A federal judge on Friday ruled that Michigan 's prohibition on same-sex marriage violates the U.S. Constitution , ordering the state to stop enforcing the ban . `` Today 's decision ... affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority , the guarantee of equal protection must prevail , '' U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman wrote . Michigan is the latest state in which federal judges have struck down state constitutional bans on gay marriage . Similar rulings recently have been issued in Texas , Virginia , Kentucky , Oklahoma and Utah , though in those cases judges have put off enforcement of the decisions until higher courts can weigh in . Friday 's decision is different in that it opens the door for same-sex couples to get marriage licenses in Michigan very soon . Barb Byrum , the elected county clerk for Ingham County and a Democrat , said she is eager and ready to do so once her office opens at 8 a.m. Monday . `` This is a wonderful decision , '' Byrum said . `` Many Michiganders have been waiting for equality in our great state , and I look forward to the opportunity to issue marriage licenses to all loving couples . '' That day may not come so fast . Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette , a Republican whose term expires later this year , announced Friday evening he 's filed an emergency request for Friedman 's order to be stayed and appealed . `` In 2004 , the citizens of Michigan recognized that diversity in parenting is best for kids and families because moms and dads are not interchangeable , '' Schuette said . `` Michigan voters enshrined that decision in our state constitution , and their will should stand and be respected . '' He was referring to the year that voters in Michigan , along with those in 10 other states , passed state constitutional amendments restricting `` marriage or ( a ) similar union '' to between one man and one woman . Whether same-sex couples should be allowed to wed was a hot-button issue then and in subsequent years , with polls showing that most Americans favored restrictions . But public opinion shifted over time . An ABC News/Washington Post survey released earlier this month found that 59 % of Americans favor allowing gay or lesbian couples to legally wed. Michigan 's amendment , specifically , states the rationale for its restrictions is `` to secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children . '' Friedman -- like federal judges in other recent , similar cases -- ruled Michigan 's ban violates the Equal Protection Clause in the U.S. Constitution 's 14th Amendment . He said , `` The court finds the ( Michigan Marriage Amendment ) impermissibly discriminates against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause because the provision does not advance any conceivable state interest . '' The plaintiffs in the Michigan case , April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse , sued in part because Michigan law also `` restricts adoptions to either single persons or married couples . '' They had hoped to jointly adopt three children under their care . Friday 's ruling , then , would seem to open the door to same-sex couples jointly adopting children , since now they could be legally married . In the ruling , Friedman cited the Supreme Court 's landmark decisions last June rejecting parts of the Defense of Marriage Act while ruling same-sex spouses legally married in a state may receive federal benefits . The justices did n't go as far as saying that all states must allow such marriages to take place within their borders , but a number of lower federal courts did subsequently step into the fray . In addition to United States v. Windsor , Friedman also pointed to Loving v. Virginia -- in which the Supreme Court ruled that Virginia 's ban on interracial marriages was unconstitutional . `` Both the Windsor and Loving decisions stand for the proposition that , without some overriding legitimate interest , the state can not use its domestic relations authority to legislate families out of existence , '' the judge wrote . Keeping their own family together is and was DeBoer and Rowse 's No . 1 goal , they said . `` Jayne and I do want to get married , but this case is about the protection of our children , '' a joyful DeBoer said . `` It is not about individuals , it is not about her or my relationship . It is about ensuring that our children will remain together no matter what happens to her and I . ''
Winning plaintiff says , `` This case is about the protection of our children '' Federal judge : Michigan state amendment barring gay marriage is unconstitutional . Michigan is the latest state in which a federal judge has taken action . Its attorney general files appeal to stay , overturn judge 's decision .