This Week in Gay News Roundup: 5/24 - 5/30
The week that brought us disappointment over Proposition 8's approval by California courts and hope with a federal challenge featured many other strides in our fight for equality. Here is what happened this week in case you missed anything. For more up-to-the-minute news stories, follow Family Fairness on Twitter.
- President Obama made his first Supreme Court nomination to fill David Souter's vacant seat. His pick, current Second Circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor, would be the Court's third woman, third non-white, and first hispanic justice. Though her time in the New York District Court and Second Circuit have not revealed her stance on gay issues, legal activists are happy with her nomination. Paula Ettelbrick, executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commissions, said of a meeting with Sotomayor in 1991, "she was totally interested [in gay civil rights issues] and supportive." Evan Wolfson, head of Freedom to Marry, said, "from everything I know, Judge Sotomayor is an outstanding choice — fair and aware, open and judicious. I believe she has the demonstrated commitment to principles of equal protection and inclusion that defines a good nominee to the Supreme Court." The National LGBT Bar Association and Lambda Legal have also made statements supporting Sotomayor.
- A Brown University poll revealed that 60% of Rhode Island voters support the right of same-sex couples to marry, and 75% support Civil Unions. Of the six New England states, four have legalized marriage equality with a fifth — New Hampshire — in the process. While Rhode Island legislatures have attempted to pass marriage bills every year since 1997, none have made it to the floor for a full House or Senate vote. Equality advocates are hopeful that such a strong showing of support will encourage lawmakers to more seriously consider a bill.
- Speaking of New Hampshire, House and Senate negotiators have reached a compromise on the state's marriage bill and will be holding votes on the amendments next week. Governor Lynch, who threatened to veto the last version of the bill unless the changes were made, has indicated his support of the new bill. The legislation added a sentence specifying that religious organizations have exclusive control over their practices with regards to marriage.
- Two bills, one of which would legalize same-sex marriage while the other would ban it, are circulating for co-sponsors in Pennsylvania. While the outcome of either bill is uncertain, Senator Leach, who intends to introduce the marriage equality legislation, believes that the climate is right for Pennsylvania to follow in the footsteps of other legislatures the recognized the fundamental inequality of marriage exclusion.
- The White House released a statement reaffirming President Obama's support for efforts repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The statement says "DOMA is a federal law passed by Congress that precludes uniform federal recognition of same-sex relationships, even those recognized as valid under the law of the state. Because the President believes that this is an issue that should be left to the states, he continues to support the legislative repeal of DOMA." While the statement is comforting given Obama's relative silence on issues important to the gay community, it offered no timeline as to when these efforts would begin.
- The domestic partnership bill in Nevada that won support from the state's House and Senate was vetoed by Governor Jim Gibbons as he promised to do. A statement released by the governor explains that he believes the 2002 constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage also extends to domestic partnerships, and that "only the voters should have the right to undo or amend constitutional mandates." He also stated that other private contracts, like a Power of Attorney document or a health care proxy, were already sufficient to give same-sex couples legal rights and that domestic partnerships were unnecessary.
Did I miss anything? Be sure to let me know in the comments. You may also follow Family Fairness on Twitter for more up-to-the-minute news stories.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.Bush v. Gore Lawyers Team Up to Challenge Proposition 8 Federally
Theodore Olson, former US Solicitor General and attorney who represented George Bush in Bush v. Gore, has teamed up with David Boies, who represented Al Gore in the same case, to challenge California's Proposition 8 in federal court. Referring to yesterday's ruling in Strauss v. Horton, the California case that upheld Proposition 8, Chad Griffin, Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, said, "yesterday's ruling had an even more profound impact: it signaled to gay americans across this nation that we are not viewed as equal in the eyes of the law," adding, "this fight is not over, and we will win."
