<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV class=timestamp><FONT size=4><EM>New York Times</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV class=timestamp><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV class=timestamp>May 13, 2005</DIV><NYT_HEADLINE version="1.0" type=" ">
<H1>Judge Voids Same-Sex Marriage Ban in Nebraska</H1></NYT_HEADLINE><NYT_BYLINE
version="1.0" type=" ">
<DIV class=byline>By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS </DIV></NYT_BYLINE>
<DIV id=articleInline>
<DIV id=inlineBox><NYT_TEXT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=articleBody>
<P>LINCOLN, Neb., May 12 (AP) - A federal judge on Thursday struck down
Nebraska's ban on same-sex marriage, saying the measure interfered not only with
the rights of gay couples but also with those of foster parents, adopted
children and people in a variety of other living arrangements.</P>
<P>The amendment to the state's Constitution, which defined marriage as a union
between a man and a woman, was passed overwhelmingly by the voters in November
2000.</P>
<P>The Nebraska ruling is the first in which a federal court has struck down a
state ban on same-sex marriage, and conservatives in the United States Senate
pointed to it as evidence of the need for a federal constitutional amendment
banning same-sex marriage. </P>
<P>"When we debated the merits of a federal marriage amendment on the Senate
floor, opponents claimed that no state laws were threatened, that no judge had
ever ruled against state marriage laws," said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of
Texas. He added, "After today's ruling, they can no longer make that claim."
</P>
<P>The drive for a constitutional amendment stalled out after the last election
as Senate leaders said they would await court rulings on the many state
constitutional amendments that already ban same-sex marriage.</P>
<P>The judge in the Nebraska case, Joseph F. Bataillon of Federal District
Court, said the ban "imposes significant burdens on both the expressive and
intimate associational rights" of gay men and lesbians "and creates a
significant barrier to the plaintiffs' right to petition or to participate in
the political process."</P>
<P>Judge Bataillon said the ban went "far beyond merely defining marriage as
between a man and a woman." He said the "broad proscriptions could also
interfere with or prevent arrangements between potential adoptive or foster
parents and children, related persons living together, and people sharing
custody of children as well as gay individuals."</P>
<P>Forty states have laws barring same-sex marriages, but Nebraska's ban went
further, prohibiting same-sex couples from enjoying many of the legal
protections that heterosexual couples enjoy. Gay men and lesbians who work for
the state or the University of Nebraska system, for example, were banned from
sharing benefits with their partners.</P>
<P>Nebraska has no state law against same-sex marriage, but Attorney General Jon
Bruning said it was not allowed before the ban and would not be permitted now.
Mr. Bruning said he would appeal the ruling.</P>
<P>The challenge to the marriage law was filed by the gay rights organization
Lambda Legal and the Lesbian and Gay Project of the American Civil Liberties
Union.</P>
<P>A lawyer for Lambda Legal, David Buckel, has called the ban "the most extreme
anti-gay family law in the entire nation."</P>
<P>Massachusetts has allowed same-sex marriages since last May; Vermont has
offered civil unions since 2000. The actions came after courts ruled that gay
couples were being discriminated against. </P>
<P>Those court decisions spurred the move last year for a federal constitutional
amendment to ban same-sex marriage, a move President Bush has said he supports.
A subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a May 19 hearing
on the need for such an amendment.</P></DIV></NYT_TEXT></DIV></BODY></HTML>