Denny Henry for NBCNews.com

Jose Manuel Godinez-Samperio poses for a portrait on Capitol Hill, April 19th, 2011. Godinez-Samperio is an undocumented immigrant who is pushing for immigration law reform.

An undocumented immigrant who applied for a law license in Florida cannot be admitted to the bar, the State Supreme Court said Thursday in a case being watched closely by both sides of the immigration debate.

But the decision, according to legal observers, did not appear to be an actual rejection of the request made by Jose Godinez-Samperio, 26.

Rather, the court indicated it would be deciding on the larger question it had been asked -- whether or not to allow people unlawfully in the country to become lawyers -- and not on a specific individual case. 

“In this cause, the Florida Board of Bar Examiners has petitioned this Court for an advisory opinion regarding a clearly stated question. The separate issue of the individual movant's admission is not before the Court,” the court said in a short order.

The Florida Board of Bar Examiners asked the court in late 2011 to decide if undocumented immigrants can be admitted to the state bar after receiving the application of Godinez-Samperio, an undocumented youth who came from Mexico on a tourist visa with his parents as a child.

The board, which filed the request for an opinion last year, said last year that Godinez-Samperio met their requirements though the court has yet to issue an opinion in the case.

After receiving a work permit on Christmas Eve last year under the new deferred action program for undocumented youth, Godinez-Samperio had his lawyer submit a “motion of admission” to the bar in January.

That motion was rejected on Thursday, with the court indicating that the larger question on undocumented immigrants – not the specific case of Godinez-Samperio – was what they had been asked to review even though Godinez-Samperio's lawyer had been making filings in the case.

Bob Blythe, general counsel of the Florida Board of Bar Examiners, said he didn’t “think that it’s accurate to say that the court has denied him (Godinez-Samperio) admission.”

"They’re just saying this case isn’t about his admission but rather the more general question,” Blythe told NBC News. “The answer from the court in this case is going to be whether undocumented immigrants can be admitted and then once we get that then the court will take the appropriate action with regard to his application. … In many respects it really doesn’t change anything at this point.”

Godinez-Samperio said the meaning of the order wasn’t entirely clear to him, but that he too felt the court was saying it would first address the larger question.

“We had moved to the court (in January) to just go ahead and admit me already and it’s a very strange ruling … One thing we are sure about is that I haven’t been denied to become a lawyer yet,” he said, noting that he didn’t view it as a setback.

“If anything … I am glad somebody’s looking at the file and I hope -- although I can’t predict what the court will do -- I hope that this means they’ll make a ruling soon,” he added.

Blythe said the court didn’t have a deadline or time frame for when it would issue a ruling.

Godinez-Samperio came to the U.S. at age nine with his parents from Pachuca, Mexico. They entered the country on tourist visas, which they overstayed. During that time, Godinez-Samperio graduated from high school, college and law school.

A case similar to his in California has reached that state’s supreme court, too. There, the State Bar of California has gone further than its Florida counterpart in saying that Sergio Garcia, a 36-year-old who was born in Mexico and first came to the U.S. as a child, should get a license, noting he had met the rules of admission and that his lack of legal status in the U.S. should not automatically disqualify him.

Related:

• California bar: Undocumented immigrant should get law license
• Obama administration won't seek deportation of young undocumented immigrants
• Can an undocumented immigrant become a lawyer?

Reza A. Marvashti / The Free Lance-Star via AP

Michael Wayne Hash is escorted to a police car in Culpeper, Va. on March 14, 2012. A Culpeper County Circuit Judge ordered Hash's release after his life sentence for killing an elderly woman was tossed out by a federal judge. That judge overturned Hash's 2001 murder conviction, citing prosecutorial and police misconduct and an inadequate defense.

The number of cases in which prosecutors or police helped exonerate people convicted of crimes surged in 2012, passing 50 percent for the first time, a research group said Wednesday.

Authorities led or cooperated on investigations into 34 of last year’s 63 known exonerations, the group said.

“To the extent that they are focused … on correcting errors that have been made, that’s really good news,” said Professor Sam Gross, editor of The National Registry of Exonerations, a project of the law schools at the University of Michigan and Northwestern University. “That means that more innocent people will be released and that we’ll, over time, learn more about the process that produces mistakes like this and avoid more tragic errors.”

The development may reflect the spread of what are often known as Conviction Integrity Units in district attorney’s offices in major cities across the country as well as changes in state laws making it easier to do post-conviction DNA testing, according to the registry, which launched last year and provides information about exonerations since 1989.

