| Part of theLGBTQ rights series |
Recognized |
Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage |
See also
|
Notes
|
 LGBTQ portal |
Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized inMaryland since January 1, 2013. In 2012, the state'sDemocratic representatives, led byGovernorMartin O'Malley, began a campaign for its legalization. After much debate, a law permitting same-sex marriage was passed by theGeneral Assembly (Maryland'sbicamerallegislature, composed of theSenate and theHouse of Delegates) in February 2012 and signed on March 1, 2012. The law took effect on January 1, 2013 after 52.4% of voters approved astatewide referendum held on November 6, 2012. The vote was hailed as a watershed moment bygay rights activists and marked the first timemarriage rights in the United States had been extended to same-sex couples by popular vote.[1] Maryland was the ninthU.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage.[a]
Upon the rise of thesame-sex marriage movement in the early 1970s, Maryland established the first law in theUnited States that expressly definedmarriage to be "a union between a man and a woman". Attempts to both ban and legalize same-sex marriage in the 1990s and 2000s failed to gain enough support from centralcommittees of the General Assembly.Roman Catholic authorities throughout the state were adamantly opposed to the legalization of same-sex marriage, saying it deeply conflicted with the best interests of society,[2] and would threaten religious liberty.[3] The debates produced disputes between individuals who had been traditionally aligned on causes and prompted sharp criticism fromAfrican-American religious leaders who said same-sex marriage would "disrupt the fabric of the culture".[4]
Before passage of theCivil Marriage Protection Act, the state recognized same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions following the 2010 release of alegal opinion fromAttorney GeneralDoug Gansler in his nine-month analysis ofcomity laws. In 2012, theMaryland Court of Appeals maintained Gansler's analysis. It issued a unanimous decision inPort v. Cowan finding that a same-sex marriage performed out-of-state must be considered equal and valid under state law, despite its earlier decision inConaway v. Deane in 2007, in which the court upheld thestatutory ban on same-sex marriage as constitutional.[5]
Maryland holds a unique place in thehistory ofsame-sex marriage in the United States.[6] In 1973, it became the firstU.S. state in the nation to definemarriage as "a union between a man and a woman", expressly banningsame-sex marriage.[7][8] TheMaryland General Assembly passed the law a short time after voters in the state ratified Article 46 of theMaryland Declaration of Rights, commonly referred to as the Equal Rights Amendment, in November 1972.[9] The constitutional provision prohibiteddiscrimination in equality of rights on the basis of sex.[10] In 1975, amarriage license was issued to two women, Michele Bernadette Bush and Paulette Camille Hill, inMontgomery County. Although thecounty clerk had issued the license and Attorney GeneralFrancis B. Burch had published an opinion that county officials could not challenge the validity of the marriage, the license was later revoked.[11]
During the 1990s, attempts to both ban and legalize same-sex marriage did not pass through the General Assembly.[12][13][14] After a committee in theMaryland House of Delegates voted in March 2004 to reject a pair of marriage bills that would have submitted aconstitutional amendment against same-sex marriage to voters and invalidated same-sex marriages performed in another state or foreign country, theAmerican Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) andEquality Maryland filed alawsuit,Deane & Polyak v. Conaway,[15] to challenge the existing law on behalf of nine same-sex couples and onebereaved man whose partner had died.[16] Thelead plaintiffs, from whom the case received its name, were Gita Deane, a learning specialist atGoucher College, and her partner Lisa Polyak, anenvironmental engineer for theU.S. Army Medical Department.[17] Theplaintiffs had applied for marriage licenses in several differentcounties but were denied by county clerks.[18][19] In theircomplaint, the plaintiffs argued that the state'sstatutory ban on same-sex marriage violated constitutional protections ofdue process,equality, and prohibitions against sex discrimination in Articles 24 and 46 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights.[15][18]
