Supreme Court gets into R-71 case
The Supreme Court shielded R-71 signatures as it hears a case on open-government laws.
Tags: Court Case, Open Government Laws, Signatures, Supreme CourtNY court hears case against gay marriage benefits
(Albany, NY) A Christian legal group seeking to stop New York agencies from recognizing same-sex marriages performed outside the state argued in the state’s highest court Tuesday that the practice amounts to a policy decision that requires approval by lawmakers.
Attorney Brian Raum told state Court of Appeals judges that a …
Tags: Albany Ny, Appeals Judges, Court Case, Court Of Appeals, gay marriage, Lawmakers, Legal Group, marriage, Marriage Benefits, Policy Decision, Same Sex MarriagesBC court tosses polygamy case
BC court tosses polygamy case
Tags: Court Case, Court Tosses, PolygamyBC court tosses polygamy case
BC court tosses polygamy case
Tags: Court Case, Court Tosses, PolygamyUpdate: Obama disses marriage law as Justice defends it
(Washington) President Barack Obama insisted Monday he still wants to scrap what he calls a discriminatory federal marriage law, even as his administration angered gay rights activists by defending it in court.
The president said his administration’s stance in a California court case is not about defending traditional marriage, but is …
Tags: barack obama, California Court, Court Case, Gay Rights Activists, Law Justice, marriage, Marriage Law, Traditional Marriage, Washington PresidentFederal Judge Stresses Trial Record on Calif. Gay-Marriage Ban
Whatever Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker winds up deciding on Proposition 8, it’s clear he wants an airtight trial record to support it.
Holding his first hearing Thursday on the controversial measure that outlawed same-sex marriage, Walker repeatedly stressed the importance of establishing a record that will stand the test of time.
He told a packed courtroom that he was “reasonably sure” that the challenge launched by two high-profile litigators is “only touching down in this court” and merely a “prelude” for things to come.
“How we do things here,” Walker said, “is more important than what we do.”
He noted that other courts have rendered decisions on same-sex marriage without holding full trials, which he suggested was a “problem.”
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 09-CV-2292, was filed in May by Theodore Olson, who represented George W. Bush in the landmark Bush v. Gore case, and David Boies, who represented Al Gore. Boies wasn’t present on Thursday. The suit attacks Prop 8 on equal protection and due process grounds.
Walker had already issued a tentative order allowing Prop 8 proponents to intervene and denying a preliminary injunction (pdf). He stood by both orders during Thursday’s 50-minute session.
Olson, a partner in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher’s Washington, D.C., office who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court 55 times, nonetheless made a fleeting attempt to persuade Walker to change his mind on the injunction.
“Every day that Prop 8 is enforced perpetuates a tragic injustice” on gays and lesbians, he argued, saying it “brands” them as “second-class citizens, unworthy and different.”
“The Supreme Court,” Olson argued, “has held again and again and again that the right to marry is the most important relationship in life.”
Representing the Prop 8 proponents, Washington attorney Charles Cooper, who was a top Justice Department lawyer during the Reagan administration, warned that the lawsuit could “sweep away” not only Prop 8, but the definition of marriage in 43 states and the federal government.
The Cooper & Kirk partner also argued that marriage has by tradition always been the union of a man and a woman, and said that every Supreme Court case that describes marriage has noted that its central purpose is procreation.
See Federal Judge Stresses Trial Record on Calif. Gay-Marriage Ban Above the Law
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/federal-judge…
Federal gay marriage challenge has Hollywood style Reuters
The story of two famous U.S. lawyers from opposite ends of the political spectrum banding together to launch a bold and unexpected fight for gay marriage sounds like it could have been written in Hollywood.
In many ways, it is.
A handful of political filmmakers led by a Democratic consultant have crafted a gay rights challenge they hope will reach the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case which has its first hearing in a federal San Francisco court on July 2 could quickly make gay marriage a national right, or, some veteran gay rights advocates fear, cripple the movement.
The team has political experience, winning referenda in California in particular, and has brought together real-world firepower in the form of Ted Olson and David Boies, the lawyers who faced off in the 2000 election vote recount that led to George W. Bush’s presidency.
What sets them apart is the willingness to take on a court case that advocates steeped in the cause have avoided.
“Patience is a virtue I’ve quite frankly never possessed — if patience is a virtue,” said Chad Griffin, 35, who began his career in the political big leagues more than a decade ago as the youngest person to work on a president’s West Wing staff.
“History is on our side, law is on our side,” added Griffin, who is gay.
Rob Reiner, the “When Harry Met Sally” director and advocate for children’s health, and Bruce Cohen, the producer of “Milk,” a film about the first openly gay elected politician in California, are two of the six-member board of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, founded for the court challenge.
