California Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments in Prop 8 Legal Challenge on March 5
Attorney General, Governor, and nation’s top civil rights groups agree: Invalidate Prop 8
(San Francisco, CA, February 3, 2009) The California Supreme Court announced today that it will hear oral arguments on Thursday, March 5, 2009 in the Proposition 8 legal challenge. The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU—with support from civil rights groups, religious organizations, labor unions, and legal scholars—argue that Proposition 8 is invalid because the people of California have established strict safeguards that prohibit the underlying principles of the California Constitution from being changed by a simple majority vote. By taking away a right only from one group, Proposition 8 violates the most basic principle of our government: that all people are entitled to equal treatment under the law.
California Attorney General Jerry Brown is also asking the Court to invalidate Proposition 8 on the ground that certain fundamental rights, including the right to marry, are inalienable and can not be put up for a popular vote.
On November 10, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger stated that he hoped the Court would overturn Proposition 8. On CNN, he said of Proposition 8′s passage, “It’s unfortunate, obviously, but it’s not the end, I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area.”
On November 19, 2008, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the legal challenges to Proposition 8 and set an expedited schedule. Briefing in the case was completed on January 21, 2009.
The California Supreme Court must issue its decisions within 90 days of oral argument.
On January 15, 2009, 43 friend-of-the-court briefs urging the Court to invalidate Prop 8 were filed, arguing that Proposition 8 drastically alters the equal protection guarantee in California’s Constitution and that the rights of a minority cannot be eliminated by a simple majority vote. The supporters represent the full gamut of California’s and the nation’s civil rights organizations and legal scholars, as well as California legislators, local governments, bar associations, business interests, labor unions, and religious groups.
In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court held that laws that treat people differently based on their sexual orientation violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and that same-sex couples have the same fundamental right to marry as other Californians. Proposition 8 eliminated this fundamental right only for same-sex couples. No other initiative has ever successfully changed the California Constitution to take away a right only from a targeted minority group. Proposition 8 passed by a bare majority of 52 percent on November 4.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU filed this challenge on November 5, representing Equality California, whose members include many same-sex couples who married between June 16 and November 4, 2008, and six same-sex couples who want to marry in California. The California Supreme Court has also agreed to hear two other challenges filed on the same day: one filed by the City and County of San Francisco (joined by Santa Clara County and the City of Los Angeles, and subsequently by Los Angeles County and other local governments); and another filed by a private attorney.
Serving as co-counsel on the case with NCLR, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU are the Law Office of David C. Codell, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.
The case is Strauss et al. v. Horton et al. (#S168047). For more information, go to: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm
EQCA works to achieve equality and secure legal protections for LGBT people. To improve the lives of LGBT Californians, EQCA sponsors legislation and coordinates efforts to ensure its passage, lobbies legislators and other policy makers, builds coalitions, develops community strength and empowers individuals and other organizations to engage in the political process. www.eqca.org
The National Center for Lesbian Rights is a national legal organization committed to advancing the civil and human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. www.nclrights.org/overturn8
Lambda Legal is a national organization committed to achieving full recognition of the civil rights of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgender people and those with HIV through impact litigation, education and public policy work. www.lambdalegal.org
The American Civil Liberties Union is America’s foremost advocate of individual rights. It fights discrimination and moves public opinion on LGBT rights through the courts, legislatures and public education. www.aclu.org
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/02/california-su…
In New Jersey, Push for Gay Marriage Meets Election Concerns
NEW JERSEY has never appeared so close to — and yet so far from — enacting gay marriage.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine; Richard J. Codey, the State Senate president; and Joseph J. Roberts Jr., leader of the Democratic-controlled Assembly, have all recently stated publicly that gay marriage is an idea whose time has come. Echoing the sentiments of a state commission report released last month, some state officials said that civil unions — the closest thing to marriage available to gay couples in the state — were woefully inadequate and that the legalization of gay marriage in New Jersey was not a matter of “if” but “when.”
But with the governor and all 80 members of the Assembly up for re-election in November, most of the officials say the “when” may not be for some time.
The New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, a 13-member panel convened to evaluate the impact of the state’s 2006 civil union law, in its final report last month, called on the state to legalize same-sex marriage after finding that civil unions did not result in equal treatment. Likening the prohibition against gay couples marrying to the racial segregation laws imposed upon black Americans, the commission said hospitals were reluctant to recognize civil unions when it came to visitation rights, employers did not always extend health benefits to both partners, and the children of such unions were stigmatized.
