian couples in Iowa, it is important to remember the similarities. During these times in our nation's history we have also heard:
"This isn't what God intended."
"Most people don't want this."
"People will be forced to accept things they don't believe in."
While there are differences in these struggles, each faced religious justification of inequality and vocal opposition stating that the majority should get to decide what civil rights the minority group receives. Iowans of faith and goodwill are working, as they always have, to determine what acceptance, diversity and equality in our state means to them and their community.
