How to deal with a hostile judge
When you die, a judge will determine how your property is distributed through a process called probate. Often, these judges face a monumental caseload and can spend very little time reviewing your circumstances before your estate appears in court. While judges are entrusted with making fair and just decisions, we must remember that judges are people too, and are subject to any of a number of personal biases and prejudices that any person may have.
What this means for same-sex couples -- especially those in states that do not permit marriage or civil unions -- is that you may appear before a judge who is hostile to gay and lesbian individuals and is under no real obligation to honor your relationship.
Fortunately, judges tend to be good people who are truly committed to doing the right thing. Those that make rulings out of pure animus are rare. It is important, then, to humanize your position and let the judge see you not as the "gay lover" or, even worse, as the total stranger, but as who you really are: the loving and committed partner.
In probate proceedings, try to answer these five critical questions for the judge:
- Who are you? Often people overlook this simple question because they and all of the other people involved in the proceedings already know who you are. But remember that judges are often under-prepared. While it might not seem particularly relevant to the issue of property distribution, judges need to know who you are in order to make their decision.
- What is the controversy, in one sentence? In contested probate proceedings, there can be any number of different claims parties are making. It is important to know the issues that people are going to raise and be able to summarize your position and interests succinctly.
- Why are you here? This is an especially important question for same-sex couples when facing a judge who does not really understand your relationship to the deceased. Hostile judges may view you as someone merely trying to unjustly claim property from a grieving family. It is vital to tell your story and explain fully exactly why you believe that you are entitled to your partner's property.
- What outcome do you want? Explain to the judge clearly what it is you want to come of the proceedings. If you want to make sure you can still live in the home you and your partner have shared, say so. If you want to continue to care for the child you and your partner have reared, make that clear. While it all may seem obvious to you, a judge may not understand without you explaining it.
- Why should you get it? This is the most important question to answer for a hostile judge. This is your opportunity to tell your story and appeal to the judge's sense of right and wrong. While as a matter of law you might not necessarily be entitled to a piece of real property, explaining that it has been your and your partner's home for several years and that you have both contributed equally to it makes it feel much more equitable to allow you to continue to keep it.
The most important thing to do, however, is to retain the aid of an attorney with experience not just in probate, but who can also handle your specific needs and can address the particular difficulties same-sex couples face. While these tips are helpful generally, nothing can replace the advice of a lawyer who knows your particular situation.
Have a question, comment, or response? 1 person does.Vermont Governor Pledges to Veto Marriage Bill
In the wake of Monday's 26-4 Senate vote in favor of marriage inclusion in Vermont, Governor Jim Douglas has announced today that he plans to veto the marriage bill if passed by the House. Douglas's explanation for his decision was split between his desire that the state's legislature focus on economic issues, and his belief that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Despite that, he did express a hope that Congress will pass federal civil union laws similar to those approved by Vermont in 2000.
Douglas also hinted that he did not think legislative leaders would have advanced an inclusive marriage bill unless they believed they had enough votes to override his veto. While the Senate has well over the required 2/3 supermajority necessary, we will have to wait until sometime next week before knowing the bill's outcome in the House. There is no word on whether Douglas's statement today may influence the vote of House legislators.
Listen to Governor Jim Douglas's official announcement.
Have a question, comment, or response? 3 people do.The ‘Marriage is for Procreation’ Myth: The Futility of Marriage Exclusionist Studies and Statistics
Research has shown that children raised by homosexuals were more dissatisfied with their own gender, had homosexual experiences more frequently, and suffered a greater rate of molestation by members of their families
Arguments like these are being used increasingly to justify the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples. The New York and Washington courts — among others — agreed with the assertion that marriage is for procreation, evoking the same denial of liberties from the era of anti-miscegenation law. However, even if the above quotation is based in truth (we, of course, believe that it is not), it still does not satisfactorily justify the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage. There is no compelling State interest to justify marriage exclusion, and laws that effect such exclusion create a policy that is unjustly and intolerably overinclusive and underinclusive.
Read more about the 'marriage is for procreation' myth and its refutation here.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.Vermont Senate Approves Marriage Bill
The first state in the country to approve of civil unions for same-sex couples may also be the first to legislatively enact inclusive marriage laws. Following a heated debate, the Vermont state Senate today approved a bill that would open marriage to same-sex couples by a margin of 26-4. The next stop is the Vermont House, where debate on the bill begins tomorrow. Largely Democratic, the House is expected to approve the bill.
Though governor Jim Douglas publicly opposes same-sex marriage, he has not yet issued any official statement about his likelihood to veto the bill. As Family Fairness recently discussed, overcoming Douglas's veto would require a 2/3 supermajority in both houses. The Senate's vote surpassed this mark, but we will have to wait for the House to vote before we can be confident that Vermont's same-sex couples will be able to wed in the coming months.
Have a question, comment, or response? 2 people do.Portia De Rossi Apologizes for Ruining Lives by Getting Married
Portia De Rossi appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Live last week to apologize to those she hurt by marrying wife Ellen DeGeneres. In the fight for marriage inclusion, we sometimes forget the innocent casualties. De Rossi expresses thanks for Proposition 8, which will help to reduce the suffering we have caused.
Via Queerty.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.HRC’s ‘End the Lies’ Spotlights Ken Starr
If you have yet to hear about the Human Rights Campaign's End the Lies web project, I recommend exploring this worthy resource. With the purpose to "expose the lies and fear-tactics of anti-LGBT voices and counteract them with respectful dialogue and grassroots action," HRC spotlights radical ideologies and counters their hateful messages.
The project has previously focused its message on individuals like Sally Kern and Maggie Gallagher, both infamous voices in the anti-gay movement. Kern became notorious last March when she said, "I honestly think [homosexuality] is the biggest threat, even more so than terrorism," while Gallagher received attention when she claimed same-sex marriage inclusion was a form of "repression".
HRC is currently asking for signatures on a petition to be sent to Ken Starr (pictured), lead council in the recent Proposition 8 oral arguments heard by the California Supreme Court. The petition reads as follows:
Your attempt to nullify the marriages of 18,000 loving couples in California is misguided and malicious. The rights of a minority should never be stripped by a simple majority vote, and the idea that divorcing parents could help the welfare of children is disgusting. History will condemn your actions.
The petition currently has over 46,000 signatures. To add your name, visit HRC's End the Lies campaign.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.