Gross said it was an important change, noting that police and prosecutors are the “central actors” in the criminal justice system and had the key role of investigating crimes and pursuing justice. “They have more information; they have more power than anybody else,” said Gross.

But Scott Burns, executive director of the National District Attorneys Association, took exception to the report’s findings, particularly that it was the first time law enforcement helped in a majority of such cases.

“It’s offensive because that’s our job all the time is to … hold the guilty accountable, but our job is (also) to make sure that the innocent are acquitted or exonerated,” he said. “We do that in every case.”

He also objected to some of the exonerations, saying that in decades-old crimes being challenged today, there were bars to prosecutors re-trying these cases, such as dead witnesses or lost evidence.

“A number of these people are not innocent,” he said. “I can’t stress this enough because you have victims out there. … If you live through that kind of stuff it’s maddening.”

He also noted that the 1,089 exonerations found by the registry from 1989 to 2012 was a small number compared to the more than 10 million felony cases that prosecutors nationwide handle annually.

Man held for 42 years in deadly Arizona hotel fire freed from prison

The registry uses its own criteria to determine when someone has been exonerated, since there is no such legal category. People have been exonerated through a governor’s pardon, court dismissal of the case, acquittal on retrial and a few through court-issued “certificates of innocence” or “declarations of wrongful imprisonment.” This includes cases where DNA testing was a factor. Some people have been exonerated posthumously.

The 2012 exonerations included those charged with murder, including: Damon Thibodeaux, who was cleared by DNA testing in the rape and killing of his 14-year-old step cousin and was released from death row; Michael Hash, who was was freed after 12 years following his life sentence conviction in the killing of an elderly woman. A federal judge vacated the conviction, citing misconduct by the prosecutor and police, and an inadequate defense.

The conviction integrity units, have emerged in recent years in Dallas, Houston, New York (Manhattan and Brooklyn), Santa Clara, Calif., and Lake and Cook counties in Illinois to review disputed cases. Some state attorneys general, such as in Virginia and Colorado, have also undertaken programs to facilitate exonerations or help particular defendants.

A snapshot of the 1,050 individual exonerations from January 1989-December 2012:

--  93.2 percent were men; 6.7 percent were women.

--  The race of the defendants was known in 97.6 percent of the cases: 47.3 percent were black, 38.5 percent were white, 12.2 percent were Hispanic and 1.8 percent were Native American or Asian.

--  9.4 percent pled guilty. The rest were convicted at trial: 82.2 percent by juries and 7 percent by judges. In about 1 percent of the cases, the Registry could not determine whether the trial conviction was by a jury or judge.

--  32.4 percent were cleared at least in part through DNA evidence

--  67.5 percent were cleared without DNA evidence.

--  Nearly all had been in prison for years: half for at least 9 years; more than 75 percent for at least 4 years.

Related:

Wrongfully imprisoned for 23 years, freed man suffers heart attack a day after release

Conviction: Reporter's 10-year quest for answers in little-known murder case

Witness error: How mind tricks can put the innocent behind bars

Tim Sharp/Reuters file

A statue of a Scout stands at the entrance to the Boy Scouts of America headquarters in Irving, Texas.

The Boy Scouts of America said Monday that the Utah Pride Center — a LGBT advocacy group — could not charter a troop, even though the group said it would comply with the youth organization's controversial policy banning gay Scouts and leaders.

The Utah Pride Center submitted its application in late February to sponsor a troop with heterosexual leaders and middle-school age boys several weeks ago, said Valerie Larabee, the center's executive director. She said the bid, which comes ahead of the BSA vote in May on whether it should keep the ban, was not a stunt.

"We feel great concern for youth that may be involved in Scouting right now that are hiding something and we don’t ask our kids when they come to our campus here whether they are gay, straight or anything else," she told NBC News by phone. "We assume that they're here because they think this is a safe place and as a safe place we think that we can offer an incredible opportunity to young people who want to be involved in BSA."

Larabee said they submitted their application to Rick Barnes, the chief executive officer of the Great Salt Lake Council. Barnes referred questions to the BSA headquarters, "since this was a national decision."

When contacted for comment on who had reviewed the application and why it was rejected, the BSA said in a two-sentence statement: "The BSA is engaged in an internal discussion about its membership standards policy and is working to stay focused on Scouting’s mission. Based on the mission of this organization [the Utah Pride Center] we do not believe a chartered partner relationship is beneficial to Scouting.”

