Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen issued the following statement Friday in response to the ruling released by Judge Barbara B. Crabb for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin in the matter of Wolf, et al. v. Walker, et al.
“As Attorney General, I have an obligation to uphold Wisconsin law and our Constitution. While today’s decision is a setback, we will continue to defend the constitutionality of our traditional marriage laws and the constitutional amendment, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters. I will appeal.
Importantly, current law remains in force. I am encouraged by the District Court’s refusal to issue an immediate injunction. We have seen the disruption to couples and families throughout the United States when courts have first allowed same-sex marriage only to have those marriages subsequently called into question by another court. I anticipate the United States Supreme Court will give finality to this issue in their next term.
I will continue defend our Constitution and law in whatever forum is appropriate and I would hope my successor will fulfill this same oath and obligation.”
Gov. Scott Walker’s press secretary Laurel Patrick released the following statement:
“It is correct for the Attorney General, on this or any other issue, to defend the constitution of the state of Wisconsin, especially in a case where the people voted to amend it.”
Democratic Candidate for Governor Mary Burke released the following statement Friday, following Judge Crabb’s ruling on Wisconsin’s gay marriage ban.
“Today is a great day for Wisconsin and committed couples who love each other across the state. Every loving couple should have the freedom to marry whomever they choose, and the fact that this freedom is now available in Wisconsin is something we all can and should be proud of.”
State Senator Glenn Grothman (R – Campbellsport), Republican candidate for Congress, issued the following statement on Judge Crabb’s decision on Wisconsin’s marriage amendment:
“I’m extremely disappointed by this ruling, although I’m not surprised. As we’ve seen again and again, liberal judges are using their courtrooms to advance their extreme left-wing agenda because the people reject their philosophy any time the issue is put to a vote.
“I continue to firmly believe in restoring the traditional family as the center of our society, including a loving mother and father. The ‘progressive’ agenda is slowly eroding the family in order to place government at the center of our lives, and this is seen in attacks on traditional marriage via the courts and by the excessive welfare system that punishes couples who get married.
“I fully support Attorney General Van Hollen’s decision to appeal, and I hope and pray that higher courts will see the error of this decision.”
Attorney General candidate Jon Richards issued the following statement responding to Attorney General Van Hollen’s push to ignore federal court ruling:
“I’m incredibly disappointed that the AG is urging clerks to ignore the law and ignore the constitution and ignore the judge’s ruling.
“He and his allies say they will follow the law. It turns out that he’ll urge clerks to ignore the law to enforce his extreme views.”
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, released the following statement:
“Today’s decision out of Wisconsin marks the twentieth consecutive ruling by a federal or state judge since last year that a discriminatory state marriage ban is unconstitutional. Across the country, the courts agree: same-sex couples and their families need the dignity of marriage, and anti-marriage laws are indefensible. With over 70 marriage cases now making their way through the courts, today’s decision in Wisconsin underscores that all of America is ready for the freedom to marry. It’s time now for the Supreme Court to bring resolution nationwide.”
“Where you live should never limit your ability to marry the person you love,” said Human Rights Campaign (HRC) president Chad Griffin. “All across the country, from coast to coast and everywhere in between, judges are striking marriage discrimination from the books using the U.S. Constitution as their guide. Because of the couples who brought this case, their attorneys with the ACLU and Mayer Brown LLP, and the hundreds of plaintiffs challenging marriage bans across the country, we as a nation are closer than ever before to full equality under the law.”