Same-Sex Marriage Update

[MsTinkerbelly]

BREAKING: Sen. Judiciary Committee votes to repeal DOMA
By Adam Bink

Just now, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-8 to repeal DOMA by passing the Respect for Marriage Act. A huge step forward for our movement to repeal DOMA!

Today’s victory will make headlines and help educate the public on what DOMA is and why it needs to go. We know when we tell stories, we win as a movement. Today’s victory will also add momentum and help bring more Senators on board so when we have a pro-repeal leadership in the House, Senate and White House, we can move forward as quickly as possible to repeal DOMA, instead of starting from scratch

It was a lift to get to this summer’s hearing and today’s vote. We all did it together — people in each state who contacted their Senator, folks like you who spread the word and chipped in.

Below is a statement from Courage Campaign’s Rick Jacobs:

“For the first time in history, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to make gays and lesbians whole people,” said Rick Jacobs, the chair and founder of the Courage Campaign, an online, grassroots political organization with more than 750,000 members around the country. “This truly historic vote today should never have been necessary because this absurd law should never have been on the books. Thanks to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, we have a bill that can move to the Senate floor where fair-minded people who believe in a nation united, not divided, can end federal discrimination against gay and lesbian couples legally married in six states and the District of Columbia. Sadly, the Republicans think this is a partisan issue, but then some thought the same about the other great civil rights issues of this nation. Eventually, America is just.”

[MsTinkerbelly]

Marriage equality: Basic Rights Oregon decides to not go to ballot in 2012
By Adam Bink

Announced by their board.

After careful consideration and extensive community input, Basic Rights Oregon’s Board of Directors voted unanimously to extend our public education campaign and continue to build public support. We will not pursue a ballot measure on marriage in 2012.

Today we re-commit ourselves to this effort. We’re committed to opening a new dialogue with our friends, family and neighbors and, ultimately, winning the freedom to marry.

Here’s the statement from Basic Rights Oregon’s Board of Directors:

For three years, Basic Rights Oregon has led a proactive community education campaign to build public support for the freedom to marry for all caring and committed couples. We have reached out to our neighbors in communities across the state, engaged in thoughtful conversations, and shared our stories in TV ads and online.

This work is opening hearts and changing minds. Every day more and more Oregonians are coming to support the freedom to marry.

In Oregon, the only path to allowing same-gender couples to join in civil marriage is through the ballot. It is not a question of if we will cross this threshold, but when.

We have considered the possibility of putting this issue on the ballot for the 2012 election. However several factors, including the expense of waging a statewide political campaign in the midst of an economic crisis, led us to conclude that we are better off extending our education campaign and building momentum for a later election.

Ballot measures in Oregon have historically been used to attack the gay and transgender community. Today, we are finally in the driver’s seat, deciding when to go forward with a proactive ballot measure to achieve equality, instead of just fighting back. That presents our community with a tremendous opportunity and an immense responsibility.

To reach this decision, we evaluated a variety of data including an online survey with over 1,000 respondents from across Oregon. We convened a group of community leaders and campaign professionals, and held town halls in communities around the state.

The feedback we have overwhelmingly heard is that we must allow our education work to continue. The progress we’ve made in increasing support for the freedom to marry will only get better in the next two years.

Today we re-commit ourselves to this effort. We’re committed to opening a new dialogue with our friends, family and neighbors and, ultimately, winning the freedom to marry.

[iamkeri1]

MsT
You are always such a good source of info on this subject. Thanks so much. I am heartened by this vote in the Senate. I do not believe it will pass in the House. BUT I am also heartened by the fact that voting results this week have all opposed reducing rights for people. I feel hopeful that this trend will continue in next years elections. I hope that the Republicans will be held responsible for their total obstructionism in both houses of Congress, and that the Democrats achieve a majority in both houses so we can get DOMA repealed. Another Liberal Supreme Court Justice would be helpful as well, LOL. 14th amendment people!!!!

I am disappointed by the decision in Oregon. The only argument against putting marriage equality to a vote that makes any sense at all is is the lack of money to wage a campaign, and its not a very good answer either.

