COURT MAY NULLIFY S.F. GAY MARRIAGES.

Byline: Phillip W. Browne Staff Writer

Saying their marriages have been profound, meaningful and an important part of history, same-sex couples in Los Angeles are nervously awaiting a California Supreme Court ruling today that could invalidate more than 4,000 marriage licenses issued in San Francisco.

Legal experts believe the court will rule San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom violated state law when he authorized the licenses in February. The biggest cliffhanger, however, is how the court will handle the status of the thousands of licenses issued before the court intervened in March.

``I'm experiencing an extreme case of the jitters,'' said Torie Osborn of Santa Monica, who married her partner, Lydia Vaias, in San Francisco on March 8.

``It's very strange to have one's personal life be part of history. And whatever happens with this decision, I know there are longer-term legal battles. I have no doubt that in the arc of history we will win.''

State Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles, who married Sharon Stricker, her partner of 25 years, said she believes same-sex couples will lose today because the court is ruling only on Newsom's actions, not the overarching constitutional issue of legal protection.

``I have no doubt the community is going to be devastated when they hear the result. But the issue we really want to hear is still on its way.''

Goldberg added that when she got married she believed she was making a political statement. But the union has become much more meaningful.

`'I had no idea how emotional it would be. I might not be married (today), which will be devastating. You don't play games with people's marriages.''

Gay rights advocates say the most they can hope for is that the justices will say nothing - at least for now - about the validity of the 4,037 licenses issued to gay couples at San Francisco City Hall between Feb. 12 and March 11, the day the court issued an injunction halting the unprecedented wedding spree.

The city, as well as several legal groups, filed suit the same day, alleging that California's marriage laws are an unconstitutional abridgment of the civil rights of gays and lesbians. Those cases, which echo arguments that led to the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts on May 17, are scheduled to be heard later this year in San Francisco Superior Court.

University of Southern California Law professor David B. Cruz said today's ruling should be viewed as purely a procedural matter, as it will not be addressing the constitutional issue. But it will definitely have a social impact.

``Everyone has been in a holding pattern since the Supreme Court decided to hear the case. What will happen now is the disappointed people will become more vocal, especially if they void the licenses. We are going to see huge agitation on both sides.''

Osborn, who is the executive director of the Santa Monica-based Liberty Hill Foundation, said that being married has meant far more to her than the legal battle and social outcry. She never believed she would be granted the opportunity to marry, and since then they have felt far more connected to the world.

``We have been showered with affirmation of our relationship from non- gays. It made us realize that gay people don't do enough to allow straight people to affirm us.''

Lawyers for the state and a Christian legal organization that filed the pair of cases challenging the mayor's decision have asked the court to nullify the disputed marriage licenses if it finds that Newsom's action was unlawful. They maintain that letting the marriages stand would not only sow confusion for other jurisdictions, but would encourage residents to disregard any laws with which they disagree.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Phillip W. Browne, [phone]

phillip.browne(at)dailynews.com