Same-sex marriage will have its day in court, again. And that has gay rights groups in the Coachella Valley and elsewhere nervous.

A federal judge ruled this month that a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8 could proceed after an attorney supporting the same-sex marriage ban could not say how allowing gay couples to wed threatens conventional marriage.

The gay-lesbian community appears split in its reaction to the judge's decision.

Some say it fulfills the need to move quickly and boldly; others worry it could ultimately reverse progress made on gay civil rights.

“We do think it's early to be doing federal litigation, but we do not disagree with the legal theory,” said Jennifer C. Pizer, senior counsel and marriage project director for Lambda Legal in Los Angeles. “There are different views about the timing of the suit.”

The nonprofit organization behind the federal lawsuit, however, defends the timing.

“I think any major, bold initiative is never without its critics, and this one certainly isn't unique,” said Chad Griffin, president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the nonprofit organization leading the federal suit against Proposition 8. “The LGBT equality movement needs more bold moves, not less.”

Local Proposition 8 supporters, however, said they saw the federal lawsuit coming as a part of the homosexual agenda.

“Anyone who stands up for traditional values gets demonized,” said Phyllis Burgess, a Palm Springs resident who has spoken out against redefining marriage.

“Why come up against a group of core values that has worked well throughout history?”

Attorneys representing the group that sponsored Proposition 8 — Charles Cooper and Andrew Pugno — did not return a phone call seeking comment Friday.

The Alliance Defense Fund, also a defendant in the suit, referred questions to Pugno.

Fighting Prop. 8

Proposition 8 is the initiative that defines marriage as between a man and woman that passed Nov. 4 with 52 percent of California voters. In May, the California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the same-sex marriage ban.

The court also upheld the validity of the roughly 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in the roughly five months it was legal for gays to marry.

This suit says the constitutional amendment violates federal equal protection rights.

The lawsuit was brought by two unmarried, same-sex couples who want to marry, but can't under the state ban.

The case is expected to be heard Jan. 11.

The California Supreme Court ruling to uphold the ban after ruling marriage was an inalienable right is what gives teeth to this suit at this time, attorneys representing the same-sex couples said.

“It really is meant to treat same-sex couples differently because of disapproval of their relationships,” said Ted Boutrous, an attorney with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, a Washington, D.C., firm.

“It really is the most significant unresolved civil rights issue here in the United States right now.”

Many of the same LGBT organizations who cautioned the suit was pushing for too much, too fast also were slow to come around to support the marriage equality march in Washington, D.C., this month, said Cleve Jones, a longtime gay advocate and the Palm Springs resident who organized the national event.

“I think this is part of a larger, significant shift in the strategy for those of us fighting for full equality,” Jones said. “It's exactly the kind of bold step that we need right now. It underscores for the supporters of marriage equality the need for federal action.”

State recognition without federal recognition, Jones said, does not advance gay civil rights. Most of the rights married couples enjoy are federal rights.

The U.S. General Accounting Office has identified 1,138 federal benefits and rights to civil marriage, none of which gays and lesbians have.

In 2004, Equality California pressed for state legislation legalizing same-sex marriage, which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed.

The overly cautious come with the civil rights fight, said Geoff Kors, a part-time Palm Springs resident and executive director of the San Francisco nonprofit organization.

“The concern was that you have one shot and you want to take the best one,” Kors said.

Since California voters approved the same-sex marriage ban, Iowa, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont have joined Massachusetts in permitting same-sex marriage.

A voter referendum in Maine banning same-sex marriage is on the November ballot.

“There is no doubt that the tide is shifting in favor of greater acceptance and inclusion of LGBT people in civic life,” said Kate Kendell, executive director National Center for Lesbian Rights.

“Given that the Supreme Court is made up of human beings that see the same events the rest of us do, if it's a close call for some on the court, this will be undoubtedly somewhat influential that they are in step with public attitude rather than too far ahead.”