Same-sex marriages gradually gain legal ground
“There’s a sense people have — a sense of inevitability — and a tremendous sense of frustration because of the history of the gay rights fight in Maine,” said Michael Heath, executive director of the Maine Family Policy Council.
Those rights are expanding as legally married gay couples relocate to states that don’t allow same-sex marriage, forcing courts, legislatures and employers to deal with the resulting issues of custody, divorce, inheritance and end-of-life decisions.
The adoption ruling in Maine had the effect of granting parental rights to same-sex couples. By the time the Legislature adjourns for the summer, experts expect Maine to become the fifth state to legalize same-sex marriage — 11 years after voters banned it.
In California, federal judges have twice overruled decisions by the federal government to deny healthcare coverage to gay employees’ legal spouses, teeing up a constitutional challenge to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which forbids federal benefits for same-sex couples.
Same-sex marriage is legal in Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and Massachusetts, which began the trend five years ago. (Iowa issued its first marriage licenses April 27, a few weeks after its Supreme Court gave approval; weddings in Vermont will begin in September.) Within a year, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey and New York will probably follow suit, say sexual orientation scholars at the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute; New Hampshire’s Senate approved a same-sex marriage bill Wednesday.
And as more same-sex couples wed in places where it is legal, the administrative fallout in other states is expected to keep expanding.
“The courts are going to have to wrestle with these issues as more and more states make it possible for people to marry,” said Toni Broaddus, executive director of the San Francisco-based Equality Federation. “People don’t stay in the same state for their whole lives anymore, so the courts in states without marriage equality are going to have to address these issues.”
The recent moves in New England and the heartland to legalize gay marriage appeared to reinvigorate campaigns for passage of same-sex marriage bills in Maine, Maryland and Hawaii. Rights advocates predict the tide will eventually sweep even into some of the 30-plus states that have passed laws or constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
“A body of law is emerging because it has no choice. Cases have been filed and they have to be decided one way or another,” said Joseph Milizio, a Long Island lawyer specializing in gay and lesbian representation.
The legal developments allow people to become comfortable with “the fact that gay marriage is going to be recognized in many different aspects, even in states that don’t allow it,” said Milizio, whose firm recently secured the first dissolution of a same-sex marriage in New York.
In the workplace, proponents of extending spousal rights such as healthcare benefits and life insurance to same-sex couples have succeeded by challenging employment practices that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Seven states, including California, now guarantee full equality to same-sex couples — another incremental advance that is lamented by opponents.
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/same-sex-marr…
Another possible first: An OPenly LGBT Supreme Court Justice?
Among the people whose names are being floated for the Supreme Court is Stanford Law Dean Kathleen Sullivan, a top constitutional scholar who has been active in gay rights battles in the Supreme Court, and who as the blog of the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund writes, would be the first openly gay person on the court.
The group Lambda Legal wrote Obama in January pressing the appointement of “‘out’ LGBT judges.”
Human Rights Campaign emails over a statement from its legal director, Lara Schwartz, that the group “looks forward to seeing more openly-LGBT people appointed to the federal courts and other positions” but that “what’s most important is a nominee must have a track record that demonstrates her or his ability to consider and decide cases fairly.”
Politico -
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/another-possi…
Gay, married and outlawed
The questions and answers volleyed back and forth last week during the California Supreme Court’s televised proceedings on Prop 8, the state’s recently enacted ban against gay marriage.
And in a dark classroom at Chapman University, watching it all with a focused intensity, was law student Tiffany Chang.
In Chang’s view, the discussion was riveting. Did Prop. 8 simply “take away the label of marriage,” as one justice put it? Chang has heard all of the arguments, including those that say that same sex couples enjoy domestic partnership rights in California, so why insist on the designation of “marriage.”
You could say there was twice as much at stake for Chang, who tracks the legal debate for reasons both scholarly and personal.
Two years ago, in front of friends and family in Long Beach, Chang and her partner Lindsey Etheridge exchanged marriage vows in an unofficial, non-legally binding ceremony. Then, exactly a year later, on July 14, 2008, during the short window when same-sex marriages were legal here in California, Chang and Etheridge filed for “official marriage paperwork.” Then they married in a legal ceremony.
Chang says the event was life changing.