Though Strauss v. Horton was decided on the California constitution, this new claim will be resolved under the US Constitution, specifically under the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantees of due process and equal protection. Said Griffin, "we are taking this fight to the federal courts in order to protect the equal rights guarenteed to every american by the United States Constitution. Our courts exist to protect our rights when they are violated, and we are prepared to go all the way to the United States Supreme Court to find justice."
The announcement came as a surprise to many gay rights advocates who had expected that the next step would be to bring a second initiative repealing Proposition 8 to California voters in 2010 or 2012. Allen explained that they "are acting now because, as Dr. [Martin Luther] King said, 'justice delayed is justice denied.'" He added, "for even one couple to live through one more day of state-sanctioned second class citizenship is one day too many."
The suit was filed Friday, May 22 in the United States District Court, Northern District of California. The text of the complaint [pdf] is available on the American Foundation for Equal Rights website. The plaintiffs also requested a preliminary injunction [pdf] against Proposition 8, which, if granted, would immediately permit same-sex couples to marry in California. A hearing for the injunction is scheduled for July 2.
Boies, explaining why he joined with his former opponent, said:
This is not a question of Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal - Ted [Olson] and I, as everyone knows, have been on different sides in important political issues - we come from different parts of the political spectrum. But I think Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, and Liberals all recognize the importance of the equal rights guaranteed by the Constitution. This is not something that is a partisan issue; this is something that is a civil rights issue - a legal issue - and I think that is what has brought us together
The press release [pdf] and a video of the press conference can both be found at the American Foundation for Equal Rights.
Have a question, comment, or response? 1 person does.The marriages of 18,000 couples depend on tomorrow’s ruling
Tomorrow morning at 10:00am PDT, the California Supreme Court will issue their ruling in Strauss v. Horton, the case challenging Proposition 8. Now seems to be an appropriate time to highlight one of the 18,000 couples whose marriages may depend on tomorrow's outcome. Below are Jackson and Jacob Howa-Morrow, board members of Family Fairness who were featured in GLAD's Show America What Marriage Equality Looks Like photo album:
Jackson and Jacob were married June 26, 2008 in Palm Springs, California one week after the Supreme Court's decision in In re Marriage Cases that recognized marriage equality in the state. The two have been together for more than five years since meeting in High School. Tomorrow, their marriage will be on the line, but their relationship will not. No matter how the court rules, the fundamental nature of their union cannot be taken away. A simple vote will not prevent gays and lesbians from continuing to form lasting bonds, even if the law refuses to recognize them.
For Jackson, Jacob, and the 18,000 couples whose rights are at risk, I sincerely hope that marriage equality will return to California . Whatever the ruling, a legal analysis of the court's opinion will appear here tomorrow.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.This Week in Gay News Roundup: 5/17 - 5/23
This has been a week of new rights, attempts to win new rights, and attempts to take away rights. Here is what happened this week in case you missed anything. For more up-to-the-minute news stories, follow Family Fairness on Twitter.
- Florida, currently the only US state to explicitly ban gays and lesbians from adopting, will now recognize adoptions performed out of state. The Florida Court of Appeals has ruled that the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution requires that Florida respect the adoptions granted in other states. Though DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, permits opting not to grant full faith and credit to out-of-state same-sex marriages, no law permits states to ignore legally performed adoptions. Another suit challenging the gay adoption ban is also working its way through Florida courts.
- Though Pennsylvania has twice failed to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, the legislature is trying again. The state currently has a statute restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples, but fears that Pennsylvania courts will soon overturn the law are leading some to push for an amendment. Before going to voters, both houses of the legislature must first approve the measure in two consecutive terms. Democrats, who control the House 104-99 but fall short in the Senate 30-20, have pledged to block the bill's passage.
- In an apparent showing of frustration with Governor Lynch, the New Hampshire House has refused to pass their same-sex marriage bill with the governor's suggested changes by a vote of 188-186. Lynch threatened to veto the bill that had previously passed both the House and Senate unless changes were made that enhanced protections for religious organizations that are opposed to marriage equality. House representatives have suggested that they should attempt to override Lynch's veto rather than catering to his demands. Another vote is scheduled for next month, and will determine the course of marriage equality in New Hampshire.
