“Whether under the Constitution same-sex couples may every be denied the right to marry, a right that has long been enjoyed by opposite-sex couples, is an important and highly controversial question,” Reinhardt wrote before adding, “we need not and do not answer the broader question in this case.”

A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California’s Proposition 8, handing gay groups a big win while avoiding the larger question of whether the U.S. Constitution guarantees gays nationwide the right to “marry”

The outcome by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was not a huge surprise, as the three-judge panel seemed inclined during oral arguments to overturn Prop 8, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman and was passed at the ballot in 2008. But it was a landmark decision and marked the first time an appeals court in the U.S. has ruled that same-sex couples in a state have a right to “marry.” The ruling will be appealed and could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 2-1 decision affirmed a 2010 lower court ruling by Judge Vaughn Walker, now retired.

“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote for the majority. “… By using their initiative power to target a minority group and withdraw a right that is possessed, without a legitimate reason for doing so, the People of California violated the Equal Protection Clause.”

But the ruling was not the home run gay groups had hoped it would be, and its impact could be limited to California, meaning it might not affect the 28 other states with constitutional amendments defining marriage in the traditional sense. Reinhardt — a nominee of President Carter — called the decision “narrow” and said it was not answering the broader question of whether states ever can define marriage as between a man and a woman. Walker, in 2010, had said there was a federal constitutional right for such unions.

“Whether under the Constitution same-sex couples may every be denied the right to marry, a right that has long been enjoyed by opposite-sex couples, is an important and highly controversial question,” Reinhardt wrote before adding, “we need not and do not answer the broader question in this case.”

Reinhardt was joined in the opinion by Michael Daly Hawkins, a nominee of President Clinton. Judge N. Randy Smith, a nominee of President George W. Bush, dissented.

Alliance Defense Fund attorney Dale Schowengerdt said that while the decision’s outcome was more narrow than Walker’s, its reasoning in striking down Prop 8 was broad.

[Editor’s note: This article is incomplete. The source for this document was originally published on bpnews.net—however, the original URL is no longer available.]