In January 2006,BaltimoreCircuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock grantedsummary judgment to the plaintiffs,[20] writing that "Family law §2-201 violates Article 46 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights because it discriminates, based on gender against a suspect class, and is not narrowly tailored to serve any compelling governmental interests."[9] She added that "tradition and social values alone cannot support adequately a discriminatory statutory classification",[21] because "when tradition is the guise under which prejudice or animosity hides, it is not a legitimate state interest."[22] The judge immediatelystayed the decision pending anappeal by theAttorney General of Maryland,[20]J. Joseph Curran Jr., which occurred later that day.[23]
While the decision was favored by the plaintiffs, gay rights groups and their supporters, including more than 100 religious leaders andchild welfare advocates across the state who filedamicus briefs,[23][24] other local religious leaders andevangelical ministers were upset by the decision and looked to state legislators to propose a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.[25] Such an amendment was favored by GovernorBob Ehrlich who said "my politics on this are very clear. We're going to protect marriage. Traditional marriage."[26] In February 2006, the proposed ban was rejected after opponents successfully amended it to legalizecivil unions.[27][28] Consequently, DelegateDon Dwyer introduced aresolution toimpeach Judge Murdock in 2006, alleging "misbehavior in office, [willful] neglect of duty, and incompetency" for hertrial court decision.[29] In 2007, he introduced a law that would ban discussion of same-sex unions in public schools.[30][31] One lawmaker said "It is a clear attempt to intimidate judges and to make the judiciary subservient to the legislature", and Michael Conroy, former president of theMaryland State Bar Association, said that "No basis in fact or law exists to support any suggestion to impeach Murdock for her recent decision on same-sex marriage."[32] David Rocah, an attorney for the ACLU, called the resolution "a frivolous, dangerous and extremist response from the lunatic fringe."[29] Both of the measures failed to pass through committee.[32]
TheCourt of Appeals, Maryland's highest court, agreed to hear the state's appeal in 2006, bypassing theintermediate court.[33] To the surprise of spectators, there were almost no questions from the judges duringoral argument, which took place on December 4, 2006,[33] causing speculation that the court may have taken the appeal just to reverse the Circuit Court ruling.[33] On September 18, 2007, the court issued its decision inConaway v. Deane & Polyak, overturning the trial court ruling for the plaintiffs in a 4–3 decision, and holding that the statutory ban on same-sex marriage did not violate theMaryland Constitution.[5]
JudgeGlenn T. Harrell, Jr. wrote that, because the statute equally barred both men and women from marrying partners of the same sex, it was not discriminatory on the basis of sex and thus did not violate the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) as plaintiffs had argued.[34][35] Judge Harrell said that the ERA was intended to prohibit sex discrimination against women and did not apply to this case, which he said was a matter ofsexual orientation.[35] JudgeLynne A. Battaglia wrote adissenting opinion stating that the statutes and ordinances in Maryland barring discrimination based on sexual orientation, in addition to the state's lack of prohibitingadoption by same-sex couples and its recognition of same-sex couples as co-parents, support the argument that denying committed same-sex couples the full benefits and privileges of marriage is not related to any rational government interest.[36] Judge Battaglia said she would haveremanded the case to circuit court for a full trial in order to settle what she deemed a central factual issue: whether the state could demonstrate that it had "broad societal interest" in retaining marriage in the traditional form.[5] The dissenting opinion from Chief JudgeRobert M. Bell faulted the majority for not recognizing gay people as asuspect class in need of protection fromdiscrimination.[5] He dismissed the majority view that gays and lesbians are politically empowered and should not be viewed as constituting such a class.[5]
Evan Wolfson, founder ofFreedom to Marry, said that the decision was "deeply flawed" because the 4–3 majority did not answer the question of how denying marriage to same-sex couples affected the ability of heterosexual couples toprocreate.[37] President of theHuman Rights Campaign,Joe Solmonese, called the decision a "setback" and Ken Choe, the ACLU attorney who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, expressed hope that, unlike the majority of the bench, the General Assembly would be able to see "that lesbian and gay couples form committed relationships and loving families just like heterosexual couples":[37][38]
We're hopeful that, unlike the court, the legislature will see that lesbian and gay Marylanders shouldn't be barred from the hundreds of important protections that come with marriage simply because the person whom they love is a person of the same sex.
