El NYT tiene editorial de hoy dedicada al caso del Tribunal Federal de Distrito de California que declaró inconstitucional la Proposición 8, en la que se prohibió el matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo. Editorial aquí.
A través del editorial se pueden resumir de manera general los argumentos de esta decisión tan importante que podría llegar al Supremo federal y dictar las pautas jurisprudenciales para esta y mucha sotras controversias similares. Dejo un resumen.
1. La discriminación no puede ser válida aún cuando una mayoría opte por ella mediante votación mayoritaria. Los derechos fundamentales (el acceso a la institución del matrimonio, aquí), no están sujetos al voto:
The judge easily dismissed the idea that discrimination is permissible if a majority of voters approve it; the referendum’s outcome was “irrelevant,” he said, quoting a 1943 case, because “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote.”
2. El argumento tiene que ser secular, no es permisible razones religiosas ni imposición de una moralidad particular para sustentar la discriminación. No hay evidencia de que el matrimonio homosexual sea dañino para la sociedad:
Supporters of Proposition 8 presented no evidence that same-sex marriage harmed society or the institution of marriage.Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in their ability to form successful marital unions and raise children.
3. Descarta argumentos comunes: la procreación no es necesariamente la meta del matrimonio, la supuesta estabilidad y beneficios para los niños y niñas criados dentro del matrimonio no es exclusivo del matrimonio heterosexual:
Though procreation is not a necessary goal of marriage, children of same-sex couples will benefit from the stability provided by marriage, as will the state and society.
4. El concepto de parejas de hecho ubica impermisiblemente a los ciudadanos homosexuales en un estatus de segunda clase:
Domestic partnerships confer a second-class status. The discrimination inherent in that second-class status is harmful to gay men and lesbians. These findings of fact will be highly significant as the case winds its way through years of appeals.
5. Los argumentos comunes respecto a lo tradicional de la institución matrimonial ya no se sostienen:
just as gender roles in opposite-sex marriage have changed dramatically over the decades. All marriages are now unions of equals, he wrote, and there is no reason to restrict that equality to straight couples. The exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage “exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage,” “That time has passed.”
6. El Estado tiene que tener un interés apremiante para discriminar basado en sexo y orientación sexual y prohibir los matrimonios entre parejas del mismo sexo. No se presentó ninguna base racional para la discriminación, más allá de que 'hay algo moralmente mal en ello" y eso no es razón permisible para sustentar la legislación discriminatoria.
To justify the proposition’s inherent discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation, he wrote, there would have to be a compelling state interest in banning same-sex marriage. But no rational basis for discrimination was presented at the two-and-a-half-week trial in January, he said. The real reason for Proposition 8, he wrote, is a moral view “that there is something wrong with same-sex couples,” and that is not a permissible reason for legislation.
“Moral disapproval alone,” he wrote, in words that could someday help change history, “is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and women.”
Finalmente, el editorial del NYT alude a posibles críticas de si en términos activistas era el momento para la estrategia de acudir al Supremo:
Certainly, there is no guarantee that the current Supreme Court would uphold Judge Walker’s ruling. But there are times when legal opinions help lead public opinions.
Y sobre la igualdad:
Just as they did for racial equality in previous decades, the moment has arrived for the federal courts to bestow full equality to millions of gay men and lesbians.
Eso digo yo.
salud!.
La opinión aquí.