Larabee said she knew their file was passed higher within the BSA, but did not know if it reached the national headquarters and said they'd had no response from the organization -- just that their application had been returned without remarks on March 4. The center took it as a denial.

"We are disappointed," she said. "It's almost like they don't even want to acknowledge that we even applied. It's like they just want us to go away." 

A call placed to a Boy Scout leader who The Salt Lake Tribune said would lead the new troop committee, Nile Eatmon, was not immediately returned. Eatmon, a member of the Great Salt Lake Council's executive board, told the newspaper that he didn't see a problem with the center hosting a troop.

"I was surprised. I thought the Pride Center application complied with the Boy Scouts’ policies," Eatmon said. "All the adult members and youth that were submitted with the application were straight."

Faith-based organizations, civic and educational groups often charter Boy Scout units, providing meeting facilities and leadership among other things. More than 70 percent of the Scouting unit in 2012 were chartered to faith-based organizations, and Larabee believed their application may be a first by a LGBT group, although the BSA did not respond to a question about that.

Related: Can a gay Boy Scout share a tent with another boy? Boy Scouts survey members on anti-gay policy

The BSA announced in late January that it may ditch the national policy banning gays, instead leaving that up to local sponsoring organizations to decide. It then pushed back a decision on the policy to May, when some 1,400 members of Scouting's National Council will vote on a resolution that Boy Scouts' officers are crafting.

The membership guidelines have roiled the organization in recent years.

Last July, the BSA said it was sticking with the ban following a confidential two-year review of the policy. That review was announced months after Jennifer Tyrrell was dismissed from her post as leader of her son’s Tiger Cubs den because she is a lesbian, and a few months before California teen Ryan Andresen was denied his Eagle award because he is gay.

Both cases made national headlines for several weeks, and led a few hundred Eagle Scouts to turn in their hard-earned regalia in protest of the ban, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 2000.

If you are a current or former member of the Boy Scouts and would like to share your thoughts on how your troop, pack or council is handling the BSA's upcoming decision on the membership policy, you can email the reporter at miranda.leitsinger@msnbc.com. We may use some comments for a follow-up story, so please specify if your remarks can be used and provide your name, hometown, age, Boy Scout affiliation and a phone number.

Related stories: 

Boy Scouts: We need more time for decision on gay Scouts

After years of heartache, gay Scouts and supporters react warily over proposal to lift ban

'Gravely distressed': Religion looms large over Boy Scouts decision on gays 

'BATTLESTATIONS!': Call-in war waged over Boy Scouts' ban on gays

Fred W. McDarrah / Getty Images

One month after the demonstrations at the Stonewall Inn, activist Marty Robinson speaks to a crowd before the first mass march in support of gay rights in New York on July 27, 1969.

From its beginning with riots against police oppression of gays in New York City more than 40 years ago, the fight for gay rights continues today on new fronts: over marriage, therapies to “cure” homosexuals and one of the country's most popular institutions, the Boy Scouts of America.

Next week, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two landmark, same-sex-marriage cases.

“The swift road to marriage equality has produced millions of conversations around the dinner table and water cooler on the freedom of every American to marry the person they love. It is these conversations that have changed minds. But while we've reached the tipping point on marriage, there's still a ways to go for full LGBT equality, like ending bullying in schools and workplace discrimination,” Kevin Nix, a spokesman for the LGBT advocacy group, Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement.

Here is a look at some of the key moments in American LGBT history:

June 28, 1969: Start of the gay rights movement
The Stonewall Riots begin after police raid a popular unlicensed gay bar, the Stonewall Inn, in New York City's Greenwich Village. The riots, which lasted for days, were triggered by police harassment of gays, according to media reports. This is considered by many to herald the start of the gay rights movement in the U.S.

June 27-28, 1970: First gay pride parades
On the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, the nation's first gay pride parades are held in four cities – New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Fred Sergeant, who attended the NYC parade, reflected in the Village Voice: “Back then, it took a new sense of audacity and courage to take that giant step into the streets of Midtown Manhattan. ... I stayed at the head of the march the entire way, and at one point, I climbed onto the base of a light pole and looked back. I was astonished; we stretched out as far as I could see, thousands of us.” Pride events now are held worldwide every year.

AP

San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk, left, and Mayor George Moscone in April 1977.

