Federal judges were openly dismissive of arguments made by an assistant Wisconsin attorney general in support of the state's same-sex marriage ban Tuesday, saying the tradition of marriage is not a valid reason to no longer extend the same marital rights to same-sex couples.
“What is the harm in allowing these people to marry? Does it harm heterosexual marriages? Does it harm children?” one of three federal judges asked Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Timothy Samuelson at the end of Samuelson’s allotted 20-minute time frame to make the state’s case.
Samuelson responded by saying the yellow light on his lectern was flashing, a sign used by the court to alert attorneys their time is up.
“It wouldn’t save you,” one judge told him, eliciting laughter from those in the courtroom.
“It was worth a shot,” Samuelson said.
Oral arguments in the Chicago-based 7th Circuit Court of Appeals lasted just over two hours. The court combined similar cases from Indiana and Wisconsin, where the states are arguing their same-sex marriage bans should remain in place.
U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Crabb ruled June 6 that Wisconsin’s law was unconstitutional. The state immediately appealed, prompting Crabb to stay her decision a week later until the appellate court made a ruling.
During that week, more than 500 same-sex couples, 215 in Dane County, were married in Wisconsin.
Chris Geidner, BuzzFeed’s legal editor who has followed numerous same-sex marriage cases in federal court, reported on the oral arguments in Chicago Tuesday. Geidner described the trial in his story as “the most lopsided arguments” over marriage bans at a federal appeals court this year.
“Y’all. I’ve seen 10 federal appellate arguments over marriage, and I ain’t seen nothing like this,” Geidner tweeted from court.
The three judge appeals court panel consists of Judge Richard A. Posner, appointed by President Ronald Reagan; Judge David F. Hamilton, appointed by President Barack Obama; and Judge Ann Claire Williams, appointed by President Bill Clinton. Williams was first appointed to a federal judgeship by Reagan, according to the Indianapolis Star.
Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law who has been following a number of the same-sex cases in federal courts across the country, said before arguments were heard that the plaintiffs in the case were fortunate to draw this particular three-judge panel.
“I think it would be hard for the (state) to get two votes on that panel,” Tobias told the Indianapolis Star.