Yesterday in Boston, a federal district court judge declared unconstitutional the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman. While some progressive legal scholars are concerned that a portion of the verdict is problematic, it's still a landmark decision because it establishes that the government has no rational basis for treating same-sex couples differently than heterosexual ones.

State Rep. Greg Harris (D-Chicago) isn't sure if the decision strengthens his case for a civil unions bill, which he has repeatedly sponsored and slowly built support for in Springfield. But gay rights advocates hope that SB 1716 -- which would guarantee same-sex couples many of the same legal protections straight couples take for granted -- will advance during the lame-duck session in early January. "We are awaiting the House and Senate going back into session," Harris told us this morning.

We also talked to the North Sider about GOP gubernatorial challenger Bill Brady and the General Assembly's changing attitude toward gay rights. A lightly-edited transcript of our conversation follows:

How important do you think it is to get a bill voted on before Sen. Bill Brady would take office in January?

Well, I think any piece of legislation that passes the House or the Senate, you would want to hope to have a governor to sign it.

Have you gotten any indication that [Brady] would be willing to sign it?

Have you read his public positions on the subject of equality? ... I've not spoken to Sen. Brady about it. I do know that he's consistently introduced constitutional amendments that would forbid same-sex marriage or just civil unions or equal partner benefits in the state of Illinois. He's gone so far as to back repeal of laws that would forbid discrimination against people in employment or housing or public accommodations based on sexual orientation. So I think his position is pretty clear.

Anything in the way of civil rights appears to be at risk if Bill Brady becomes the governor of Illinois. So if I were a person in any minority group who feels they have certain protections against discrimination -- whether it would be LGBT, an immigrant or refugee, a Latino, an African-American, a woman -- I think I'd be very worried to have Bill Brady as the governor of the state of Illinois.

On the flip side, in your conversations with colleagues in the General Assembly, do you think that lawmakers are growing more receptive to the idea of extending equal rights to the LGBT community?

I think that for a lot of my colleagues, when we began this discussion a couple of years ago, it was the first time for a lot of them that it had been brought before them. So there was a lot of education that needed to be done about the underlying issues.

And I think then that we've made an effort to be sure people have heard in each one of the 177 House and Senate districts from constituents for whom this is an important issue: Whether it's because they are lesbian or gay or transgender themselves, or because they have children or grandchildren who are, or because they have friends or neighbors who are, or people who go to their church or synagogue who are. So yeah, I think people have vastly changed their opinion since the day we began this process in 2007.

Why do you think this bill is so important to the state?

Because I think Illinois needs to be a leader in saying we're not going to discriminate in giving government benefits to any class of person based on an animus towards that class. I think we are very careful to protect rights of all religious institutions to consecrate marriages as they see fit within their denomination, whether they would choose to honor a same-sex union or a union of people who had previously had a divorce or who are not of the same faith. But as far as the government conferring rights, benefits, and obligations on its citizens, nobody should be excluded simply because there are people in society who wish to discriminate against them.