Current:Home > reviewsA second high court rules that Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional -StockSource
A second high court rules that Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional
View
Date:2025-04-24 20:16:57
TOKYO (AP) — A second Japanese high court ruled Wednesday that the government’s policy against same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, the latest in a series of decisions upholding plaintiffs’ demands for marriage equality.
The Tokyo High Court called the ongoing ban “a groundless legal discrimination based on sexual orientation,” saying it violates the constitutional guarantee of right to equality, as well as individuals’ dignity and equality between sexes. It was a clearer statement than the 2022 lower court decision that described the situation as “an unconstitutional state.”
The Sapporo High Court ruling in March said not allowing same-sex couples to marry and enjoy the same benefits as straight couples violates their fundamental right to equality and freedom of marriage. Wednesday’s ruling is the seventh overall that found the ongoing ban to be unconstitutional or nearly so, against only one district court decision that found it constitutional. The rulings can still be appealed to the Supreme Court.
In Wednesday’s ruling, Presiding Judge Sonoe Taniguchi also wrote that the purpose of marriage is not only to produce offspring but also to ensure stable legal status for the partners, and that there is no rational reason to justify excluding same-sex couples. She said there is a shared international consensus against discriminating based on sexual orientation.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said Wednesday’s ruling has not been finalized and that his government will continue to watch other pending court cases.
Still, the winning streak has raised hopes among the LGBTQ+ community.
Plaintiffs cheered outside of the court Wednesday, while their supporters held banners carrying messages such as “Further advance toward marriage equality!” and “No more waiting for legal revision!”
Makiko Terahara, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, welcomed the ruling, calling it historic. She and her fellow lawyers in a statement demanded the government immediately take steps “to open the door for marriage equality.”
“I felt grateful to be alive when I heard the word ‘unconstitutional’ from the judge,” said Yoko Ogawa, a plaintiff in her 60s. She said she worries about a lack of legal protection for her and her partner as they age, and that “I hope to see progress toward legalization as soon as possible.”
Their main obstacle, Japan’s conservative Liberal Democratic Party’s ruling coalition, lost a parliamentary majority in Sunday’s election and is likely to have to compromise on more liberal policies pushed by the opposition parties such as marriage equality, which is largely supported by the general public.
Japan is the only member of the Group of Seven industrialized countries that does not recognize same-sex marriage or provide any other form of legally binding protection for LGBTQ+ couples.
Six lawsuits on marriage equality have been filed at five regions across Japan since 2019. LGBTQ+ activists and their supporters have stepped up their efforts, and in 2023, the government adopted a law that is not legally binding that states discrimination is unacceptable.
Hundreds of municipalities have issued partnership certificates as a workaround for same-sex couples to lower their hurdles in renting apartments and facing other forms of discrimination, but it does not provide the same legal benefit as heterosexual couples, Wednesday’s ruling said.
The court, however, rejected a request by the seven plaintiffs that the government pay them 1 million yen (about $6,500) each in compensation for damages suffered under the current system that does not recognize them as legally married.
On Tuesday, the United Nations women’s rights committee in Geneva published a report that urged the Japanese government to amend civil code to allow an option of allowing married couples to retain separate surnames. It noted that the current law requiring only one surname compels virtually all women to adopt their husband’s surname, another issue also stalled by the LDP for decades.
The U.N. committee also urged Japan to revise the male-only succession rule under the Imperial House Law to allow a female emperor.
Hayashi called the report “regrettable” and “inappropriate.” He said the imperial succession is a matter of national foundation and that it is not part of constitutional basic rights.
___
Associated Press video journalist Ayaka McGill contributed to this report.
veryGood! (2)
Related
- Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
- US, Japan and South Korea hold drills in disputed sea as Biden hosts leaders of Japan, Philippines
- Trump will be first ex-president on criminal trial. Here’s what to know about the hush money case
- O.J. Simpson murder trial divided America. Those divisions remain nearly 30 years later.
- $73.5M beach replenishment project starts in January at Jersey Shore
- A near-total ban on abortion has supercharged the political dynamics of Arizona, a key swing state
- Vietnam property tycoon Truong My Lan sentenced to death in whopping $27 billion fraud case
- Prosecutors: South Carolina prison supervisor took $219,000 in bribes; got 173 cellphones to inmates
- Sonya Massey's father decries possible release of former deputy charged with her death
- O.J. Simpson just died. Is it too soon to talk about his troubled past?
Ranking
- South Korean president's party divided over defiant martial law speech
- Biden administration announces another round of loan cancellation under new repayment plan
- Lifetime to air documentary on Nicole Brown Simpson, O.J. Simpson's ex-wife who was killed
- Houston hospital halts liver and kidney transplants after learning a doctor manipulated some records
- Newly elected West Virginia lawmaker arrested and accused of making terroristic threats
- Water From Arsenic-Laced Wells Could Protect the Pine Ridge Reservation From Wildfires
- Maryland members of Congress unveil bill to fund Baltimore bridge reconstruction
- When should I retire? It may be much later in life than you think.
Recommendation
Moving abroad can be expensive: These 5 countries will 'pay' you to move there
Golden Bachelor's Gerry Turner and Theresa Nist Break Up 3 Months After Wedding
Maryland program to help Port of Baltimore businesses retain employees begins
Is there lead in Lunchables? What to know after Consumer Reports released guidance to USDA
Trump invites nearly all federal workers to quit now, get paid through September
Commercial vehicle crashes into Texas Department of Public Safety office, multiple people injured
The 3 secrets of 401(k) millionaires
California fishermen urge action after salmon fishing is canceled for second year in a row