The next steps down the aisle: the U.S. Senate strikes down one antigay constitutional amendment, but another one is on the way. That's in addition to the key battles across the country.

The day in July before the U.S. Senate took its vote on the antigay Federal Marriage Amendment--whether to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman constitutionally--Washington lawmakers were caught in a storm of last-minute lobbying efforts by both sides of the aisle.

Cheryl Jacques, executive director of the national gay rights group Human Rights Campaign, stood in a room off the Senate floor, flagging senators who walked by and asking them to sink the legislation. During the previous couple of months more than 1.5 million pro-gay e-mails, faxes, and other types of communication from HRC supporters had flooded lawmakers' in-boxes, asking them to vote against, the measure.

Not to be outdone, the Christian right was having its own field day. Tens of thousands of phone calls had poured in to support "traditional marriage." Rumor had it that the Republican leadership, headed by gay rights opponent Bill Frist of Tennessee, was putting immense pressure on Republicans to support the measure. Antigay Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum began to equate passing the amendment with protecting the country against terrorism.

That afternoon was a nasty, nerve-racking lesson in Washington politics and how it's necessary to fight for a cause right up until die end. Lobbyists never underestimate the ability of a politician to switch sides at the last minute.

As expected, the amendment failed, but the victory was short-lived. A week later the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives voted to prevent federal courts from ordering states to recognize same-sex marriages sanctioned by other states. [See At Issue, page 13.] The House of Representatives is also set to consider its own version of the marriage amendment this fall.

July's Senate fight also served as a preamble to how the same-sex marriage debate will play across the country in the coming months. The real battles will fan out across a dozen states, where the far right is in a desperate push to stop gay men and lesbians from lying the knot.

In Oregon on June 30 a conservative group turned in the number of petition signatures necessary to put a proposed state constitutional amendment before voters in November that would ban same-sex marriage. The amendment could prove a serious setback in the battle to win marriage rights in the state. As of press time proposed constitutional marriage bans were set to appear on fall ballots in Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ohio, Utah, Michigan, Arkansas, and Louisiana Similar actions effectively elided efforts to legalize stone-sex marriage in Hawaii and Alaska during the 1990s.

Most of the states with ballot questions headed to voters already have so-called defense of marriage acts, which define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Gay rights groups are lighting those laws in a handful of key states--New York, Oregon, Washington, California, and New Jersey. "If you take all the guarantees of the [state] constitution to heart, then it's clear that the government has no legitimate reason to deny marriage rights," says Susan Sommer, lead attorney on Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund's Hernandez v. Robles ease in New York. Sommer hopes to argue her case before the state supreme court.

A third major case is under way in New York. That state and other traditionally progressive ones with a long history of gay activism, such as California, are likely to produce additional marriage victories like the one in Massachusetts. Not that gay rights groups are ruling out midsize states like Washington, which was one of the first to strike down its ban on interracial marriage, says Julie Shapiro, assistant law professor at Seattle University's School of Law. "There is a progressive tradition here," she says. "It all depends on the circumstances of the state and the case."

In Oregon the ACLU's case is awaiting appeal and could see a decision by early 2005. The ACLU is also involved with a constitutional challenge in California. Lambda Legal also has active same-sex marriage cases in California and Washington State. In almost all cases conservative groups have filed briefs arguing against marriage rights of gay and lesbian couples.

While some or even all of these challenges may fall, gay rights groups and lawyers say they are important tests for certain legal arguments. "The longer the courts work with it, the more sophisticated the arguments can become," says Matt Coles, director of the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project. "There's definite momentum."

Hudson has written for The Detroit News and Knight Ridder newspapers.