Same-Sex Marriage Law Allowed to Stand in New York Court Ruling A state appellate court ruled unanimously on Friday that the State Senate did not violate New York's Open Meetings Law last year as it considered whether to legalize same-sex marriage, and the court refused to nullify the marriages performed under the law. The court, the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court in Rochester, ruled in response to a lawsuit from a conservative group, New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, which lobbied against the same-sex marriage bill, and then, after it passed, challenged it in court on procedural grounds. A lower court in November dismissed several arguments advanced by the group against the legality of the bill's passage, but allowed the group's challenge to proceed on the open-meetings issue. The state then appealed the lower court's refusal to dismiss that last argument and allow the case to go forward. The lawsuit contended that in the run-up to the vote on the marriage bill, at least two closed-door meetings of the Senate's Republican majority should have been held in public - one at the Capitol with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and another at the Executive Mansion with Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo. The plaintiffs argued that since Mr. Bloomberg, an independent, and Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, were not Republicans, their meetings with the Republican senators should have been held in public. But the Open Meetings Law allows legislative caucuses to meet privately with guests, and, in the opinion written for the five-member appellate panel, Justice Eugene M. Fahey said there was nothing in the law that limited that exemption based on the political affiliation of the guests. "The broad construction of "guests" that we perceive the Legislature as having employed is eminently practical," Justice Fahey wrote. He added that if the court were to adopt a narrower definition, "it would be impossible for a Democratic member of a governor's office, such as a budget director, to speak to a majority Republican caucus." In his 11-page opinion, Justice Fahey added that even if the court had believed the meetings with Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Cuomo violated the Open Meetings Law, such violations would not have warranted striking down the Marriage Equality Act or invalidating the same-sex marriages performed since it took effect last July. The executive director of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, the Rev. Jason J. McGuire, said Friday that he was disappointed by the ruling and added that his group would consult with its lawyers to consider its options. "The integrity of our legislative process is at stake, and it is worth defending," Mr. McGuire said in a statement. A spokesman for the Senate Republicans declined to comment. But the state attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, whose office represented the Senate in the case, called the ruling "a great victory for marriage equality" that "further protects the right of all New York couples to equal treatment under law." "We are pleased that the court upheld the Marriage Equality Act and found no defect in the meetings that preceded the passage of this historic law," Mr. Schneiderman said. Mr. Cuomo also issued a statement applauding the ruling, saying, "The court's decision affirms that in our state, there is marriage equality for all."