Waiting has never helped a civil rights movement. PUSHING hard is what works. Putting the issue in people's face over and over again. Forcing them to re-think their positions over and over again until they see the injustice in the current state of affairs. As for the lack of money, look what was accomplished in Ohio by people with very little money (They overturned the anti-union law passed by the republican run state legislature earlier this year) and in Mississippi. (They voted down a bill declaring life to start at the moment of conception) Both of these measueres were accomplised by word of mouth, by people speaking their minds to each other, by door to door campaigns, and with very little money. I think marriage equality (and civil rights in ALL areas for LGBTQ people) should be put on the ballot EVERY year in EVERY state until we have torn down the walls of anti-us laws that keep us from our dreams.
I quote the words of Martin Luther King Jr, spoken in an earlier and yet still ongoing struggle ...

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself,

Smooches,
Keri

[MsTinkerbelly]

Originally Posted by iamkeri1

MsT
You are always such a good source of info on this subject. Thanks so much. I am heartened by this vote in the Senate. I do not believe it will pass in the House. BUT I am also heartened by the fact that voting results this week have all opposed reducing rights for people. I feel hopeful that this trend will continue in next years elections. I hope that the Republicans will be held responsible for their total obstructionism in both houses of Congress, and that the Democrats achieve a majority in both houses so we can get DOMA repealed. Another Liberal Supreme Court Justice would be helpful as well, LOL. 14th amendment people!!!!

I am disappointed by the decision in Oregon. The only argument against putting marriage equality to a vote that makes any sense at all is is the lack of money to wage a campaign, and its not a very good answer either.

Waiting has never helped a civil rights movement. PUSHING hard is what works. Putting the issue in people's face over and over again. Forcing them to re-think their positions over and over again until they see the injustice in the current state of affairs. As for the lack of money, look what was accomplished in Ohio by people with very little money (They overturned the anti-union law passed by the republican run state legislature earlier this year) and in Mississippi. (They voted down a bill declaring life to start at the moment of conception) Both of these measueres were accomplised by word of mouth, by people speaking their minds to each other, by door to door campaigns, and with very little money. I think marriage equality (and civil rights in ALL areas for LGBTQ people) should be put on the ballot EVERY year in EVERY state until we have torn down the walls of anti-us laws that keep us from our dreams.
I quote the words of Martin Luther King Jr, spoken in an earlier and yet still ongoing struggle ...

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself,

Smooches,
Keri

Very well said!

[MsTinkerbelly]

BREAKING: CA Supreme Court to issue opinion on Prop 8/standing tomorrow Will be today the 17th!!!!!!By Adam Bink

The California Supreme Court just announced it will issue its opinion tomorrow, November 17th at 10 AM PST regarding whether the proponents of ballot initiatives have authority to represent the state of California when the state’s public officials (governor and attorney general) decline to do so. From the court’s release:

The court granted the request of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to address the following question: “Whether under Article II, Section 8 of the California Constitution, or otherwise under California law, the official proponents of an initiative measure possess either a particularized interest in the initiative’s validity or the authority to assert the State’s interest in the initiative’s validity, which would enable them to defend the constitutionality of the initiative upon its adoption or appeal a judgment invalidating the initiative, when the public officials charged with that duty refuse to do so.”

Opinion(s) in the above case(s) will be filed on:

Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.

For those not familiar with the timeline of the case, this is not a binding decision on the case. That rests with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Some background: in December of last year, the 9th Circuit heard the appeal of Judge Walker’s ruling, which struck down Prop 8. The court heard arguments on the constitutionality of Prop 8, and arguments on whether the proponents of Prop 8 (ProtectMarriage.com, et al) even have standing to represent the state of California in the case as defendant when Gov. Brown and Attorney General Harris decline to do so. For the live-blogging of those arguments, click here.

Rather than immediately rule on those arguments, the 9th Circuit decided to kick the ball over to the California Supreme Court on the issue of standing, asking an important question: do proponents of ballot initiatives in California — in this case, those who collected signatures and raised money and helped pass the initiative — have the authority to represent the state when the state’s public officials decline to defend the initiative? If ultimately not, then Prop 8 goes without a defendant, our side (the plaintiffs) wins and Prop 8 ends.

The California Supreme Court accepted the question, heard arguments (for live-blogging of those arguments at the hearing, click here), and tomorrow will issue its opinion. From there, the 9th Circuit 3-judge panel which heard the appeal of Judge Walker’s decision and kicked the ball over to the California Supreme Court will read the opinion and then issue its own ruling some time after, which actually functions as a decision in the case. It’s important to note that tomorrow’s opinion, while influential, is more of a “hey 9th Circuit, here’s what we think about your question.” It’s not a binding decision per se. That said, many legal observers believe that the 9th Circuit will follow what the California Supreme Court decides on standing. The issue of whether Prop 8 is constitutional is another question.

