Massachusetts Ruling Shakes Up Marriage Equality Debate (2004)

In Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declared that “barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution.” Notably, the Court held that civil unions (legal arrangements that gave same-sex couples most, but not all of the rights reserved for marriage) were insufficient because individuals were not treated equally under the law. As shown in this 2004 report from The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, the decision stimulated protest in the Massachusetts state capital and debate on the floor of the state legislature.

But the decision also had national implications. In the view of opponents of gay marriage legalization, “traditional marriage” was under attack because “activist judges” were making new laws in defiance of legislators and voters. President George W. Bush and other Republicans ultimately called for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. These efforts were motivated by the fear that supreme courts in other states (or even the U.S. Supreme Court) might argue that laws that prevented same-sex couples from marrying were unconstitutional. However, some commentators argued that the GOP's focus on marriage was a campaign strategy to court Christian conservatives during the 2004 elections.

NewsHour with Jim Lehrer | NewsHour Productions: Washington, DC.) | February 13, 2004 | This video clip and associated transcript appear from 22:40 - 27:38 in the full record.