See Federal gay marriage challenge has Hollywood style
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/federal-gay-m…
Gay adoption before Fla. Legislature, courts
The state Legislature is faced with a bill aimed at overturning the state’s 1977 ban on gay adoption, and Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals must resolve a lawsuit over the issue stemming from Gill’s case. The case is likely to move on to the Florida Supreme Court.
The court case will likely resolve questions posed by gay rights advocates before the bill does.
The legislation is expected to die without coming to a vote before the Legislature adjourns next week.
“This year the bill is not going to be going anywhere to be honest with you,” said the sponsor, Sen. Nan Rich, D-Sunrise. “The best chance to get a change in this state … will be with Gill.”
The high court will hold preliminary hearings soon on Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman’s ruling that allowed Gill to adopt the boys in November. Her ruling said the ban violates equal protection rights for the children and their prospective gay parents.
See Gay adoption before Fla. Legislature, courts
MiamiHerald.com
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/gay-adoption-…
Five stories from five years of same-sex marriage
Cambridge, Mass. - Susan Shepherd looks up at the rough-hewn pink granite of City Hall, just across the Charles River from downtown Boston. An American flag ripples in the wind. Inside the building, a plaque commemorates Cambridge as America’s birthplace of legal same-sex marriage.
“I can’t believe it’s been five years,” Shepherd says, hugging her wife. “I feel like I just met her yesterday.”
Nor can gay marriage opponents believe what’s happened in Massachusetts since, in their view, traditional marriage came to an end.
Yet in the past five years as same-sex marriage became part of Massachusetts’ landscape, many Bay Staters say something unexpected has happened: Life is as it always was.
Just after midnight on May 17, 2004, Shepherd and Marcia Hams, a Cambridge couple who’d been together three decades and raised a son, became Massachusetts’ first same-sex couple to get a marriage license. They had waited 24 hours in rain and cold, and by the time they got the license, 10,000 supporters gathered on the front lawn of City Hall.
Five years later and 1,300 miles away, Iowa on Monday will allow same-sex marriages. As Iowa enters into uncharted territory for the Midwest, the Bay State may serve as a sign of what may come.
Since same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts, about 12,000 same-sex couples have applied for marriage licenses. Gay marriages now comprise about 4 percent of all marriages performed in the state, meaning there are about 1,500 a year.
There have been some same-sex divorces, too, most notably by the couple whose name was on the court case that legalized same-sex marriage.
To be sure, a sizable chunk of Massachusetts’ 6.3 million residents remain opposed to same-sex marriage, mostly on religious grounds. Some say legal same-sex marriage has led to censorship of those who remain opposed, to infringement on the rights of parents who object to same-sex marriage being taught in schools, and to Catholic Charities of Boston ending adoption work because it refused to allow same-sex couples to adopt.
But polling results show a shift toward acceptance of gay marriage. A 2004 survey by the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston found the state split: 42 percent supported gay marriage, 44 percent opposed it. A similar survey in 2008 found 59 percent in support of gay marriage, 37 percent opposed.
As Iowa enters a new era, a drive through Massachusetts and into Maine shows how same-sex marriage has changed life - for better, for worse or, as many say, hardly at all.
See Five stories from five years of same-sex marriage
DesMoinesRegister.com - Des Moines,IA,USA
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/five-stories-…
Utah opposition to civil unions shows proponents of Prop 8 Lied - again
You may remember how proponents of Prop 8 claimed they were not against Civil Unions for queers - they only wanted to protect marriage from being destroyed, etc.
Well, over in Utah (home of The Mormon Church) we can now see the truth: far right conservatives and the Mormon Church are against any form of equality for LGBT people. Read on:
Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said Friday that Utah’s constitutional amendment banning gay marriage also prohibits civil unions, and that Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. is wrong when he says it’s open to interpretation from the courts. “When it comes to civil unions, it’s absolutely clear. There is no doubt,” Shurtleff said in an interview. “That’s in the Constitution.” Utah voters approved Amendment 3 to Utah’s Constitution in 2004, stating that marriage can only consist of a union between a man and a woman and that “No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.” On Thursday, Huntsman said that it is not clear that the Constitution bans civil unions. “I think that ultimately could be a court case and that might be adjudicated in court if it comes to that level,” Huntsman said during his monthly KUED news conference. “But [the amendment] wasn’t clear. That spoke to marriage and anything subordinate to marriage, I think, would probably be adjudicated in a court of law.” Shurtleff said that, based on the language of the amendment and the legislative intent and history, “they clearly were prohibiting civil unions.” On Friday, Shurtleff sent a Twitter message to 380 correspondents: “It is NOT a matter for the courts, the PEOPLE have spoken!”
Salt Lake Tribune - United States
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/utah-oppositi…
