This plaintiffs in the second case, however, asked Johnson Coleman to issue a ruling that would grant all similarly situated couples in the state immediate access to marriage licenses. The lawsuit itself seeks a permanent order from the court, as a class-action lawsuit, that the state stop enforcing the ban on same-sex couples marrying in Illinois. More immediately, though, it asks the court to allow a so-called “subclass” of couples who have “an urgent need to marry” — such as those facing a “potentially life-threatening illness of one or both parties.”

In a Dec. 10 written opinion, Johnson Coleman agreed, saying that allowing the couples in the subclass to marry early would do more good than harm.

“Given the Illinois General Assembly’s enactment of Senate Bill 10, any erroneous decision here would only result in allowing a relatively few people to marry a short period of time sooner,” the judge wrote. “The harm to the putative subclass of medically critical plaintiffs, on the other hand, would be far weightier since a denial of relief could effectively deny them the right to marry at all if one member of the couple passes away before June 1, 2014.”