Nov. 27, 1978: Assassination of Harvey Milk
Milk became the first openly gay man elected to office in a major U.S. city when he won a seat on San Francisco's Board of Supervisors in early 1978. An outspoken advocate for gay rights, he urged gays to come out and fight for their rights. Milk and Mayor George Moscone were assassinated by former supervisor Dan White. But Milk's legacy has lived on and California has designated May 22 as a day of “special significance” in his honor.

1981: The AIDS crisis
Gay advocacy groups form to deal with the crisis gripping the community amid a slow government response to AIDS and the linking of the disease with gay men. Over the years, the AIDS Quilt will form, and some well-known figures will succumb to AIDS, including actor Rock Hudson, or be diagnosed with it, like basketball star Magic Johnson.

Wilfredo Lee / AP

President Bill Clinton answers questions during a news conference in Taylor, Mich., in 1996.

1993: 'Don't ask, don't tell'
President Bill Clinton enacts "don't ask, don't tell," a policy preventing gays from openly serving in the military. Under it, an estimated 13,000 people were expelled from the U.S. Armed Forces. President Barack Obama repealed the policy in 2011. 

1996: Congress bars federal recognition of same-sex marriage (DOMA)
Congress passes the Defense of Marriage Act. Section 3 of the statute bars recognition of same-sex marriage, affecting more than 1,100 provisions of federal laws. It denies gay couples the right to file joint taxes and the protections of the Family Medical and Leave Act, and it blocks surviving spouses from accessing veterans’ benefits, among other things. The Supreme Court will hear a challenge to DOMA on March 27, 2013. Bill Clinton, who signed the legislation, recently came out against the law and asked the Supreme Court to repeal it.

April 30, 1997: 'Yep, I'm gay' -- Degeneres comes out 
Ellen Degeneres comes out on her television show, "Ellen," in an episode that drew in 42 million viewers. Her ratings plunged, which she said was due to a lack of promotion, and the show was pulled the next season, according to The Hollywood Reporter. But she bounced back and she now hosts a popular afternoon talk show, "The Ellen Degeneres Show." Her “coming out” heralded an era of other gay celebrities following suit, and LGBT leading ladies and men have in the last year said they felt it was unnecessary to reveal their sexual preference.

Evan Agostini / Getty Images

Candlelight vigil for slain gay Wyoming student Matthew Shepard.

Oct. 12, 1998: Matthew Shepard's beating death
Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson rob and beat Shepherd, a 21-year-old college student, and tie him to a split-rail fence outside of Laramie, Wyo. He dies on Oct. 12, less than a week after the attack. The murder, for which the pair are each serving two consecutive life sentences, inspired "The Laramie Project," a play and later film about Laramie in the year after the murder, and federal hate crimes legislation approved in 2009 that bears Shepard's name.

2000: Boy Scouts can ban gays
The Supreme Court rules that the Boy Scouts of America can bar gay Scouts and leaders from membership, saying that as a private youth organization it has the right to do so. Under increasing pressure in recent years to change the policy, the BSA has said it will hold a vote on the controversial membership guidelines in May.

Toby Talbot / AP

Lawyers Susan Murray, left, and Beth Robinson brought a lawsuit before the Vermont Supreme Court that led to the court's decision on same-sex marriage in 2000.

2000: First state to allow same-sex civil unions
Vermont becomes the first state to allow same-sex couples to join their lives via civil unions. The state approved same-sex marriage in 2009.

2003: Anti-sodomy law struck down
The Supreme Court strikes down a Texas anti-sodomy law, reversing an earlier decision made in another case 17 years earlier that Justice Anthony Kennedy said “demeans the lives of homosexual persons.” Gays are ''entitled to respect for their private lives," Kennedy said for the court, according to The New York Times. ''The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.'' 

2004: State same-sex marriage bans
A dozen states pass constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. The amendments become a popular method to attempt to block legislative acts and judicial decisions on the issue.

Rich Pedroncelli / AP

Jeff Barr, left, places a wedding ring on Wes Wilkinson at the Yolo County clerk's office in Woodland, Calif. on June 16, 2008. They were among the first gay couples to wed in Yolo County after the California Supreme Court overturned a ban on same-sex marriages.

2008: California's Prop. 8 nixes gay marriage
California’s Supreme Court rules that gays and lesbians should be allowed to wed. For a short time that year, some 18,000 same-sex couples tie the knot in the Golden State. But in November, voters approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage (Proposition 8) after a hard-fought, multimillion-dollar campaign – one of the most expensive on this issue. The Supreme Court will hear a challenge to Prop. 8 on March 26, 2013.

