Five
Democratic
senators
joined
forces
with
a
gay
Republican
law
professor
at
a
Senate
hearing
last
week
to
dispute
the
need
for
a
constitutional
amendment
prohibiting
gay
marriage.
“[A]n
amendment
banning
same-sex
marriage
is
a
solution
in
search
of
a
problem,”
said
University
of
Minnesota
Law
School
Professor
Dale
Carpenter,
a
member
of
the
gay
GOP
group
Log
Cabin
Republicans.
Carpenter
said
“federal
and
state
laws
already
prevent
the
court-ordered
imposition
of
nationwide
same-sex
marriage
for
the
foreseeable
future.”
He
said
states
should
be
allowed
to
adopt
same-sex
marriage
if
they
choose
to
do
so.
Sen.
John
Cornyn
(R-Texas),
chair
of
the
Senate
Judiciary
Subcommittee
on
the
Constitution,
said
he
called
the
Sept.
4
hearing
to
discuss
whether
the
anti-gay
Defense
of
Marriage
Act
of
1996
could
withstand
a
ruling
by
state
or
federal
courts
legalizing
same-sex
marriage.
The
hearing
took
place
four
days
before
gay
rights
leaders
and
their
supporters
from
civil
rights
groups
met
Sept.
8
in
Washington
to
discuss
strategy
for
advancing
the
cause
for
civil
marriage
for
same-sex
couples
and
opposing
a
constitutional
amendment.
The
meeting
was
closed
to
the
press
and
the
public.
Gay
civil
rights
attorney
Evan
Wolfson,
who
founded
the
New
York-based
group
Freedom
to
Marry,
declined
to
comment
on
what
was
said
or
who
attended
the
meeting,
saying
the
conclave
was
a
“routine”
gathering
of
those
committed
to
advancing
the
cause
of
protecting
gay
families.
Sources
familiar
with
the
hearing,
which
was
held
at
the
offices
of
the
Human
Rights
Campaign,
said
among
the
topics
discussed
was
an
assessment
of
how
much
support
a
constitutional
amendment
has
among
members
of
Congress
and
steps
civil
rights
activists
can
take
to
oppose
the
amendment.
HRC
held
a
news
conference
on
Sept.
4,
prior
to
the
start
of
Cornyn’s
hearing,
to
present
several
lesbian
and
gay
male
couples,
who
described
the
problems
they
face
by
not
being
able
to
secure
legal
recognition
of
their
relationships.
Gay
activists
had
expressed
concern
that
Cornyn,
an
opponent
of
gay
marriage,
would
stack
the
hearing
with
witnesses
who
oppose
gay
rights
and
support
the
Federal
Marriage
Amendment,
a
proposed
constitutional
amendment
that
would
forbid
states
from
adopting
same-sex
marriage.
But
Cornyn
was
the
only
one
of
the
subcommittee’s
five-member
Republican
contingent
to
show
up
for
the
hearing.
Each
of
the
panel’s
four
Democrats
plus
Senator
Patrick
Leahy
(D-Vt.),
the
ranking
Democrat
on
the
full
Senate
Judiciary
Committee,
attended
and
spoke
out
against
the
constitutional
amendment.
Although
each
of
Cornyn’s
four
invited
witnesses
—
a
minister,
two
lawyers
and
a
conservative
columnist
—
said
such
a
constitutional
amendment
was
needed,
the
Democratic
senators
and
their
two
invited
witnesses
each
called
for
equal
rights
for
same-sex
relationships.
In
addition
to
Carpenter,
the
other
witness
invited
by
Democrats
was
Keith
Bradkowski,
a
California
resident
whose
domestic
partner
died
in
the
Sept.
11
terrorist
attacks,
who
gave
an
account
of
how
not
having
a
legally
sanctioned
relationship
added
to
his
suffering.
Bradkowski’s
partner,
flight
attendant
Jeff
Collman,
was
among
those
killed
when
one
of
two
jetliners
crashed
into
the
World
Trade
Center.
“After
his
death,
I
was
faced
not
only
with
my
grief
over
losing
Jeff
—
who
was
indeed
my
better
half
—
but
with
the
painful
task
of
proving
the
authenticity
of
our
relationship
over
and
over
again,”
Bradkowski
told
the
panel.
“With
no
marriage
license
to
prove
our
relationship
existed,
even
something
as
fundamental
as
obtaining
his
death
certificate
became
a
monumental
task.”
Sen.
Edward
Kennedy
of
Massachusetts,
one
of
the
Democratic
members
of
the
panel,
criticized
the
decision
to
hold
the
hearing,
saying
the
Senate
was
consumed
with
work
on
other,
“more
important”
issues
such
as
the
war
in
Iraq,
problems
with
the
nation’s
electric
power
grid
and
air
pollution
regulations.
Kennedy
called
the
proposed
amendment
unnecessary
and
a
form
of
blatant
discrimination
against
gay
couples.
“What
in
the
world
are
we
doing
here
considering
this
constitutional
amendment?”
he
asked.
Cornyn
said
the
hearing
was
needed
to
help
the
Senate
assess
whether
further
action
is
necessary
to
“protect”
the
institution
of
marriage
through
the
Defense
of
Marriage
Act,
known
as
DOMA.
DOMA
defines
marriage
under
federal
law
as
a
union
between
a
man
and
a
woman
and
allows
states
to
refuse
to
recognize
same-sex
marriages
approved
by
other
states.
Congress
passed
the
act
by
a
lopsided
margin
and
President
Clinton
signed
it.
That
law’s
lead
sponsor,
former
Congressman
Bob
Barr
(R-Ga.),
has
publicly
lobbied
against
passage
of
a
constitutional
amendment,
arguing
that
the
issue
ought
to
be
left
up
to
individual
states,
which
have
always
adopted
marriage
and
divorce
laws
in
the
past.
“The
question
before
us
now
is
whether
the
popular
and
bipartisan
legislation
will
remain
the
law
of
the
land
as
the
people
intend,
or
be
overturned
by
activist
courts,”
Cornyn
said.
“I
believe
it
is
our
duty
to
carefully
consider
what
steps
are
needed
to
safeguard
the
traditional
understanding
of
marriage,
and
to
defend
the
Defense
of
Marriage
Act.”
The
freshman
Texas
senator
said
the
recent
U.S.
Supreme
Court
decision
overturning
state
sodomy
laws
based
on
grounds
of
privacy
rights
might
be
cited
by
courts
to
strike
down
state
marriage
laws
that
ban
same-sex
marriage.
Cornyn
...
