|
Both sides in a legal battle over a proposed ballot initiative to ban gay marriage acknowledged today that the Supreme Judicial Court can not force the Legislature to take a vote.
Assistant Attorney General Peter Sacks told the seven justices in oral arguments this morning that even though the architects of state ballot initiatives intended lawmakers to bring the measures to a vote, the court could not legally force legislators to act before their term expires on Jan. 2. The people's only recourse, Sacks said, was to vote for different senators and representatives next election. "Our position is that judicial relief is not available," said Sacks, who argued on behalf of Senate President Robert Travaglini and the Secretary of State. The lawsuit, spearheaded by Governor Mitt Romney, charges that legislators subverted the state constitution on Nov. 9 when they met in joint session and took no action on a voter-initiative petition to ban gay marriage. John Hanify, a lawyer representing Romney and 10 other plaintiffs, also gave some ground. He conceded that the court could not force the Legislature to take a vote, even though that is what backers of the ban said they wanted when they filed suit last month. Hanify did say, however, that the court could pressure lawmakers to act by spelling out the intentions of Article 48, the provision in the constitution that permits citizen initiatives. "We're not asking you to tell the Legislature how to do their business," he said. "We're only asking you to declare what their constitutional obligations are." The court did not issue a decision, but supporters of the ballot initiative say they want one before the last day of the legislative session on Jan. 2. Backers of a constitutional amendment had collected 170,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot in 2008. To qualify for a statewide referendum, however, a measure needs the support of at least 50 legislators in two consecutive sessions. Instead of acting on the measure, the Legislature moved to recess the joint session until Jan. 2. Travaglini gave an interview that aired this morning on WBUR in which he said he thought the measure should be brought to a vote. "This vote will be based on personal beliefs," said Travaglini. "I do believe, however, in my own personal and political professional view that a vote is the appropriate action to take on the measure, one way or the other." Travaglini was one of the 87 lawmakers who voted against taking a recess last November before the Legislature ruled on the proposed ballot initiative. Source: boston.com |
