9/14/2006
By DIONNE WALKER / Associated Press
In a direct attack on arguments used by opponents to the gay marriage amendment, Republican Attorney General Bob McDonnell Thursday issued a legal opinion saying the amendment, as written, would not have unintended consequences for unmarried, heterosexual couples.
"The passage of the Marriage Amendment will not affect current legal rights and obligations of unmarried persons involving contracts, wills, advance medical directives, shared equity agreements, employer accident and sickness insurance policies or protection under domestic violence laws," McDonnell wrote in the one-page opinion.
He wrote the opinion at the request of five conservative lawmakers: Sen. Steve Newman, R-Lynchburg, Del. David Albo, R-Fairfax, Del. Kathy Byron, R-Campbell, Del. John Cosgrove, R-Chesapeake and Del. Bob Marshall, R-Prince William.
While McDonnell has openly opposed same-sex marriage, his opinion was based on months of legal research and not his personal views, according to spokesman J. Tucker Martin.
The attorney general routinely issues opinions when they're requested.
In the opinion, McDonnell cited the General Assembly's official explanation of the amendment, passed on May 12.
"(It) clearly states that all other legal rights, benefits and obligations continue to be available to unmarried persons," McDonnell wrote. "The intent of the amendment is clear."
The amendment reads that, "Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth."
It goes on to say that lawmakers will neither create nor recognize a legal status for unmarried individuals, "that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage."
It was the latter that concerned Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
Kaine, a vocal opponent to the amendment, argued its final sentences would tie lawmakers' hands if they wanted to create a special status for unmarried couples in the future.
Kaine said he didn't view the opinion as partisan driven, though he noted other lawyers have reached different conclusions about the amendment's potential impact.
"The second and third sentences go so much farther than what Virginia law is now," Kaine told reporters gathered at his downtown office late Thursday. "The potential for unintended consequences is a very serious flaw."
The opinion came about a week after a coalition of 100 Virginia lawyers signed a petition arguing the amendment could indeed impact non-gay couples.
Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, a spokeswoman for the Commonwealth Coalition, leading opponents to the amendment, acknowledged said dueling legal opinions create confusion for voters.
"If you're advocating for significant change you need to tell voters why they should do that," Gastanaga said. "If nobody knows what it means, it shouldn't be in our constitution."