From there, the ruling can be appealed to the full 9th Circuit en banc, and of course the U.S. Supreme Court, both of which may or may not take up the case.

We’ll have coverage and reaction to the opinion tomorrow here at Prop8TrialTracker.com

[MsTinkerbelly]

Prop 8 trial: Preview of today’s California Supreme Court opinion in Perry v. BrownBy Adam Bink

Today, the California Supreme Court will issue its opinion regarding whether the proponents of ballot initiatives have authority to represent the state of California when the state’s public officials (governor and attorney general) decline to do so. The specific case around which this arises is Perry v. Brown and the proponents being ProtectMarriage.com et al, e.g., the people who filed and helped pass the ballot initiative. It was referred to the California Supreme Court by the 9th Circuit, which will take the California Supreme Court’s opinion and then issue a ruling in the case down the road.

Some background and links:

•You can read more about how we got to this point in the case and why today’s opinion is important in yesterday’s preview post.
•The decision will come down at 10 AM PST/1 PM EST today. Jacob Combs, Prop8TrialTracker.com’s writing intern, will have the decision up as soon as it comes in, and update that post with coverage and reaction throughout the rest of the day. Be sure to refresh the post for updates when it goes up. We’ll also have legal commentary from Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who led the legal team for the In re Marriage Cases decision before the California Supreme Court in 2008, among others.
•Meanwhile, on the preview side of things, many questions have come in on how long it would take for the 9th Circuit to turn around a decision in Perry v. Brown after today’s opinion is issued, and the timeline from there. Lyle at SCOTUSBlog has a thought on the timeline for the case:
Although both sides in the historic lawsuit over the gay marriage ban have expected their dispute ultimately to reach the Supreme Court, it now seems quite unlikely that the case will move fast enough in federal court from here on to reach the Justices in time for a decision during the current Term. A case must be ready for the Justices to consider by no later than the end of January in order for it to be decided in the current Term, which is likely to end late next June. The Circuit Court is considering the Proposition 8 case on an expedited basis, but it is doubtful that it could act quickly enough, and that preliminary filings in the Supreme Court could be made soon enough, for the case to be ready within the next two and a half months.

•Elsewhere, Ari Ezra Waldman has an interesting meta piece at Towleroad on the implications of the Perry case overall.
•If you’d like to read the live-blogging transcript of arguments before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on this issue, you can find it here. If you’d like to read the arguments before the California Supreme Court back in September, you can find them here. From a legal point of view on whether people should be allowed to stand in for duly elected officials in court (and for the sake of trying to divine how the Court will rule today), they are fascinating.
•Many folks in the comments yesterday opined on whether the California Supreme Court will rule that state law allows for ballot proponents to have standing to represent the state. What’s your prediction of today?
•There’s also a robust debate being had over whether the case should be decided on the merits (e.g. whether Prop 8 is constitutional or not) versus standing (which many people refer to as a more technical issue). Remember that if the proponents of Prop 8 are found to not have standing and that is held up on appeal, the case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and Prop 8 ends. On the one hand, many hope the California Supreme Court decides in favor of standing for ballot proponents and the 9th Circuit ultimately grants standing for the Prop 8 backers to represent the state in court so that a final decision can be had on the constitutionality of Prop 8 and perhaps even marriage equality nationwide, e.g. whether laws and constitutions across many states that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples are in violation of the U.S. Constitution. On the other hand, many others wish to see Prop 8 end however it can. Aside from the serious implications of whether ballot proponents can represent the state in California instead of elected officials, one way to view this is that there are two bites at the apple to take down Prop 8: constitutionality and standing. For the sake of allowing couples who desperately wish to wed — some, like Ed and Derence in Palm Springs, with serious medical conditions like Alzheimer’s threatening their right to the pursuit of happiness — many just want Prop 8 to end however it can end, standing or otherwise. There is also a concern on the merits side that 5 Justices cannot be had on the U.S. Supreme Court who find Prop 8 to be unconstitutional. What do you think?
•We’ll see you when the ruling comes down later today

[Jess]

Moving to same sex marriage state. Next... DOMA...