Massachusetts and Connecticut are currently the only states that allow gay couples to marry, and in both instances the issue was decided by the courts rather than the legislatures. California was in that category until November, when gay marriage was overturned by voters.
Mr. Goldstein says his organization has been lobbying to get a measure passed.
“We are very, very close,” he said. “Do I believe we have the votes yet? It depends on how you count them. Even under our very conservative vote counts, we’re very close.”
While the governor had asked state lawmakers to refrain from raising the issue during the presidential election, for fear that it would sidetrack voters, he is now encouraging lawmakers to seriously review the commission’s report.
“While this administration is focused squarely on the economic crisis for the foreseeable future, it’s clear that this issue of civil rights must be addressed sooner rather than later,” Mr. Corzine said in a statement.
The governor promised to sign marriage-equality legislation when it reaches his desk. The question is whether state lawmakers will present him with the opportunity. “Politics will play a role in whether it actually gets posted to a committee,” said Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, a Democrat from Princeton and the deputy majority leader, who sponsored a gay marriage bill. “With the Assembly up this November, there will be a lot of members unlikely to get involved with such a polarizing issue.”
See Push for Gay Marriage Meets Election Concerns
New York Times, United States
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/in-new-jersey…
In New Jersey, a Blue-Ribbon State Government Commission Tells Governor Corzine and the Legislature: It’s Time to Enact Marriage Equality
To Read the Complete Report Online, visit http://www.nj.gov/oag/dcr/ curc.html
Making its final recommendation, the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission says the civil union law ‘invites and encourages’ harm to same-sex couples and their children
The commission cites ‘overwhelming evidence’ the civil union law will never provide equality with the passage of time
The 13 Commissioners include not only LGBT leaders, but also a right-to-life Republican, plus two clergy, plus six government officials representing an Administration that had opposed marriage equality in the courts
To watch video of same-sex couples testifying before the Commission, visit www.CivilUnionsDontWork.com
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey state government commission today unanimously recommended to Governor Corzine and the New Jersey legislature that they enact a law to allow same-sex couples to marry “expeditiously because any delay in marriage equality will harm all the people of New Jersey.”
The recommendation is part of the 79-page final report just released by the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, a 13-member body created by the civil union law enacted in December 2006. The 13 Commissioners include not only LGBT leaders, but also a right-to-life Republican, plus two clergy, plus six government officials representing an Administration that had opposed marriage equality in the courts. Their report, passed on a 13 to 0 vote with no abstentions, is based on testimony from more than 150 witnesses over 26 hours spanning 18 public meetings in 2007 and 2008.
The civil union law “invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children,” concludes the final report, titled The Economic, Legal, Medical and Social Consequences of New Jersey’s Civil Union Act. “In a number of cases, the negative effect of the Civil Union Act on the physical and mental health of same-sex couples and their children is striking, largely because a number of employers and hospitals do not recognize the rights and benefits of marriage for civil union couples.”
“The Commission is compelled to issue its final report now because of the overwhelming evidence that civil unions will not be recognized by the general public as the equivalent of marriage in New Jersey with the passage of time. Nearly a decade later, civil union couples in Vermont report the same obstacles to equality that New Jersey civil union couples face today,” the report states, citing the recent study of a panel in Vermont.
Besides assessing the civil union law’s impact on same-sex couples, today’s final report describes how the absence of a marriage equality statute deprives New Jersey’s entire economy of considerable revenue. “Spending on weddings and tourism could boost the New Jersey economy by approximately $248 million over three years,” the report states. One expert testifying before the Commission estimates the figure could be $500 million or more.
But the heart of today’s report is its delineation of the harm that New Jersey’s civil union law has pro-actively inflicted upon same-sex couples.
“I’m a pro-life Republican and past Director of Gloucester County Right-to-Life,” said Commission member AnnLynne Benson on the release of today’s report, “so I know the diversity of this Commission. Our report demonstrates in exquisite detail why amending New Jersey’s law to extend marriage to same-sex couples is a necessity. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that ‘denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples violates the equal protection guarantee and can no longer be tolerated under our State constitution.’ Implementation of that ruling by the invention of a parallel status failed to deliver equality. It was like planting a toothpick and hoping a tree would grow.”
