Court of Appeals Refuses Look at Legality of Gay 'Marriage'

Rev. Jason J. McGuire, Executive Director NYCF

Yesterday New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms (NYCF) received word that the New York State Court of Appeals has refused to allow evidence to be presented in a case questioning the legality of the process and procedure whereby same-sex "marriage" became law in New York.

The case, known as New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms v. New York State Senate, was first filed in July 2011. The Honorable Robert Wiggins, Livingston County Supreme Court Judge, upheld New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms' (NYCF) right to present evidence questioning the legality of the process by which "marriage" became law. In his decision, Wiggins said:

The State Attorney General's office filed court papers seeking to dismiss the suit brought by NYCF and other plaintiffs that could overturn New York's same-sex "marriage" law, but Judge Wiggin's decision soundly denied that action.

Judge Wiggins was particularly interested in the court's role regarding the Governor's use of the message of necessity (a legal mechanism that allows legislation to immediately move to the floor for a vote, rather than age the normal three-day waiting period). Judge Wiggins' decided:

"Logically and clearly this cite by the Governor is disingenuous. The review of such concept altering legislation for three days after generations of existing definitions would not so damage same-sex couples as to necessitate an avoidance of rules meant to ensure full review and discussion prior to any vote. Nonetheless, this Court is reluctantly obliged to rule that that the message of necessity submitted by the Governor was accepted by vote of the Senate, and is NOT within this Court's province to nullify."

"...Although the disregard for the statute seems evident, the Court feels constrained to not rule on the Governor's certification of necessities."

"It is ironic that much of the State's brief passionately spews sanctimonious verbiage on the separation of powers in the governmental branches, and clear arm-twisting by the Executive on the Legislative permeates the entire process."

When it came to alleged Open Meetings Law violations, Wiggins decided:

"...The Court must consider allegations by Plaintiff as true. Considering Plaintiff's allegations, and without deciding matter at this time, the Court feels that is a justiciable issue presented whether there was a violation of the Open Meetings Law."

It was on this point that the Honorable Judge Wiggins decided that NYCF's suit should be heard.

The State Attorney General's office filed papers seeking an appeal on Judge Wiggins' Decision. The Appellate Court, Fourth Division, sided with the Attorney General.

In August 2012, NYCF filed an appeal with the New York State Court of Appeals. Today NYCF was informed that the Court has refused to allow evidence to be presented.

Rev. Jason J. McGuire, Executive Director, New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, reacted to the Court's decision saying:

"We're disappointed, but not surprised, by today's decision. Every time the people of a state have had opportunity to vote on this issue, they have rejected same-sex 'marriage', but when rogue legislators and activist courts get involved they reject the will of the people."

"Essentially this was a case that didn't look at the morality of gay 'marriage', but the legality of the process and procedure by which it became law. What is most troubling is that the court has surrendered its rightful role as a check and balance on an out-of-control Legislature. It is the last defense against legislators that simply pursue political aspirations, rather than the interests of the people they were elected to represent. This was simply put not good government."

"With two weeks to the General Election, voters will have their say. They've already spoken up in various districts including the 43rd Senate District where Senator Roy McDonald lost his seat after voting for gay 'marriage'. The drumbeat is only growing louder."