Supreme Court takes up dispute over endorsement of gay adoption by Florida Bar’s family-law section
State Supreme Court justices critically questioned both sides today in a dispute over whether the family-law section of the Florida Bar should be allowed to legally endorse adoption for gay couples. A circuit judge in Miami threw out the statute banning adoption by gays but the case is headed for the Supreme Court. The Bar itself has not taken a position but its family-law section sought to file a “friend of the court” brief supporting the circuit court ruling. Lawyers supporting the statute objected — saying the Bar shouldn’t be using compulsory dues paid by all lawyers to fight on one side of a controversial issue.
Tallahassee attorney Barry Richard said the family section is a voluntary association and that its lawyer members have a right to take positions. But Matt Staver, representing the conservative Liberty Counsel, said Bar rules forbid lobbying on either side of a hot topic.
The attorneys argued over the distinction between lobbying the Legislature and filing a legal brief in court. They also disagreed about whether a voluntary section of the bar is restrained by the same rules applying to the full bar.
Chief Justices Peggy Quince and Justices Barbara Pariente, Fred Lewis, Charles Canady and Ricky Polston pressed Richard and Staver on the legal distinctions.
Pariente said that if the prohibition on pursuing controversial, divisive issues had been interpreted as a ban 50 years ago, the Bar could not have taken sides on racial integration. Lewis said he doesn’t think much of “friend of the court” briefs, because they are usually partisan advocacy rather than independent guidance on the law, and that the public doesn’t make a distinction between a section of the Bar and the whole Bar itself.
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/04/supreme-court…
Gay marriage debate at Big Bear school over anti-Prop. 8 shirt
Attorneys for the ACLU have sent a letter to Big Bear High School saying that school officials cannot prohibit students from wearing anti-Proposition 8 T-shirts.
Proposition 8, which amended the state Constitution to ban gay marriage, was among the most divisive issues on the November ballot and continues to inspire protests and boycotts.
The day before the election, sophomore class president Mariah Jimenez wore a home-made T-shirt that said “Prop 8 Equals HATE.” Her sixth-period teacher sent her to the office, where the principal told her that she would have to take off the shirt before returning to class because the shirt’s message was divisive.
But attorneys for the ACLU have argued that schools cannot prohibit speech simply because it is controversial; only speech that incites a disturbance can be prohibited, ACLU attorneys said.
See Gay marriage debate at Big Bear school over anti-Prop. 8 shirt
Los Angeles Times, CA -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/gay-marriage-…
