Law Firm of Nichols Kaster, PLLP Opposes Proposed Constitutional Amendment Limiting Marriage Rights of Minnesotans

Minneapolis, MN (PRWEB) May 15, 2012

This November, Minnesota voters will be called on to decide whether to enshrine in our Constitution a measure forbidding same-sex couples from marrying. The law firm of Nichols Kaster, PLLP, strongly and unequivocally opposes the proposed amendment, and encourages all Minnesotans to unite in opposition.

The choice of whom we love, whom we care about, and whom we marry is deeply personal, bounded only by our own values and conscience. Indeed, marriage itself “is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred.” Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479, 486 (1965). The proposed amendment, if enacted, would strike a blow to the individual liberties Minnesotans hold dear. The amendment would displace a fundamentally personal choice, leaving cold, unbending government regulation in its place. Minnesotans ought to decide for themselves whom they marry. The proposed amendment, if approved, would also enshrine inequality in our highest law. The Minnesota Constitution guarantees that, “No member of this state shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen . . . .” Minn. Const. Art. I Sec. 2. The proposed amendment, by singling out and disfavoring a class of Minnesotans in a manner unknown in our state’s history, would erode our cherished tradition of holding each citizen as equal in rights, dignity, and protection under the law.

“As attorneys at Nichols Kaster we feel a unique obligation to speak out strongly and forcefully in opposition to the proposed amendment limiting the marriage rights of Minnesotans,” said Steven Andrew Smith, one of the firm’s partners. Since 1974, Nichols Kaster has centered its practice on protecting and advancing the rights of employees, consumers, and others who have been treated unfairly. “As we have learned from our clients over many years of practice, discrimination is not a technical legal concept; rather, it is a deeply felt moral wrong, one which at once demeans the perpetrator, the victim, and all who live in its shadow. We cannot stand by and do nothing as anti-marriage forces seek to write such discrimination into our founding charter.”

We once again reaffirm our commitment to the protection of our liberties, and to the promise of equality in Minnesota. We call on all Minnesotans to unite in voting NO in November, and rejecting the proposed constitutional amendment seeking to forbid same-sex couples from marrying.