“We were in the clerk’s office and there were people there we don’t know, but they represented the government, validating our relationship,” says Chang, 28. “After it was all done, that sense of security, it was tenfold at least.
“I never could have known what that felt like, to truly be equal in our society,” she adds. “I don’t think you know what that feels like until you’ve got it.”
Chang was part of a “friend of the court” brief filed with the state’s Supreme Court in support of those who have legally challenged Prop. 8. And, in her declaration, she elaborated that on the day “I walked out with my head held higher than I thought was even possible.”
The brief was drafted by attorneys Katherine Baird Darmer and Ronald Steiner, who are also law professors at Chapman, and includes declarations from other people connected to Chapman, as well as from members of the Orange County Equality Coalition, a community group that says it educates and advocates for marriage equality in California.
For Chang, Prop. 8 isn’t just a matter of nomenclature; it’s a matter of denying a minority group the rights afforded to all others. Since the law passed in November, Chang has been speaking out in public. She says she’s come to realize that until a person is treated like a second-class citizen it’s difficult for them to understand what it’s like to be on the other side.
See
Gay, married and outlawed
OCRegister
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/gay-married-a…
Mainline Clergy Survey shows high support for activist government, growing support for LGBT equality
Leading researchers on religion and politics today released the results of an in‐depth survey of
Mainline Protestant clergy political engagement during the 2008 election season, attitudes on social and economic issues, and the public role of the church. The Mainline Protestant Clergy Voices Survey (CVS), conducted by Public Religion Research, is the largest survey of mainline clergy in seven years, and the broadest ever in scope. Mainline Protestants, who make up 18 percent of all Americans and nearly a quarter of all voters, have been trending Democratic in recent years, but remain fairly evenly divided in their political behavior.
“Mainline Protestants are probably the most under‐examined major religious group in the United States,” said Dr. Robert P. Jones, President of Public Religion Research. “That’s especially surprising when you consider that they occupy so much of the vital middle ground in American politics.” Jones said that Mainline Protestants, once the religious bedrock of the Republican Party, are now an important swing constituency that has been moving slowly but steadily away from the GOP since the early 1990s. He said the new survey will be invaluable in helping us understand Mainline Protestants’ role in the American religious landscape by shedding light on the attitudes and political engagement of mainline clergy.
“Mainline clergy are highly educated, political interested, and socially engaged,” said Jones. “They are strong supporters of church‐state separation, but they are also interested in being more personally involved on social and political issues.”
The CVS surveyed senior clergy from the seven largest mainline denominations: United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, American Baptist Churches USA, Presbyterian Church USA, Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, and Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). The survey found significant differences across the denominations on religious and political measures.
Among its findings on social and political issues:
Mainline clergy are much more likely to identify as liberal and Democratic than conservative or Republican. Almost half (48%) of all mainline clergy identify as liberal, compared to about one‐third (34%) who say they are conservative. A majority (56%) of mainline clergy identify with or lean towards the Democratic Party, compared to roughly one‐third (34%) who claim a Republican affiliation, a 22‐point gap. Clergy political leanings vary considerably by denomination. Three quarters (74%) of UCC clergy identify as liberal, compared to less than a third (32%) of ABCUSA clergy.
Mainline Protestant clergy are broadly supportive of government’s role in addressing social problems such as unemployment, poverty and poor housing. More than three‐quarters (78%) agree that the federal government should do more to solve social problems, and more than 4‐in‐10 strongly agree.
Mainline clergy are strongly supportive of government action in the areas of health care and the environment. More than two‐thirds (67%) of clergy agree that government should guarantee health insurance for all citizens, even if it means raising taxes. And nearly 7‐in‐10 (69%) clergy say that more environmental protection is needed, even if it raises prices or costs jobs.
On a broad range of issues, mainline clergy affirm equality for gay and lesbian Americans. Roughly two‐thirds of mainline clergy support some legal recognition for same‐sex couples (65%), passing hate crime laws (67%), and employment nondiscrimination protections for gay and lesbian people (66%). A majority (55%) of mainline clergy support adoption rights for gay and lesbian people.
