All they sought was wedded bliss. But the hopes of three gay couples in the early 1990s sparked a contentious, eight-year debate over same-sex marriage in Hawai'i as attorneys, religious and civil rights groups, lawmakers and — finally — voters grappled with its central question: Was matrimony the exclusive privilege of a man and a woman?
Patrick Lagon and Joseph Melillo, a gay couple from Pearl City, turned to attorney Dan Foley after state Health Department officials denied their request for a marriage license in 1990. They were joined by two lesbian couples and in May 1991, Foley sued the state on grounds that the denial was unconstitutional. The judge threw out the case.
Foley's appeal to the Hawai'i Supreme Court produced a landmark opinion in May 1993 that found the state's ban on same-sex marriage to be a violation of the state constitution's equal rights amendment. The ruling fueled national debate on the issue and set off a chain reaction: 29 states approved laws that prohibited gay marriage or recognition of gay marriages in other states.
The court did not award marriage licenses to Foley's clients and instead reinstated the lawsuit in Circuit Court, where it came to trial in 1996. To prevail, the state would have to give a compelling reason why gay and lesbian couples should not be allowed to marry. But in December 1996, Circuit Judge Kevin Chang rejected the state's argument for a ban on same-sex marriage.
In the spring of 1997, the state Legislature joined the debate, passing a pair of laws in the hope of finding a compromise for the bitter issue. One of them placed a proposed constitutional amendment on the November 1998 ballot that, if approved, would allow the lawmakers to define marriage as exclusively between one man and one woman.
An emotional campaign ensued, with both sides spending more than $1 million each on advertising. It was second only to the governor's race in intensity. Much of the money came from Mainland donors.
This time, same-sex marriage supporters lost. Nearly 70 percent of Hawai'i voters sided with the state's right to define the union.
Since the defeat, all that remained for gay couples was the other law passed by the 1997 Legislature, which passed a reciprocal-benefits law allowing same-sex couples to obtain some of the benefits of married couples. Gay rights advocates have insisted ever since that that law offers them little.
