Business Law Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Business Law - Research Paper Example The best answer for this question is found in the Massachusetts Constitution, which states that all people must have equal dignity, and rights, which means that it does not allow development of second-class citizens. However, the Commonwealth and the Department of Public Health denies civil marriage of same-sex couples. Therefore, the ultimate aim of this context is to outline the case that was held at Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts concerning same-sex marriage (Kiritsy 12). The paper also argues and supports the majority opinion, which represents judicial activism. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk, November 18, 2003 On November 18 2003, there was a case filed by same-sex couples who alleged that they were deprived their rights to acquire a marriage license by the department and Commissioner of Public Health. The couple claimed that the department policy and observation refused to give them the marriage license, which was violation of several stipulations of State Constitution. The case was very complicated and to make judgment was a big dilemma (Vermont Public Radio 43). The superior court department had a cross-motion for judgment and eventually Thomas E. Connolly, J., summarized the case for Department but the plaintiffs appealed. The Supreme Court granted the requests of the parties for direct appellate evaluation and the ultimate opinion by Marshall, C.J, was that: The decree of marriage license were not vulnerable of interpretation therefore, same sex couples qualified to obtain marriage license As a matter of initial reaction, snagging of benefits, protections and compulsion of opposite sexes needed rational foundation and infringed state constitutional equal protection rights. The judgment by the Supreme Court was controversial in a way that some prominent people concurred with it while others differed. Greaney, J., was one of the few people who concurred with it while majority differed. For instance, Spina, J. disagreed with th e judgment and was joined by Cordy, JJ. Sosman also opposed it and was joined by Cordy and Spina while Cordy disputed against the issue of marriage in the case (Foderaro 161). Therefore, since the people who dissented with the judgment represented the judicial activism, it is clear that the activism were the majority in the case. In other words, majority of the people were against the issue of same-sex marriage licensing among them being the Commonwealth and Department of Public Health. In order to understand why majority of opinion represented judicial activism, it is important to understand the aspect of marriage. The Marriage Issue The decree of marriage licensing is both a public records and gatekeeping decree, which lays down minimum requirements for acquiring a marriage license and guides town and city clerks, the department of public health and the registrar to remain and maintain some crucial records of civil marriages. M.G.L.A. c. 207,  §Ã‚ § 19, 20. If the Department of Public Health and Commonwealth were against same-sex marriage and they are the same people who are issued with the qualifications of marriage license, then it means that the judgment was indeed wrong (Katie 111). The judgment was based on the Massachusetts constitution, which supports same-sex marriage, but it