Chris
06-11-2003, 12:05 AM
Article Here (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=7&u=/nm/20030610/ts_nm/canada_gays_licenses_dc)
If the ruling is not appealed, the province of Ontario would be the first jurisdiction in North America to legalize gay marriage. Vermont and Quebec have allowed gay civil unions but not full marriage.
Already a marriage ceremony between two men who had helped bring the case was set for Tuesday afternoon in Toronto, Canada's largest city.
Retroactively, the court decision also recognized two religious gay marriage ceremonies that took place in Toronto in 2001, ordering the province to register those marriages.
"They're married, as effective today," said Joanna Radbord, a lawyer for several of the couples who had lodged the case.
Canada's federal government, which is responsible for the marriage law, was putting up no immediate roadblocks.
"I think it's time for us to recognize that same-sex marriages are part of our societal norm," Deputy Prime Minister John Manley said in Ottawa after a cabinet meeting.
If the government had wanted to block speedy gay marriages, it would have had to have quickly sought a stay of the ruling while deciding if it wants to appeal. Cauchon said he would make a decision on an appeal later on Tuesday or on Wednesday.
"I know the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ontario has immediate effect so we have to move quickly," he said. But his spokesman said later no stay would be sought on Tuesday.
The three-person Ontario court ruled that the federal law limiting marriage to heterosexuals violated the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Canadian Constitution.
The decision was one of three rulings expected this year by appeals courts in provinces across the country.
The court redefined the common law definition of marriage as "the voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others." In so doing, it substituted "two persons" for "one man and one woman" -- the phrasing Parliament had reaffirmed as recently as 1999.
"The common law definition of marriage is inconsistent with the Charter to the extent that it excludes same-sex couples," the court ruled.
Cauchon said the House of Commons justice committee, which has conducted hearings across the country on what should be done about the definition of marriage, had to play a role in determining the government's response.
Committee member Vic Toews of the opposition Canadian Alliance, an opponent of gay marriage, asked Cauchon to launch an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court declaring that the courts had usurped Parliament's role.
"The definition of marriage is a matter that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament," he said.
Retroactively, the court decision also recognized two religious gay marriage ceremonies that took place in Toronto in 2001, ordering the province to register those marriages.
"They're married, as effective today," said Joanna Radbord, a lawyer for several of the couples who had lodged the case.
Canada's federal government, which is responsible for the marriage law, was putting up no immediate roadblocks.
"I think it's time for us to recognize that same-sex marriages are part of our societal norm," Deputy Prime Minister John Manley said in Ottawa after a cabinet meeting.
If the government had wanted to block speedy gay marriages, it would have had to have quickly sought a stay of the ruling while deciding if it wants to appeal. Cauchon said he would make a decision on an appeal later on Tuesday or on Wednesday.
"I know the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ontario has immediate effect so we have to move quickly," he said. But his spokesman said later no stay would be sought on Tuesday.
The three-person Ontario court ruled that the federal law limiting marriage to heterosexuals violated the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Canadian Constitution.
The decision was one of three rulings expected this year by appeals courts in provinces across the country.
If the ruling is not appealed, the province of Ontario would be the first jurisdiction in North America to legalize gay marriage. Vermont and Quebec have allowed gay civil unions but not full marriage.
Already a marriage ceremony between two men who had helped bring the case was set for Tuesday afternoon in Toronto, Canada's largest city.
Retroactively, the court decision also recognized two religious gay marriage ceremonies that took place in Toronto in 2001, ordering the province to register those marriages.
"They're married, as effective today," said Joanna Radbord, a lawyer for several of the couples who had lodged the case.
Canada's federal government, which is responsible for the marriage law, was putting up no immediate roadblocks.
"I think it's time for us to recognize that same-sex marriages are part of our societal norm," Deputy Prime Minister John Manley said in Ottawa after a cabinet meeting.
If the government had wanted to block speedy gay marriages, it would have had to have quickly sought a stay of the ruling while deciding if it wants to appeal. Cauchon said he would make a decision on an appeal later on Tuesday or on Wednesday.
"I know the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ontario has immediate effect so we have to move quickly," he said. But his spokesman said later no stay would be sought on Tuesday.
The three-person Ontario court ruled that the federal law limiting marriage to heterosexuals violated the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Canadian Constitution.
The decision was one of three rulings expected this year by appeals courts in provinces across the country.
The court redefined the common law definition of marriage as "the voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others." In so doing, it substituted "two persons" for "one man and one woman" -- the phrasing Parliament had reaffirmed as recently as 1999.
"The common law definition of marriage is inconsistent with the Charter to the extent that it excludes same-sex couples," the court ruled.
Cauchon said the House of Commons justice committee, which has conducted hearings across the country on what should be done about the definition of marriage, had to play a role in determining the government's response.
Committee member Vic Toews of the opposition Canadian Alliance, an opponent of gay marriage, asked Cauchon to launch an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court declaring that the courts had usurped Parliament's role.
"The definition of marriage is a matter that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament," he said.
Retroactively, the court decision also recognized two religious gay marriage ceremonies that took place in Toronto in 2001, ordering the province to register those marriages.
"They're married, as effective today," said Joanna Radbord, a lawyer for several of the couples who had lodged the case.
Canada's federal government, which is responsible for the marriage law, was putting up no immediate roadblocks.
"I think it's time for us to recognize that same-sex marriages are part of our societal norm," Deputy Prime Minister John Manley said in Ottawa after a cabinet meeting.
If the government had wanted to block speedy gay marriages, it would have had to have quickly sought a stay of the ruling while deciding if it wants to appeal. Cauchon said he would make a decision on an appeal later on Tuesday or on Wednesday.
"I know the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ontario has immediate effect so we have to move quickly," he said. But his spokesman said later no stay would be sought on Tuesday.
The three-person Ontario court ruled that the federal law limiting marriage to heterosexuals violated the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Canadian Constitution.
The decision was one of three rulings expected this year by appeals courts in provinces across the country.