State SenatorRichard Madaleno requested in 2009 that Attorney GeneralDoug Gansler answer the question of whether same-sex marriages could be recognized by the state.[39] In February 2010, Gansler issued an opinion after a nine-month analysis of state laws,[40] stating that valid same-sex marriages performed in states that permit same-sex marriage could be recognized under Maryland law.[39][41] Gansler stated that the opinion was not binding on the courts, and state agencies could begin immediately to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages.[39][40] He said that he expected the opinion to be quickly challenged in court.[40]
The opinion garnered negative reactions from someRepublicans,socially conservativeDemocrats, and severalAfrican-American lawmakers, including delegatesEmmett C. Burns, Jr. and Don Dwyer, who spoke out against the opinion and promised to initiate impeachment proceedings against Gansler. "It is not up to the attorney general, and that's the reason I will be bringing charges of impeachment," Dwyer said in a statement where he described the Attorney General asusurping the law.[40] The Roman Catholic Archbishops ofWashington andBaltimore and theBishop of Wilmington also took "strong exception" to the decision.[39][40]
Recognition of same-sex marriages from other states becameprecedent when the Court of Appeals ruled in a case fromPrince George's County in May 2012. The couple, two women who had legallymarried in California, had been denied adivorce by the circuit court.[42] On May 18, 2012, the Court of Appeals published a unanimous ruling inPort v. Cowan that validated the marriage of Jessica Port and Virginia Cowan because it said "no viable decision by the Court had deemed a valid foreign marriage to be 'repugnant'" even if the marriage was void or punishable as a crime were it performed in Maryland.[43] The opinion cited conflicts that arose from decisions inAnne Arundel andSt. Mary's counties where two same-sex couples had theirpetitions for divorce granted, and another case inBaltimore where it was denied.[42][44] The decision of the court was based on the state's traditional use of thecommon law doctrine ofcomity, which specifies that Maryland "will give effect to laws and judicial decisions of another state or jurisdiction, not as a matter of obligation but out of deference and respect."[42]
After the Court of Appeals upheld the statutory ban on same-sex marriage in 2007, State SenatorGwendolyn Britt ofLandover Hills, along with delegatesVictor R. Ramirez andBen Barnes, sought tosponsor a marriage bill in the General Assembly.[45] On January 12, 2008, Britt died ofheart failure.[46] The executive director of Equality Maryland, Dan Furmansky, who originally approached Britt to sponsor the legislation, said her death was a "devastating loss, but civil rights struggles are greater than any one person, and as our fight for equality in Maryland continues, her spirit will be with us."[46] On January 25, 2008, theReligious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act was introduced to the House of Delegates.[47] The Senate version of the bill was introduced by senators Richard Madaleno andJamie Raskin the same day.[48][49] Advocates held arally in support of the bill on February 11, 2008, but it ultimately failed in committee,[50] alongside a constitutional ban introduced by Don Dwyer.[51]
While early efforts to legalize same-sex marriage failed, the General Assembly approved two laws in 2008 that grant all unmarried couples certaindomestic partnership rights, including the ability to makehospital andnursing home visits, end-of-life choices and other medical decisions, as well as rights tojoint property ownership.[52] Domestic partners must be at least 18 years old and be able to provide anaffidavit attesting to their relationship along with two documents, such as jointchecking accounts,mortgages or car leases, coverage on health insurance policies or the designation as a primarybeneficiary in awill.[53] The laws went into effect on July 1, 2008.[54]
The General Assembly first considered theCivil Marriage Protection Act in 2011. GovernorMartin O'Malley stated that he would sign the bill, despite urges from Archbishop of BaltimoreEdwin Frederick O'Brien requesting that he "resist pressure to do so".[2] O'Malley said "I have concluded that discriminating against individuals based on their sexual orientation in the context of civil marital rights is unjust. I have also concluded that treating the children of families headed by same-sex couples with lesser protections under the law than the children of families headed by heterosexual parents, is also unjust."[2] On February 24, 2011, theSenate, which was thought to be the biggest obstacle to passage, approved the bill in a 25–21 vote.[55] The House of Delegates proved to be a challenge, where same-sex marriage advocates struggled to gain support from social conservatives fromPrince George's County,southern Maryland and the Baltimore suburbs, who cited religious concerns.[56]
The debate highlighted disagreements between openly gay lawmakers and some black lawmakers on whether same-sex marriage is a matter ofcivil rights.[57] DelegateEmmett C. Burns, Jr. said: "If you want to compare same-sex marriage to civil rights as I know it, show me theKu Klux Klan that invaded your home."[57] DelegateKeiffer J. Mitchell, Jr., grandson ofNAACP chief lobbyistClarence M. Mitchell, Jr.,[56] said "It is a civil rights issue when we as a state and a government deny equal protection under the law."[58] Several delegates who originally co-sponsored the bill began to express doubts after beinglobbied by church-going constituents, includingSam Arora,[59] andTiffany Alston, who delayed the bill's vote in the House committee by skipping the voting session.[55] The bill passed through the committee after its chairman, who rarely votes in committee, voted in favor.[55] The Housemajority whip opposed the bill.[55] Despite pleas from gay lawmakers, the House of Delegates voted to send the bill back to committee on March 11, 2011 and would not reconsider it before January 2012.[55]
