There's a spot around Sam Ciapanna's ring finger where his wedding band used to be.

The Bellevue attorney removed the ring yesterday after learning that the Oregon Supreme Court had nullified the marriage licenses of nearly 3,000 same-sex couples, including his own.

In a unanimous ruling that disappointed gay-rights advocates and buoyed opponents of same-sex marriage, the court said that marriage laws are a matter of state, not local, jurisdiction and that Multnomah County lacked authority to issue the licenses last spring. The court noted that Oregonians in November passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as strictly a union between a man and a woman.

Conservative groups said the amendment, coupled with yesterday's ruling, effectively resolves the issue in Oregon. But gay and lesbian groups said they would explore other legal or legislative options.

In Washington, gay-rights advocates awaiting a decision from the state's high court on the question of same-sex marriage said the ruling could have provided some kind of signal for Washington — but didn't. Gay couples in Washington are challenging the constitutionality of the state's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which limits marriage to heterosexual couples.

The Oregon ruling came two weeks after Ciapanna and his partner of 14 years, Dean Williamson, celebrated their one-year anniversary. Yesterday they mourned what they called their court-ordered "divorce."

"It was important for us to be married; it meant something," Ciapanna said.

The men's marriage in Portland last year was as much for Ciapanna's mother, who was dying of Alzheimer's disease, as it was for them. "It was an emotional thing for us," he said. "When mom died, in her obituary, Dean was described as a son-in-law. Now she's gone and I guess the obit was dishonest."

Tim Nashif, head of the Oregon Family Council and the Defense of Marriage Coalition, said the couples should not have assumed anything about the validity of their marriages until the Oregon Supreme Court ruled.

"The travesty of this is the Multnomah County commissioners took the law into their own hands," Nashif said.

Multnomah County commissioners ordered marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples in March 2004 after reviews by the county attorney and an independent law firm indicated it could be unconstitutional to deny requests for the licenses. Many couples from Washington state were among those who flocked to Portland to obtain licenses.

Six weeks later, a judge ordered the county to stop issuing the licenses in a ruling that found no right to gay marriage but suggested that denying gays and lesbians the rights afforded to married couples could be unconstitutional. Opponents of same-sex marriage then collected signatures for the constitutional amendment approved by voters in November.

The Multnomah County case was appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court, which ruled yesterday that all the marriage licenses were invalid because the county did not have the authority to issue them under state law.

"Two West Coast liberal states now, both California and Oregon, have both said that local governments don't have authority to take the law into their own hands," said Kelly Clark, attorney for the Defense of Marriage Coalition, which represented gay-marriage opponents.

"It certainly sends a signal to the rest of the country."

The Oregon ruling came a day after Connecticut lawmakers passed legislation that would make it the second state, after Vermont, to offer civil unions to same-sex couples. Massachusetts is the only state where same-sex couples can civilly wed.

The Oregon justices did not mention civil unions, but Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski on Wednesday proposed a civil-union bill to a Legislature that had been awaiting the ruling for guidance.

"I suspect the issue will be resolved by either legislation or by additional litigation," said Kevin Neely, spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office.

In February 2004, weeks before Multnomah County began issuing marriage licenses to gays and lesbians, the city of San Francisco started issuing thousands of licenses to same-sex couples. California courts ordered the city to stop and later declared the marriage licenses invalid, although a constitutional challenge to California's law against gay marriage is pending.

Howard Leonard, who married his partner of 22 years in Portland last March, said, "None of this is a surprise; it further reinforces how out of control so many Americans are of their personal lives and decisions."

The men are the parents of two teenage daughters; each is the biological father of one and the adoptive parent of the other. "Were we ever legally married? Who knows?" Leonard said. "It did surprisingly mean something when we went through that, as it does now to have somebody that I don't know say, 'Sorry we're taking it back.' "

Because many provisions in Washington's Constitution mirror Oregon's, yesterday's decision could have had some legal implications for the case pending before the Washington Supreme Court, said Jamie Pedersen, a Seattle attorney and member of Lambda, one of the groups representing gay couples in a lawsuit.

Analysis of the privileges-and-immunities clause of the state constitution, which requires any privileges offered to one group be offered to all, for example, "could have had some effect on the case," Pedersen said.

"The real effect Oregon had is that it was one of 11 states — and the one closest to home — to pass a constitutional amendment [banning gay marriage] in November," he said.

Lornet Turnbull: 206-464-2420 or lturnbull@seattletimes.com