In light of all of these circumstances we conclude that retention of the traditional definition of marriage does not constitute a state interest sufficiently compelling, under the strict scrutiny equal protection standard, to justify withholding that status from same-sex couples. Accordingly, insofar as the provisions of sections 300 and 308.5 draw a distinction between opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples and exclude the latter from access to the designation of marriage, we conclude these statutes are unconstitutional.
Aldus het California Supreme Court, overwegend Republikeins, aan het eind van haar overweging om een verbod op het homohuwelijk ongrondwettelijk te verklaren. Dat wordt een feestje vandaag op IDAHO, de International Day Against Homophobia.