| Yes 60–70% 50–60% | No 70–80% 60–70% 50–60% |
TheCivil Marriage Protection Act was reintroduced to the General Assembly on January 23, 2012.[60] The new version of the bill contained provisions that more explicitly protects religious leaders, institutions, and their programs from legal action if they refuse to officiate or provide facilities for a same-sex marriage or couple as a matter of theirdoctrine.[61] During the legislative process, several high-profile political figures attempted to persuade legislators to vote in favor of the bill, including former PresidentBill Clinton, former Vice PresidentDick Cheney,Terry McAuliffe, andKen Mehlman.[62] TheHouse of Delegates passed the bill with a 72–67 vote on February 17, 2012 and the Senate passed with a 25–22 vote on February 23, 2012.[63][64] To secure support from some lawmakers who desired to submit the law to a publicreferendum, the bill was amended to take effect on January 1, 2013.[65]
| Political affiliation | Voted for | Voted against | Absent (Did not vote) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic Party | 24
| – | |
| Republican Party | – | ||
| Total | 25 | 22 | 0 |
| 53.2% | 46.8% | 0.0% |
Governor O'Malley signed the bill on March 1, 2012.[68][69] In June 2012, referendum supporters submitted 109,313 valid signatures to theState Secretary,John P. McDonough,[70] more than the 55,736 required for aballot in Maryland.[71] The language of Question 6 informed voters that theCivil Marriage Protection Act would allow same-sex couples to obtain a civil marriage license, protectclergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs, and affirm that each religious faith hasexclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith.[72] On November 6, 2012, the measure passed with 52.4% of the vote.[73][74] On November 29, 2012, Attorney General Gansler issued a legal opinion stating that court clerks could accept applications for marriage licenses immediately and issue them on December 6, 2012, as long as the effective date on the licenses specified January 1, 2013.[75] 20 out of the 23counties in Maryland and the city ofBaltimore chose to issue the licenses ahead of schedule.[76] Among the first couples to be issued a license were Jessie Weber and Nancy Eddy, who received a marriage license at theClarence M. Mitchell Jr. Courthouse in Baltimore. "It's important from a legal standpoint, to have the protections of marriage. But even more than that, it's affirming to be recognized by the state. Our ceremony was with our community, our family, our friends, but this feels like being with the entire state. So this is really special", Weber said.[77] The first marriages were solemnized on Tuesday, January 1, 2013. TheMayor of Baltimore,Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, married six couples atBaltimore City Hall that day.[78]
Maryland statutes now state the following:[79]
Only a marriage between two individuals who are not otherwise prohibited from marrying is valid in this State. [MD Fam L Code § 2-201 (2013)]
A study from theUniversity of California, Los Angeles estimated in 2007 that extendingmarriage rights to same-sex couples would result in anet gain of approximately$3.2 million each year to thestate budget.[80] The study drew on data from theU.S. Census Bureau and Maryland statistical reports. The gain is attributable to savings in expenditures onmeans-testedpublic benefit programs and an increase insales andlodgingtax revenue fromweddings and wedding-relatedtourism.[80]
AnotherWilliams Institute study conducted in February 2012 estimated that in the first three years of legalization, Maryland same-sex couples would generate between $40 and $64 million for the stateeconomy, in addition to whateverrevenue out-of-state couples bring.[81] Several dozen small employers in the state have also said that same-sex marriage would be good for their businesses, helping to attract and retain talent.[82]
Data from the2000 U.S. census showed that 11,243 same-sex couples were living in Maryland. By 2005, this had increased to more than 15,600 couples, likely attributed to same-sex couples' growing willingness to disclose their partnerships on government surveys. Same-sex couples lived in all counties of the state and constituted 1.0% of coupled households and 0.6% of all households in the state. Most couples lived inBaltimore,Montgomery County, andPrince George's County. Same-sex partners in Maryland were on average younger than opposite-sex partners, and more likely to be employed. However, the average household income of same-sex couples was lower than different-sex couples, and same-sex couples were also far less likely to own a home than opposite-sex partners. 21% of same-sex couples in Maryland were raising children under the age of 18, with an estimated 5,900 children living in households headed by same-sex couples in 2005.[83]
40,456 marriages were performed in Maryland in 2013, an increase of 23% from the year prior thought to be largely attributed to the legalization of same-sex marriage on January 1.[84] The state had not recorded such a significant increase in the number of marriages since 1970.[85]
The2020 U.S. census showed that there were 12,969 married same-sex couple households (5,427 male couples and 7,542 female couples) and 8,488 unmarried same-sex couple households in Maryland.[86]
.svg)