KTLA News: "Richard Adams and Tony Sullivan gay marriage case" (1979)

[Lawyer] The government... initially rejected our petition to recognize the validity of the marriage, by saying that there can't be a marriage between two faggots. And as far as we know that's still the position of the government in this case. As far as I'm concerned, that's the kind of discrimination that's forbidden by the United States Constitution. We intend to rectify it, and that's why we're here. [Richard Adams] I don't want to go through another five years of it. But if we have to, we will. [Tony Sullivan] I'm not allowed to work, or go to school, or pursue any productive development of my life while all this is taking place. It has been seven years of that, and another five years of that... It gets to be wearing after awhile. (street noise) [Lawyer] This action involves... April 1972... (fades-out) There is no order, no pending order of deportation... (low microphone murmur... 'United States' ... 'investigation' ... 'we really love each other' ...murmur continues) [Reporter] What are you planning to do in court today today? [Lawyer] We're asking the court to order the Immigration and Naturalization Service to recognize the validity of the marriage between Tony Sullivan and Richard Adams. Tony is an Australian Citizen, and he is seeking through Richard, to be permitted to stay in this country on a permanent basis, as a spouse of an American citizen. The Immigration Service has refused the petition. It took a number of years for it to wind its way here, but now we're in Federal court, and we're asking Judge Hill to order The Immigration Service to recognize that these two men are in fact married. They love one another and they have the right to live with one another in the United States. [Reporter] What will happen if Judge Hill turns down your request? [Lawyer] We will appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and we'll take this case as far as we have to. [Reporter] Has there been a case like this before, or is this a precedent-setting case? [Lawyer] There's never been a case involving whether or not gay men or women have the right to marry one another brought in the federal courts. This is the first one. There have been some in state courts around the country. But never in the Federal Courts. Reporter] Is there any question about the marriage in Colorado being legal in that state? [Lawyer] There is no question at all, the state of Colorado, through it's officials could have brought an action in state court there to set this marriage aside on the grounds that it was illegal. But it's been four-and-a-half years, and Colorado has done nothing. We assume that Colorado approves of this marriage at least tacitly. [Reporter] Are you saying that the immigration service simply doesn't recognize the laws in Colorado? [Lawyer] The Immigration Service has taken it's own position on what it thinks Colorado law means. But that's a wrong position. It's wrong as a matter of Colorado law, but really more importantly, it's wrong as a matter of United States constitutional law. Gay people have the right to marry the person that they love. Just like any other citizen of the United States. That's the right that ought to be and has to be recognized. (unintelligible) [Lawyer] There is a deportation hearing... (microphone low) ...'February of 1980'... ...Richard Adams, as an American Citizen to permit Tony to be here... (low microphone continues...) I wish it was over with. I hope it's over as soon as possible [Reporter] Thank you... (quiet murmuring, street noise) [Lawyer, quietly] ...United States Attorney's Office... [Reporter, repeats quietly] ...United States Attorney's Office? [Lawyer, quietly] Yes. It was the INS. (murmuring/street noise)