Mainline Protestant clergy are strong advocates of church‐state separation. A majority (65%) of mainline clergy agree that the U.S. should “maintain a strict separation of church and state.” Mainline clergy are more worried about public officials who are too close to religious leaders (59%) than about public officials who do not pay enough attention to religion (41%).\
Mainline clergy are more likely to publicly address hunger and poverty and family issues than controversial social issues. More than 8‐in‐10 clergy say they publicly expressed their views about hunger and poverty often in the last year, and three‐quarters say they addressed marriage and family issues often. Only about one‐quarter (26%) say they often discussed the issues of abortion and capital punishment.
The survey also includes findings on religious measures, including clergy religious self‐identification (mainline, evangelical, born‐again), their views on the interpretation of scripture, and the relative importance of evangelism and social action.
Dr. John Green, Director of the Bliss Institute for Applied Politics at the University of Akron, served as advisor to the project and supervised its data collection. Green also participated in two of the earlier studies of mainline clergy in 1989 and 2001 upon which this new survey builds.
“This survey adds significantly to our knowledge and understanding of mainline clergy,” said Green. “Scholars of religion as well as journalists and interested activists will benefit from the information and insights it offers.”
The survey, which was conducted by mail, contained over 250 separate questions and generated
2,658 respondents with a response rate of 44%. The Mainline Protestant Clergy Voices Survey was funded by the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/mainline-cler…
EQCA Executive Director Geoff Kors: “Prop. 8 destroys the fundamental principle of equal protection”
“By taking away a fundamental right from one group, Prop. 8 destroys the fundamental principle of equal protection – a principle codified in our Constitution and intended to protect minority groups from the oppression of the majority. Without the right to equal protection, every Californian risks discrimination at the ballot box.
“Equality California has sued on behalf of our members to invalidate Prop. 8. Today, our team of attorneys, led by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU, argued that Prop. 8 usurps the guarantee of equal protection and bypasses our legal safeguards. More than 300 leading civil rights organizations, legal scholars, and faith leaders submitted amicus briefs to the court, indicating their support of our argument. And this week, the state Assembly and state Senate passed resolutions stating their belief that Prop. 8 is an invalid revision to the Constitution.
“But victory in the courts is far from certain and no matter the outcome, the work to achieve acceptance and understanding must continue. Prop. 8 showed how much work there is left to be done and invalidating that discriminatory, unconstitutional amendment is just the beginning.
-30-
Equality California (EQCA) is the largest statewide lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender-rights advocacy organization in California. In the past decade, EQCA has strategically moved California from a state with extremely limited legal protections for LGBT individuals to a state with some of the most comprehensive civil-rights protections in the nation. EQCA has passed over 50 pieces of legislation and continues to advance equality through legislative advocacy, public education and community empowerment. www.eqca.org
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/eqca-executiv…
Attorneys Urge California Supreme Court To Invalidate Prop 8
(San Francisco, CA, March 5, 2009) Attorneys for same-sex couples, civil rights organizations and the state Attorney General’s office appeared before the California Supreme Court today to urge the court to strike down Proposition 8, which took away the right of same-sex couples the right to marry. At issue in the case is whether the ballot initiative process can be used to take away a fundamental right only for one group of Californians based on a trait – in this case sexual orientation – that has no relevance to the group’s ability to participate in or contribute to society. Because the case has serious implications for the constitutional rights of all Californians, it has generated unprecedented support from many national and state civil rights groups as well as California legislators, local governments, bar associations, business interests, labor unions, and religious groups. The California Supreme Court, which has struck down several other initiatives in the past, is expected to issue a decision within 90 days.
“Proposition 8 jeopardizes not just the right of same-sex couples to marry, but the rights of all Californians to be treated as free and equal citizens of this state,” said Shannon P. Minter, Legal Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), who argued the case before the Court. “Our Constitution is based on the principle that majorities must respect minority rights. But if a majority can change the Constitution to take away a fundamental right from one group, then it can take away fundamental rights from any group. Our government will have changed from one that respects minority rights to one in which the power of the majority is unlimited.”
NCLR, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU filed the legal challenge on November 5, after Proposition 8 was approved by just 52 percent of the voters on Election Day. In court today, the groups argued that it was improper for the proponents of Proposition 8 to use the ballot initiative process to strip same-sex couples of the fundamental right to marry. The groups contend that changes to the Constitution that alter its core requirement of equal protection by selectively depriving minorities of fundamental constitutional rights cannot be accomplished through a simple majority vote. Such major changes of core structural principles are revisions to the Constitution that can only be put on the ballot by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature.
