A judge threw out a lawsuit brought by the Alliance Defense Fund to stop the governor's executive order to recognize marriage performed outside of the state.
"The [Paterson's] directive is entirely lawful," Billings wrote. "New York's recognition of same-sex marriages legally solemnized in other jurisdictions is consistent with New York policy regarding recognition of marriages legally solemnized outside New York."
This puts it to rest, and New York will continue to recognize same-sex marriage. Some excerpts from the lawsuit, after the jump.
Governor Paterson issued an executive order back in May that ordered state agencies to recognize marriages performed out-of-state. New York doesn't have an anti-gay amendment on the books, but neither does it perform same-sex marriages. Someone needed to clarify, and after an appeals court ruled that those marriages needed to be recognized, Paterson issued the memo.
The ADF is claiming that this is an activist executive:
"The governor has no authority to issue directives which conflict with New York's public policy. His actions are an assault on the democratic process," Raum argued in Supreme Court, the lowest level court in New York state.
"The future of marriage should be decided by the legislature, not executives who take matters into their own hands," Raum argued.
Didn't Schwarzeneggar say that marriage should be recognized by the people or the courts, not the legislature? And didn't the Religious Right argue that the California legislature passing same-sex marriage twice didn't count for anything?
Not that conservatives really have any place to talk when it comes to limiting executive power.
"The governor should respect New York's marriage laws over the laws of foreign jurisdictions. Governor Paterson is overstepping his authority and the democratic process by issuing a directive at odds with New York public policy on marriage," said Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum.
Given that the ADF is an Arizona-based org that sends lawyers all over the country to litigate and testify in legislatures for marriage amendments, it's rather disingenuous that they're arguing for the choice of the people of New York.
And since when is Massachusetts "foreign"?
It was a silly case that got thrown out. Now, are groups like the ADF the exact reason Bush called for tort reform?