According to the final report, the civil union law’s harm to same-sex couples includes:
– The inability of a number of same-sex partners to visit one another in
the hospital, and to make medical decisions for one another, because
hospitals don’t accept civil unions as equal to marriage. The
Commission’s final report begins with the story of Naomi and Gina, a
couple in Montclair, New Jersey who had a humiliating and
life-threatening experience at a hospital. Gina was admitted to the
emergency room with cardiac arrhythmia, unable to give consent for
treatment. When Naomi arrived and said she was Gina’s partner, the
doctor interrogated Naomi about the nature of the relationship and
initially kept Naomi away from Gina and refused to let her give
consent for Gina. The report has other stories like this.
– “Significant psychological damage” to the children raised same-sex
couples because their families are given the stigmatizing label of
civil union; and to LGBT youth who view themselves as inferior because
they cannot marry. “Their heartbreaking testimony,” the report
states, “brings to life their struggle in a way that no numbers –
whether complaints filed with government agencies or advocacy
organizations — can encapsulate on their own.” As Dr. Marshall
Forstein, a Harvard Medical School professor, testified:
“Second-class citizenship, now institutionalized in some states in the
form of civil unions, contributes to increased rates of anxiety,
depression and substance use disorders in marginalized populations.”
– The denial of health insurance by employers to same-sex partners,
especially harmful during the current economic crisis. Today’s final
report underscores what the Commission’s interim report of February
2008 found, that the federal Employment Retirement Insurance Security
Act (ERISA) preempts the New Jersey Civil Union law for approximately
50 percent of all employers in the state. For that 50 percent,
providing equal rights and benefits for same-sex couples under the
civil union law is an option rather than a requirement.
The Commission’s final report refutes the notion — as the interim
report did — that a change in state law from civil unions to
marriage equality would have minimal impact because Federal law does
not recognize same-sex relationships. The final report provides
ample evidence to the contrary, based on the dramatically lower
invocation of ERISA by companies in Massachusetts, which has a
marriage equality law. “The term ‘marriage,’ the report concludes,
“would make a significant difference in providing equality even with
no change in federal law.”
– Compounded harm to women, African-Americans and Latino-Americans, all
of whom face discrimination because of their gender, race or
ethnicity, and who now suffer double discrimination when denied equal
rights and benefits under the civil union law. The state Public
Advocate told the Commission about “the particular difficulty for
lower-income same-sex couples who encounter discrimination because
they have fewer resources with which to seek legal counsel and
redress, and who have difficulty meeting expenses if faced with
reduced healthcare benefits.”
– Harm to the marriages of couples where one partner is transgender.
The final report reaffirms the finding in the Commission’s interim
report that the classification of civil union places marital status in
question for these couples, who had gotten married legally when they
were opposite-sex couples. * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/in-new-jersey…
No timeline to permit gay marriage in NJ
TRENTON — Legislative leaders reiterated their long-term support for allowing same-sex couples to marry in New Jersey but didn’t promise immediate action on a call today by a state review commission to scrap civil unions in favor of gay marriage. The Civil Union Review Commission said in a 79-page report issued today that state law should be amended to allow gay marriage — and quickly, saying “any delay in marriage equality will harm all the people of New Jersey.”
The commission said current New Jersey law, drafted in response to a state Supreme Court order, allowing gay couples to enter civil unions “encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children” and that some employers and hospitals don’t afford civil union couples the same rights as married ones.
“Even if, given enough time, civil unions are understood to provide rights and responsibilities equivalent to those provided in marriage, they send a message to the public: same-sex couples are not equal to opposite-sex married couples in the eyes of the law, that they are ‘not good enough’ to warrant true equality,” says the report. See No timeline to permit gay marriage in NJ
Dailyrecord.com – Parsippany,NJ,USA
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/no-timeline-t…
Iowa Justices Hear Same-Sex Marriage Case
In a case that could make Iowa the first Midwestern state to legalize same-sex marriage, the Iowa Supreme Court on Tuesday pressed lawyers for both sides with sharp questions on topics like the 4,000-year-old history of marriage and whether a ruling favoring gay couples would open the door to polygamy.
The legal core of the case, Varnum v. Brien, is whether the state’s 10-year-old law defining a “valid” marriage as only “between a male and female” violates the Iowa Constitution’s guarantees of equal treatment and due process.
A trial court judge ruled last year that the law was unconstitutional and that a dozen gay men and lesbians had been wrongly denied marriage licenses in Polk County, which includes the state capital, Des Moines. The state appealed the ruling, leading to Tuesday’s oral arguments.
But the technical details of the law and the Constitution were only part of a free-wheeling discussion lasting nearly two hours in which the seven justices repeatedly interrupted the lawyers, demanding that they parse and defend their positions.
See Iowa Justices Hear Same-Sex Marriage Case
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/12/iowa-justices…