“It is simply wrong—legally and socially—to short-circuit the California Constitution and its equal protection guarantees,” said Jennifer C. Pizer, Marriage Project Director for Lambda Legal and co-counsel in the legal challenge to Proposition 8. “Proposition 8 is no ‘garden variety’ amendment that changes a tax or zoning or safety rule in a way that affects everyone equally. This is a radical attempt to strip a cherished constitutional right from just one targeted minority group and then to stop the courts from doing their most basic job of upholding the constitutional promise of ‘liberty and justice for all’.”
The case before the court is unprecedented because no other initiative-amendment has successfully taken away a fundamental right only for a particular minority. Because Proposition 8 would, for the first time, change the Constitution in a way that strips a minority group of its constitutional right to equal treatment under the law, California Attorney General Jerry Brown agrees that Proposition 8 should be struck down. The Attorney General’s office argued that the right to marry is an “inalienable right” that can not be selectively eliminated from one group without compelling reasons.
“The Court has a solemn responsibility to enforce our state constitution and to protect the rights of all people, regardless of popular opinion,” said Elizabeth Gill, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. “This case isn’t just about marriage, and it’s certainly not just about gay and lesbian couples. If the Court strikes down Proposition 8, it will be protecting the civil rights of all Californians.”
An unprecedented 43 friend-of-the-court briefs, representing hundreds of religious organizations, civil rights groups, and labor unions, and numerous California municipal governments, bar associations, and leading legal scholars, were filed in the case, urging the court to strike down the initiative. Because the issues at stake have such important implications for other minority groups, Raymond Marshall of Bingham McCutchen, who represents the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the California State Conference of the NAACP, the Equal Justice Society, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, asked and was given permission to appear in court today. He argued that allowing Proposition 8 to stand could be detrimental to other minority groups who could easily become the targets of initiative campaigns seeking to take away their rights.
“Our state Constitution was created to ensure equal treatment under the law for every Californian,” said Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California. “Prop 8 changes that fact by taking away a fundamental freedom from one particular group and mandating government discrimination against a minority. We hope the court upholds the Constitution’s promise of equality.”
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU are 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 arguments today also included 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
The California Supreme Court must issue its decisions within 90 days of oral argument.
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/attorneys-urg…
Case Against Prop 8 — Oral Argument and Telephone Briefing Today!
Today another historic argument will be made before the state Supreme Court in California to protect the constitutional guarantee of equal protection for all and to fight to restore marriage equality. Lambda Legal, NCLR, the ACLU and others have been working for months to prepare for today’s oral argument in our historic case against Prop 8. And now you can be among the first to know what happened in the courtroom. By making a gift to Lambda Legal, you can join our members–only telephone briefing immediately following the argument.
At 3 pm PST (6 pm EST), Lambda Legal’s National Marriage Project Director Jenny Pizer and our Legal Director Jon Davidson will discuss the latest developments in the Strauss v. Horton case. If you’re interested in watching the argument, we have learned that it will be aired on California’s Public Access TV and streamed online. (High traffic at the site may impair viewing.)
Upholding the California Constitution’s promise to protect the rights of minorities is important for all Americans. In January, hundreds of religious organizations, civil rights groups and labor unions, and dozens of California municipal governments, bar associations and leading legal scholars agreed that the rights of all vulnerable minorities are at stake as they collectively urged the California Supreme Court to strike down Prop 8. The California Attorney General has also argued that Prop 8 is invalid.
Be in the know, every step of the way. With your support, we are making history. Take this final opportunity to join Lambda Legal and receive instructions on how to sign up for today’s conference call. Join us as we discuss the justices’ questions and what may come next in this fight to uphold the constitution and our equal freedom to marry in California!
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/case-against-…
Top Russian Scholar: US will collapse next year, partly due to gays
(Moscow) If you’re inclined to believe Igor Panarin, and the Kremlin wouldn’t mind if you did, then President Barack Obama will order martial law this year, the U.S. will split into six rump-states before 2011, and Russia and China will become the backbones of a new world order.
Panarin might be …