Pete Souza / White House via EPA

In an interview with Robin Roberts of ABC's "Good Morning America," on May 9, 2012, President Barack Obama spoke in support of gay marriage for the first time as president.

May 9, 2012: First sitting president to support same-sex marriage
Barack Obama becomes the first sitting U.S. president to back marriage for gay and lesbian couples. It marked a reversal from his 2008 campaign, when he said he opposed same-sex marriage but favored civil unions as an alternative. His announcement came one day after voters in North Carolina passed a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage as well as civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.

Nov. 4, 2012: In a first, gay marriage wins at the ballot box
Voters in Maine approve same-sex marriage in the first vote brought by supporters, while voters in Maryland and Washington uphold state legislation allowing gays and lesbians to wed. And in Minnesota, voters reject – for just the second time nationwide – a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

Related:

Same-sex marriage's big day in court: What's at stake?

Once 'inconceivable,' Republican leaders sign pro-gay marriage brief

Even before Supreme Court rules, gay marriage battles rage in the states

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

SAN FRANCISCO, CA - DECEMBER 06: (L-R) Same sex couples and plaintiffs Sandy Stier, Kris Perry, Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo look on at a news conference following a hearing at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 6, 2010 in San Francisco, California.

Two gay California couples who are leading the legal fight to overturn the state's ban on same-sex marriage said Thursday on the eve of their landmark Supreme Court hearing that they were relieved to have "the end in sight" and believe the justices will step in "to right these wrongs."

Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, are the faces to the challenge to Proposition 8, a citizen's initiative denying gays and lesbians the right to wed that voters approved in a pitched multi-million dollar ballot battle in 2008. The court will hear arguments in the case on Tuesday.

“The right thing for the justices to do is to lead the country on including all of us in this institution and finding a way to equity and fairness that brings the country together rather than dividing us based on a characteristic that we cannot change,” Perry said on a call to reporters. 

Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

Plaintiffs Kris Perry (L) kisses her partner Sandy Stier during a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California.

“There is an opportunity here for the court to send a message that who we love is important and we should be treated equally under the law," she added.

The couples will be in Washington, DC, for the historic hearing, which comes one day before the justices hear arguments contesting the constitutionality of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), that bars recognition of same-sex marriage and thereby denies more than 1,100 benefits to gay and lesbian couples. 

"We both are very relieved and excited by the prospect of the final chapter in this case happening in the next few months,” Perry said, adding that they have "been waiting a very long time to be married and to celebrate that with our children and our parents. … I know that we are both very excited to have the end in sight."

The couples' journey began years earlier, when they decided to join the legal effort and testified before lower courts about the impact the ban has had on their lives. They further entered the public realm as advocates, doing interviews and television/online spots about their campaign.

Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

Lawyer Theodore Olson (L) and his clients Paul Katami (C) and his partner Jeff Zarrillo attend a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California. A federal judge overturned California's Proposition 8, a same-sex marriage ban, finding it unconstitutional.

“All four of us have regular lives and we have jobs that we need to pay our bills and so we have to be able to plug in and unplug when that happens,” said Zarrillo, of Burbank. “But being a part of this case, and being so closely associated with it, it reminds us of the daily harm and that discrimination even more every day.”

The legal struggle, he added, also “made us closer as a couple and has made us want access to that language even more, because the word 'marriage' and the word 'husband' and the word 'wife,' they have meaning” to society, family and children. 

“It affirms the commitment that we have built and shared,” he said. “While some people say it's just a word, that word is so important. And if it wasn't so important, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."

Stier, of Alameda, said being a part of the case has impacted their lives in a “dramatic way.” Two of the couple's four boys were headed to college when they joined the fight, but another two were just starting high school, and so that “experience has been happening in parallel with this case.”

“For Kris and I, the focus of our lives has always has been and continues to be our family,” said Stier. “And that will continue to be the driving focus of our lives and it's really what helps us be inspired by the case – is that we want other families to have the greatest potential for success.”

When the couples first joined the legal fight, the objective was to repeal Prop. 8, and lower courts sided with them. The latest court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, said that since same-sex marriage was allowed in California for a few months in 2008 before the vote, it could not be taken away.

The Supreme Court justices could agree with that lower court decision — in a move that would limit their ruling to couples in California — or they could side with the backers of Prop. 8. Efforts to reach the backers, ProtectMarriage.com, for comment on Thursday were not immediately successful.

The court also could broaden out their ruling to recognize same-sex marriage in all states, as the couples' attorneys have argued, saying that the more than 30 statewide bans on gays and lesbians getting married violate the U.S. Constitution. Nine state, plus the District of Columbia, allow same-sex marriage.