- The Nevada legislature has approved a domestic partnership bill for same-sex couples, but Governor Jim Gibbons has said that he intends to veto it, saying that he "believes there are existing contracts that can be created, so no change to the law is needed. If there are people who want to be domestic partners, they can do so under existing laws." The governor forgets, of course, that several vital rights cannot simply be contracted, and that these legal mechanisms come only with great time and financial investments that would be unnecessary if domestic partnerships or marriage was available. The House and Senate each need two additional votes in order to override the governor's veto.
- Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins, and Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen have introduced legislation to give the same-sex partners of federal employees the same benefits available to spouses. The William's Institute estimates that the new law would benefit 30,000 couples. Though the federal government still would not recognize legally performed marriages, the granting of rights and privileges to partners of federal employees is an important step in the recognition of gay and lesbian families.
- Though the Washington D.C. City Council recently passed a measure to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, 33 members of Congress are now attempting to pass the D.C. Defense of Marriage Act, a bill that would mandate "[t]hat in the District of Columbia, for all legal purposes, 'marriage' means the union of one man and one woman." It is unlikely that the bill will pass, as it requires the support of a majority of the Democrat-controlled House and the Democrat-controlled Senate, and also requires the signature of President Obama, who believes in the de-federalization of marriage legislation.
Did I miss anything? Be sure to let me know in the comments. You may also follow Family Fairness on Twitter for more up-to-the-minute news stories.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.Washington group primed to roll-back newly won rights
With Governor Chris Gregoire's signature on Senate Bill 5688 yesterday, Washington now offers every "privilege, immunity, right, benefit, and responsibility" of marriage to registered same-sex domestic partners. However, according to Seattle PI, conservative anti-gay group Washington Values Alliance has already filed Referendum 71, a measure allowing Washington voters to overturn the new domestic partnership bill. The group will have until June 25 to collect the more than 120,000 signatures necessary to place the referendum on the November ballot. Should they succeed, the new law will be suspended until after the vote, affecting 5,395 Washington couples already in a registered domestic partnership.
Some in the state's legislature have indicated interest in sponsoring a legislative push for full marriage equality, and Governor Gregoire herself has been quoted as saying that she "want[s] to see a bill on [her] desk." However, given Washington's preference for a slower, incremental approach to gay rights, it is likely that the state's leaders are waiting to see the results of Referendum 71 before seriously considering such a bill.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.Same-Sex Marriage Now Legal in Maine
Last Thursday, Maine's senate by a vote of 21-14 approved LD 1020, a bill affirming marriage equality in the state. Yesterday, the House followed suit and passed the bill by a margin of 89-58. This morning, Governor John Baldacci, who has stated previously that he does not support same-sex marriage, signed the bill into law, making Maine the 5th state in the country to offer marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples and the second to do so legislatively.
The governor issued a press release after the signing:
In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions. I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage. [. . . .] [M]y responsibility is to uphold the Constitution and do, as best as possible, what is right. I believe that signing this legislation is the right thing to do.
Governor Baldacci also stated that the state Constitution "guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people," hinting at a possible veto referendum to challenge the law. Dubbed the "People's Veto", the process only requires that opponents collect a sufficient number of signatures to place the referendum before voters. At that time, the people would choose whether to approve or reject the new law. Current polls show that 39% of Maine residents support same-sex marriage while 23% oppose any legal recognition. 34% support civil unions and not marriage.
The Maine Family Policy Council, a conservative evangelical group, has already started the process, saying:
Maine people twice rejected "gay" rights in the past decade. Homosexuality is very sad, and sinful. Maine must not create a culture that winks at something so debilitating on so many levels. To present this "orientation" as benign to impressionable children is the height of arrogance, and surely qualifies as evil.
Opponents have 90 days to collect the more than 55,000 signatures required to put the issue on the ballot.
Have a question, comment, or response? Share your thoughts.