This woman Kelly Ayotte is AG.




What on earth was Kelly Ayotte thinking? On Thursday, the New Hampshire attorney general joined her counterparts in nine other states in asking the California Supreme Court to delay its ruling legalizing same-sex marriages in that state. Ayotte and the others said they had an interest in the case because they would have to determine whether to recognize the marriages of gay couples who got hitched in California.

Two days later, Ayotte changed her mind and withdrew from the case. Her office issued a terse statement and made no one available to discuss the decision.

What changed in 48 hours? Apparently the attorney general or someone on her staff actually took the time to read up on the New Hampshire law, albeit belatedly.

Turns out, state legislators had already thought through this dilemma, addressing it in New Hampshire's five-month-old civil unions law. If a gay couple has the opportunity to get married elsewhere, their marriage will be treated as a civil union by the state of New Hampshire. The same goes for couples granted civil unions elsewhere. The language is clear and unambiguous.

So far, gay marriage hasn't been much of an issue. Before the California court legalized it, Massachusetts was the only U.S. state where it was legal. And there, it is only available to Massachusetts residents.

But in passing New Hampshire's civil union law, state legislators rightly foresaw a time when gay marriage would be available to their constituents - if not at home, then perhaps elsewhere.

Some New Hampshire lawmakers tried to undo this bit of legislation a few months back. Apparently under the radar of the attorney general, they crafted legislation explicitly forbidding the state from recognizing gay marriages performed elsewhere. Thankfully, the bill was quickly scuttled by the House.

It is comforting that Ayotte realized her error and quickly change course. But the episode is troubling nonetheless.

The New Hampshire attorney general is chosen by the governor, not elected by the people. The system is supposed to keep the office from playing politics. The AG's actions are to be based on a clear-minded reading of the law.

In this case, it appears that scoring political points came first.

Ayotte joined with states whose voters or elected officials have come to a contrary position on this issue - explicitly banning gay marriage. In joining an effort to delay California's landmark ruling, she would have sought to deny, rather than expand, the rights of individual New Hampshire citizens. That's a curious priority indeed for the attorney general of a state whose civil union law has put it proudly at the forefront of the gay rights movement.

New Hampshire gay men and lesbians have been quietly joining in civil union ceremonies since January 1, when a joyous ceremony was held at midnight at the State House plaza. The world hasn't ended. Heterosexual marriages haven't crumbled.

Chances are, if gay couples start jetting off to California to get married and then settle down in New Hampshire to share in the laundry and bill-paying, life for everyone else will surely go on.