“If we've learned anything through this journey, it's that when the minority rights are being oppressed by a majority the court is supposed to step in, and some times it's not always popular for them to do so,” Zarrillo said. “We would expect the court to step in and right these wrongs."

As their legal battle seemingly winds down, Stier said the couples know that the journey they embarked upon is not their's alone but will affect many others, noting she felt they – and thousands more couples – were “on the cusp” of being able to finally legally wed.
 
“We are ... struck by the importance not only of being married but of a shift happening in the country that will affect generations to come,” she said. “When we imagine the day, we're standing somewhere and taking our vows and deciding to be married, we will not only be committing to each other but will be overwhelmed, I'm sure, by the power of this decision, not only for ourselves but for the whole country.”

Meanwhile, the opposition is gearing up for the fight — and is expecting a win. As Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage said in a statement:

"We, too, are looking forward to the court hearing. It represents the opportunity to right the wrong that was imposed by federal judges in stripping over 7 million California voters of their right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, the same definition that has guided civilization for thousands of years. We are confident of our position."

Related:

GOP sea change on gay rights?
Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage
US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples

Steve Snowden / Getty Images, file

Santa Fe Mayor David Coss speaks during a public appearance in October 6, 2009 in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

The Democratic mayor of Santa Fe is calling on New Mexico’s county clerks to begin issuing licenses to same-sex couples, saying it was time that everyone – including his lesbian daughter – should be treated equally under the law in a state that does not ban gay marriage.

New Mexico is one of two states in the country that neither specifically allows nor explicitly bans gays and lesbians from getting married (the other is New Jersey).

Nor does it offer civil unions or domestic partnerships to same-sex couples, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The marriage statute, which does not specify gender, is “sufficiently vague” on the issue, said Phil Sisneros, a spokesman for New Mexico’s attorney general.

Mayor David Coss and City Attorney Geno Zamora teamed up to examine that legal question and believe that nothing in the state constitution or statutes prevent county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Zamora issued a legal analysis of these findings, and the City Council is expected to vote on a resolution in support of Coss’ call on March 27.

“People’s lives are short and when you’re waiting for your rights you know how long do you have to wait? I’m sorry we didn’t do it ten years ago. I don’t think we should wait another ten years before we push the issue,” Coss told NBC News. “Let’s start treating everybody equally under the law.”

Though the resolution does not carry legal weight, Zamora, who has a gay brother, said they wanted to send a message to the Supreme Court before it hears landmark cases next week challenging a federal law (Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA) that bars recognition of same-sex couples and California’s Proposition 8, which prohibits gays and lesbians from getting married in the Golden State.

“The decision was made … we cannot wait any longer to protect the rights of our brothers and sisters, our colleagues and our community members,” he said. “It’s very important for cities and city attorney’s offices to enter this debate recognizing equal rights for their citizens.”

In 2004, a clerk for Sandoval county issued same-sex marriage licenses for one day before the state attorney general ordered her to stop, saying the 64 licenses were not valid, according to The Santa Fe New Mexican.

Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar told the newspaper on Tuesday that she wasn’t going to issue licenses to gay and lesbian couples, even though she’d like to, because she felt she couldn’t under the law.

“I would love to be able to issue marriage licenses (to same sex couples) but under the current law, I feel I’m not free and clear to do so. The Legislature creates the laws and the judges interpret the laws and I as a county clerk do not create or interpret laws,” she said. “And I feel that my oath of office does not allow to me act counter to the laws of New Mexico.”

Sisneros, of the attorney general’s office, said that the issue was unclear and felt nothing was likely to happen until a county clerk attempted to grant a license to a same-sex couple. At that point, an anti-gay marriage group may file a lawsuit or the attorney general could be asked to weigh in, among other possible scenarios.

“This seems more properly characterized as an expression of the city’s position on same-sex marriages since it does not carry the force of law,” Sisneros said of the Santa Fe mayor’s resolution. “Our office, though, has not had the opportunity yet to weigh in on the specific question of whether same sex marriages are legal under New Mexico law."

Previous state bills to ban or approve same-sex marriage have been rejected by New Mexico's lawmakers.

Thomas Peters, a spokesman for the National Organization for Marriage which opposes same-sex marriage, said New Mexicans should be able to decide the issue for themselves. 

"Allow the debate to continue and the people to decide, not activists mayors and judges," he said in a statement.