Current:Home > reviewsA second high court rules that Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional -AssetLink
A second high court rules that Japan’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional
View
Date:2025-04-16 18:21:36
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! (53)
Related
- Blake Lively’s Inner Circle Shares Rare Insight on Her Life as a Mom to 4 Kids
- Empty office buildings litter U.S. cities. What happens next is up for debate
- Gunfire at Chiefs’ Super Bowl celebration kills 1 and wounds nearly two-dozen, including children
- A former South Dakota attorney general urges the state Supreme Court to let him keep his law license
- Jamaica's Kishane Thompson more motivated after thrilling 100m finish against Noah Lyles
- Super Bowl winner Travis Kelce has a new side hustle — the movies
- Kansas City parade shooting shows gun violence danger lurks wherever people gather in US
- Disneyland performers seek to have union protections like other park employees
- NHL in ASL returns, delivering American Sign Language analysis for Deaf community at Winter Classic
- Lent 2024 food deals: Restaurants offering discounts on fish and new seafood menu items
Ranking
- FACT FOCUS: Inspector general’s Jan. 6 report misrepresented as proof of FBI setup
- Our Place Flash Deal: Save $100 on the Internet-Famous Always Pans 2.0
- Notre Dame's new spire revealed in Paris, marking a milestone in cathedral's reconstruction after fire
- He died 7 years ago, but still sends his wife a bouquet every Valentine's Day
- Audit: California risked millions in homelessness funds due to poor anti-fraud protections
- 'It almost felt like you could trust him.' How feds say a Texas con man stole millions
- Phoenix attorney appointed to Arizona Legislature; will fill vacant seat through November election
- Who should pay on the first date? Experts weigh in on the age-old question.
Recommendation
JoJo Siwa reflects on Candace Cameron Bure feud: 'If I saw her, I would not say hi'
California mansion sits on edge of a cliff after after Dana Point landslide: See photos
Jennifer Lopez's Zodiac-Themed Dress Will Make You Starry Eyed
Rachel Dolezal fired from Arizona teaching job due to OnlyFans account
2024 Olympics: Gymnast Ana Barbosu Taking Social Media Break After Scoring Controversy
Caitlin Clark is on the cusp of the NCAA women’s scoring record. She gets a chance to do it at home
Beyoncé will grace the cover of Essence magazine
Global Warming Could Drive Locust Outbreaks into New Regions, Study Warns