This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2004, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Down, but still out - and hopeful.
Gay Utahns are taking a philosophical view of the California Supreme Court decision Thursday voiding marriage licenses issued by San Francisco.
"That's a disappointing ruling, but not unexpected," said Jane Marquardt, a Centerville attorney who made a whirlwind trip to the Bay Area in February with partner Tami to pick up a license. "It's just a chapter in a long conversation we're having about how you design a system that lets gay people who want to make a commitment to each other do that."
On Thursday, the court ruled that San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom exceeded his legal authority by allowing the county clerk to issue the licenses to same-sex couples.
About 4,000 couples queued up at City Hall to pick up licenses between Feb. 12 and March 11, when an injunction initiated by the state's attorney general and a conservative Christian group stopped the wedding march.
Many gay couples have criss-crossed the country to take advantage of various legal recognitions of their relationships, however short-lived. For the Marquardts, that has meant trips to Vermont, which recognizes civil unions, as well as California.
Thursday's ruling left many gay and lesbian couples in California unsure what would happen to benefits they briefly received, such as family insurance discounts and medical coverage, after receiving a marriage license.
Though the license was meaningless in Utah, many couples went to San Francisco to get one anyway.
Like the Marquardts, love and political activism spurred Trista Emmer and Kristin Midyett of Salt Lake City to make the trip.
After an all-night drive, they showed up at City Hall on Feb. 13, and were the 73rd couple to get a license that day. They were married on Valentine's Day at the First Unitarian Universalist Church of San Francisco, with the blessing of their families.
"We were really surprised that it felt so good," said Emmer. "And now, I'm surprised that it feels so terrible.
"I feel personally voided by the news, [as if] someone had taken a big eraser and tried to erase our relationship. It's not true - our relationship is still strong, but it feels as though they are trying to erase us."
She has tried to console Midyett with this thought: It "just means we'll get to get married again if it ever becomes legal."
But dashed for the moment are hopes the license might eventually invoke marriage-related rights - in California, if not Utah.
That's a particular concern for Emmer and Midyett, who plan to start a family this year; Midyett will learn any day now whether she is pregnant.
"We're pretty scared for the future because [Trista] won't be able to legally adopt our child," Midyett said. "It's scary. If something were to happen to me, we don't know legally what would happen to our children."
Concern about family status is one reason they are keeping a watchful eye on a proposed constitutional amendment in Utah that would block gay marriages. The Beehive Sate is one of about a dozen states with a gay marriage amendment on the ballot this fall.
"I am trying to be positive about it and hope that Utah voters would choose not to vote that sort of amendment into our constitution, but I'm not feeling terribly optimistic, especially today," Emmer said.
The Marquardts, who between them have five children and five grandchildren, keep their license filed among other important papers.
"It's not hanging in lights in the foyer or anything," Jane Marquardt said. "Hopefully, our grandchildren will wonder what the fuss was all about when they pull it out and look at it.
"This is just a step," she said.
---
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
California ruling
l The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that there are limits on a mayor's authority to interpret state law, which San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom exceeded when he authorized the county clerk to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.
The court decision did not resolve whether the state constitution would permit same-sex marriage, as Massachusetts' highest court found. The justices voted 5-2 to invalidate the marriages in the meantime, to avoid a legal quagmire.
The resolution of these challenges will have to wait until a series of lawsuits over the San Francisco weddings, consolidated into one case, reach California's top court. The next step is the filing of legal briefs, due in San Francisco Superior Court on Sept. 8.
-
Photo here later on