 |
| Via Freedom To Marry. Click to enlarge. |
Freedom To Marry infographic on 11 straight wins for marriage equality
Federal judge issues ruling requiring Ohio to recognize legal same-sex marriages performed in other states
As expected, U.S. District Court judge Timothy Black officially issued his ruling in Henry v. Himes, declaring that the state of Ohio must respect the marriages of same-sex couples legally performed in other states.
In his ruling, Judge Black wrote, “Ohio’s marriage recognition bans are facially unconstitutional and unenforceable under any circumstances.”
The ruling is stayed for now.
Freedom to Marry founder and president Evan Wolfson celebrated the news today. He said:
Couples who are married should be treated as married no matter where they are in the country, including Ohio. Couples should not have to play ‘now you’re married, now you’re not’ as they travel, work, move, or return home. This is a good day for families and businesses in Ohio, and a good day for the Constitution and America.
This is the eleventh huge federal court victory in favor of the freedom to marry since the United States Supreme Court ruled in Windsor v. United States.
In total, there are more than 60 lawsuits seeking the freedom to marry or respect for same-sex couples’ marriages working their way through the system in 29 states or territories.
More at Freedom To Marry.
Marriage News Watch – April 14, 2014
From the Foundation for Equal Rights:
• A Republican icon comes out in support of marriage equality
• A sting of major marriage wins in the last few months, but now anti-gay groups will keep trying to tear those victories down in a series of hearings
• Support for marriage equality is picking up in conservative states
• A terminally ill woman in Indiana is one step closer to getting her marriage recognized
• More lawsuits on the horizon in the south.
Mike Huckabee questions if President Obama has religious convictions
Mike Huckabee recently defended his position on gay marriage by saying it’s not homophobia to be on “the right side of the Bible.”
Huckabee explained those remarks on The O’Reilly Factor Friday night, telling Laura Ingraham that his position is no different from what President Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton professed to believe in 2008.
Much of America held the same opinion back in 2008 and have now evolved. What I guess Huckabee is trying to say is that he’s years behind where a majority of Americans are now.
Huckabee called out Obama specifically for saying in 2008 he supported traditional marriage because of his Christian convictions. Huckabee said that either Obama lied then or is lying now, and wondered of those convictions, “Does he have them or does he not?”
(via NewsFeedsNow)
Virginia’s Attorney General files brief in support of marriage equality lawsuit
Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring has filed a brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of AFER’s marriage equality lawsuit.
One of the key tenets of Herring’s brief focuses on the fact that “heightened scrutiny” should be applied in deciding the case. From his brief:
Virginia’s same-sex-marriage ban violates the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Because the ban substantially interferes with the right to marry, it is subject to strict scrutiny.
The ban also discriminates on the basis of gender and sexual orientation, triggering at least heightened scrutiny.
All of the considerations apply here for the judiciary to be suspicious of laws that discriminate against gay people. And the Clerks’ claim that the ban treats men and women equally is like saying that interracial-marriage bans treat blacks and white equally, an argument rejected by the Supreme Court.
Like many AG’s across the country, Herring has refused to defend the law on the basis that he feels it is unconstitutional.
(via JMG)
Both sides of Utah marriage equality appeal in Tenth Circuit speak after oral arguments
Oral arguments conclude in Tenth Circuit Appeals Court on same-sex marriage in Utah
Oral arguments have ended for the lawsuit taken to the Tenth Circuit Appeals Court regarding the ban on marriage equality in Utah.
FOX News reporter Ben Winslow indicates in his tweets that the three judge panel appeared split.
From the AP:
One of the judges, Carlos F. Lucero, compared the state’s argument that the ban should to the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision that denied citizenship and constitutional protections to blacks before the Civil War. “To argue that public policy can trump a declared constitutional right would be a remarkable proposition,” Lucero said.
But Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. suggested Utah does have the right to reaffirm what has been a centuries-long tradition of heterosexual marriage. “You are just taking the position they are wrong on this. …. We’ll just ignore what the people have decided and the Legislature has done,” Kelly said.
The swing vote in the case appears to be justice Jerome A. Holmes, who sharply challenged attorneys for both sides.
Utah distances itself from discredited Regnerus study in advance of 10 Circuit Court marriage equality appeal
|
| Mark Regnerus |
The state of Utah filed a last minute brief yesterday with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in advance of oral arguments which begin today in the lawsuit over the state’s marriage equality ban.
The brief basically steps back from using the flawed and discredited study by Mark Regnerus, which has been referenced by many anti-marriage equality opponents as reason to discriminate against gay couples who wish to marry.
From the letter:
Utah files this supplemental letter in response to recent press reports and analysis of the study by Professor Mark Regnerus, which the State cited at footnotes 34 and 42 of its Opening Brief, and which addresses the debate over whether same-sex parenting produces child outcomes that are comparable to man-woman parenting.
First, we wish to emphasize the very limited relevance to this case of the comparison addressed by Professor Regnerus. As the State’s briefing makes clear, the State’s principal concern is the potential long-term impact of a redefinition of marriage on the children of heterosexual parents. The debate over man-woman versus same-sex parenting has little if any bearing on that issue, given that being raised in a same-sex household would normally not be one of the alternatives available to children of heterosexual parents.
Second, on the limited issue addressed by the Regnerus study, the State wishes to be clear about what that study (in the State’s view) does and does not establish. The Regnerus study did not examine as its sole focus the outcomes of children raised in same-sex households but, because of sample limitations inherent in the field of study at this point, examined primarily children who acknowledged having a parent who had engaged in a same-sex relationship. Thus, the Regnerus study cannot be viewed as conclusively establishing that raising a child in a same-sex household produces outcomes that are inferior to those produced by man-woman parenting arrangements.
The bolding is mine.
Regernus’ study was blasted recently in the marriage equality ruling handed down in Michigan. And while he was testifying in Michigan, his own school where he teaches issued a statement putting space between the university and Regnerus.
Here’s a brief recap going into oral arguments for the case in the 10th Circuit today.
Quote of the day: Frank Bruni for the New York Times
“The debate is essentially over, in the sense that the trajectory is immutable and the conclusion foregone. Everybody knows it, even the people who still try to stand in the way. The legalization of same-sex marriage from north to south and coast to coast is merely a matter of time, probably not much of it at that.” – from Frank Bruni’s April 5th op-ed in the New York Times
Utah Unites for Marriage releases two ads featuring straight allies
Utah Unites for Marriage has released new ads featuring straight allys detailing their support of marriage equality in hopes of convincing others that allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry will strengthen, not harm, the state.
William and Marge Bradshaw are family-oriented folks, who look forward to the day their children can enjoy the kind of life they’ve led — a life filled with love, family and, ultimately, marriage to a committed partner. And that includes their gay son.
In this ad, Terry Wood, a longtime television news anchor, reporter and radio personality, credits his openly gay son with changing his views on relationships and bringing him to a pro same-sex marriage position.