Ruby-Sachs: Supreme Court case pits gay activists v. free speech

[1]

There is a very important case arriving in the Supreme Court tomorrow. Referendum 71 was a ballot initiative in Washington attempting to undo domestic partnership privileges for same-sex couples. Many signed the petition for the law, but ultimately their regressive bid failed. Still, gay rights groups want to release the names from the petition on a searchable website. Under Washington law, that kind of disclosure is mandatory.

But the lawyer for the other side argues that the release of names on the web will lead to the intimidation and harassment of those individuals who signed the petition.

That argument holds little water. Although courts have, in the past, found that harassment did occur against homophobic individuals in the wake of Prop 8, the objective evidence illustrates that there is not one case of harassment or intimidation resulting from the political participation of homophobic individuals. The worst we saw was a highly organized and very legal boycott of certain businesses in California – a political initiative that is the very expression of democracy in the U.S.

However, that doesn’t mean that releasing the names won’t affect free speech in Washington. Individuals who already signed the petition obviously feel that the release of their names will harm their reputation or livliehood (frankly, it should). And that feeling, that fear, results in a chill on free speech. Public petitions might discourage some from signing certain petitions calling for certain laws.

The Supreme Court has to decide if the chill on free speech outweighs the public’s right to access its political process. Is it unconstitutional free speech? If you listen to the presentation tomorrow, you will likely get a feel for how the court is going to decide. The result of this case could seriously affect the political process, certainly around gay marriage, for many years to come.

Transcripts of the oral arguments are available here [2] and the transcripts from this case will be up some time before the end of the day tomorrow.

[1] http://www.365gay.com/wp-content/uploads/news-supreme-court-top.jpg
[2] http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts.aspx

Ruby-Sachs: Citizens United puts LGBT rights at risk

Ruby-Sachs: Citizens United puts LGBT rights at risk

Ruby-Sachs: Hawaii May Get Civil Unions

It’s a Tuesday after a holiday, which always makes me feel a bit out of the news world. Couple that with the awesome nature of the Haitian tragedy, and it’s hard to think of much else. But, today is an important day in many respects for LGBT voters.

First, and I …

Ruby-Sachs: Gay Malawi Couple Arrested for Having Engagement Party

Sometimes when we are navigating the complicated social and legal mine fields in the United States, we forget the freedoms we have. Trudging from one awkward family interaction, all those parties for LGBT people with no family to go home to, long conversations about finding a nice [insert opposite sex …

Ruby-Sachs: Justice Department Will Pursue LGBT Discrimination Claims

The head of the Civil Rights Department of the Justice Department announced today that he is making the pursuit of claims by LGBT Americans a priority for his office. Specifically, Tom Perez said,

“We must fight for fairness and basic equality for our LGBT brothers and sisters who so frequently are …

Ruby-Sachs: Chicago Mayor to Appoint a Homophobe

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley

[/caption]

Chicago Mayor Daley, part of the Daley dynasty that has ruled Chicago on and off for fifty years, has had a hard year. First, his state came under fire for widespread corruption, then his likelycorrupt parking meter privatization scheme caused outrage amongst Chicago residents and now …