High Court overturns ACT’s same-sex marriage legislation

High Court overturns ACT’s same-sex marriage legislation

act

THE High Court has unanimously struck down the Australian Capital Territory’s same-sex marriage legislation after declaring it unconstitutional.

This means the 27 couples who wed in the ACT when the laws came into effect on December 7 will now have their marriages annulled.

The High Court ruled that the laws were inconsistent with the Federal Marriage Act, which was a victory for the Abbott government, who had sought to appeal the ACT’s same-sex marriage laws that were passed in late October.

The court said any change to the Marriage Act must come from the Federal Government.

“The court held that the federal parliament has power under the Australian Constitution to legislate with respect to same-sex marriage, and that under the Constitution and federal law as it now stands, whether same-sex marriage should be provided for by law is a matter for the federal Parliament,” the court stated in a summary of its judgement.

The news comes a just day after a federal cross-party working group on marriage equality including senators from the Coalition, Labor and the Greens was announced.

Yesterday, Liberal senator Sue Boyce, Labor senator Louise Pratt and the Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young signed a pledge of co-operation forming the basis for the marriage equality working group, a move hailed by advocates as a significant step forward for marriage equality.

The court was expected to have made this decision early last week, however they held their deliberations until today.

This enabled scores of same-sex couples to get married last weekend – a first for Australia – as December 7 was the earliest day they could marry in the ACT under the same-sex marriage laws.

You May Also Like

12 responses to “High Court overturns ACT’s same-sex marriage legislation”

  1. I cant understand why the law could’nt pass as many states have passed legislation in the past on their own without it being over ruled as a federal issue. I am Gay and a catholic, though some might think recognizing gay marriage is a positive thing, there’s also that aspect that its not necessary, marriage was originally formed for the purpose of a male and a female because they were likely to bear children and therefore it was kind of a security arrangement for those purposes. A homosexual person is a different dynamic to those that are heterosexual and in that way I cannot understand the desire to want to marry like heterosexuals do. Modern day heterosexual marriages have a very high divorce rate. These days people are just in love with the idea of marriage, the white dress, big reception, flash honey moon then realize they have nothing in common. The government I feel is doing gays a favor in more ways than none. Also like steve says, does the gay community really know what love and commitment is? has it really evolved much since the stonewall revolution?

    • Just because you don’t understand it doesnt mean that it isn’t important for others. Actually, marriage origininated with abduction and rape, but thankfully that is not the basis for it now. I think you do a great disservice to those who want to marry by trivialising it as you do in your post. Maybe working on your own empathy might be a good way to spend your energy.

  2. Such a “Huge Relief” for the Magnitude of Gay Men especially in Sydney who are no-way interested in Love-Commitment-Marriage as their just to busy sleeping around,and are gold members in Saunas and apps like Gaydar,Manhunt,GRINDER and so fourth,lookimg for yet another root.
    The quickest way to loose a gay guy in Sydney is to mention they word “Commitment” as that would end an endless choosen lifestyle of soul destroying shagging around,mention those words to them and they shit themselves,commitment & monogamy.
    Until gay men can understand the those words there’s no way marriage for us will become legal! it’s very sad.And yes I’m all for marriage ,but it doesn’t matter if your young,old,ugly or good looking no one wants a relationship in Sydney,thanks.

  3. So its back to the Federal Government… Can someone remind me why we don’t “Out” those(closetted) that Vote against gay issues

  4. Great outcome. Who do they think they are anyway.
    Want to live together,fine but don’t try to trash the meaning of marriage,(male and female).

    • Who do they think they are? Law abiding, tax paying citizens of this country probably. Who do you think you are to arrogantly proclaim that marriage should only be for heterosexuals???

      • Hetrosexuals have had their shot at Marriage,yet they still break their sacred vows,but ohh I forgot,60% of them now “Refuse Bluntly” a religious wedding and are married by Celebrants instead in a park.
        Enough said

  5. Let the haters win, or get on a plane, and your marriage is just a couple of hours away in New Zealand. Have your reception in Australia. I did it, and it was fantastic. Your community, will treat you as married. We are still getting wedding presents from friends and family in our remote country town. Do not give up, do let them get to you, get married and do not let someone you do not know, make the decision for you. It is your life.

  6. Always best to get this fixed nationally, the ACT solution always had whiskers. And if you are getting angry…GET ACTIVE!!

  7. Common sense prevails. You can’t have separate laws in every state, territory and the Commonwealth – potentially nine different laws – in the name of equality. Especially when those laws are contrived around the sex of a couple. The ACT law discriminated against opposite sex couples in the same way the amended Commonwealth law discriminates against same sex couples. If equality is the goal (rather then just marriage itself) then the law needs to be gender neutral.