“[A]s this Court has respectfully explained, in America even sincere and long-held religious views do not trump the constitutional rights of those who happen to have been out-voted,” he wrote in his opinion.

The Kentucky decision is the latest in a string of federal court rulings against state same-sex marriage bans, the latest of which saw Indiana’s ban struck last week. A federal appeals court there delivered a much more limited victory, also on Tuesday, ordering Indiana to recognize the marriage of a lesbian couple “on an emergency basis.” One of the spouses is terminally ill fighting ovarian cancer.

AD

AD

Tuesday’s ruling in Kentucky represents the 23rd consecutive pro-marriage ruling since a key Supreme Court decision last summer, according to a list maintained by Freedom to Marry, a group that advocates for same-sex marriage. That ruling, in U.S. v. Windsor, struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, granting married same-sex couples federal recognition and arming judges with the legal precedent to overturn state bans. Eighteen rulings have been issued by federal courts, affecting policies in 14 states, according to Freedom to Marry. Challenges have been filed against every state gay marriage ban and bans have been struck in 10 states, the group says.

Judge Heyburn in February ruled that Kentucky must recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and, in doing so, alluded to the decision that came Tuesday. The February case, he wrote at the time, did not deal with the constitutionality of Kentucky’s ban, but, he added, “there is no doubt that Windsor and this Court’s analysis suggest a possible result to that question.”

That result came, at least for now, in Heyburn’s ruling. In it, he argued that allowing same-sex marriages places little burden on opponents.

AD

AD

“Sometimes, by upholding equal rights for a few, courts necessarily must require others to forebear some prior conduct or restrain some personal instinct. Here, that would not seem to be the case,” he wrote. “Assuring equal protection for same-sex couples does not diminish the freedom of others to any degree. Thus, same-sex couples’ right to marry seems to be a uniquely ‘free’ constitutional right.”