This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/americas/7981893.stm

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Iowa upholds gay marriage rights Iowa upholds gay marriage rights
(30 minutes later)
The Supreme Court in Iowa has ruled that a ban on same-sex marriages in the US state was unconstitutional. Iowa's Supreme Court has ruled that a ban on same-sex marriages in the US state was unconstitutional.
The judges rejected an appeal against a lower court's 2007 ruling that the ban violated the rights of gay men and women in the state.The judges rejected an appeal against a lower court's 2007 ruling that the ban violated the rights of gay men and women in the state.
The case stems from a 2005 suit filed by a New York-based gay-rights group on behalf of six gay and lesbian couples.The case stems from a 2005 suit filed by a New York-based gay-rights group on behalf of six gay and lesbian couples.
Iowa now becomes the third US state to allow same-sex marriages after Connecticut and Massachusetts.Iowa now becomes the third US state to allow same-sex marriages after Connecticut and Massachusetts.
In 2007, Polk County Judge Robert Hanson ruled that the state's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman, violated the couples' constitutional rights.
On the same day Polk County attorney John Sarcone filed an appeal arguing that the issue should be left to the legislature.
But the Supreme Court rejected the appeal and the Associated Press reported that Mr Sarcone would not ask for a rehearing, meaning the court's decision should take effect after in three weeks' time.
Lambda Legal, which filed the case, said the couples, three of whom had children, had been together for between five and 16 years.Lambda Legal, which filed the case, said the couples, three of whom had children, had been together for between five and 16 years.
The group had said the couples wanted "the responsibilities of marriage and the protections only marriage can provide".The group had said the couples wanted "the responsibilities of marriage and the protections only marriage can provide".
They also said the couples' children and future children should have the right to "have their families treated fairly".