Connect with us

Iowa

Published

on

roger kuhle polk county assist att. 

Child-raising: If marriage provides the optimal environment for children denying it harms the children of same sex unions. Essential right to know biological parent. No dispute that it’s better for a child to have two parents. Judge: Is it your argument that they will be harmed if we honor? State has an intertest in  marriage. By fostering dss marr will harm and could defeat its vital purpose. State will be teaching marriage is not necessary. child of current ss marr = stigma. Judge they claim more than that. Tangible benefits can be obtained legally. argu are hypiothetical. Could not provide evidence example of anyone turned away from a hospital or will contested. Perceived harms are not real. Difference treatment not substantial. How does a man terach a girl to be a woman, vice versa. Judge: Maybe dual marriage gender optimal. We allow sex offenderds and felons and deadbeat dads to get marriaed. If sex offender or alcoholic marries they do not destroy fabric of marriage. JHudge: can we allow felons to not get married. Lawyer would violate their rights. Judge Is a view of morality sufficient to allow legislative opinion. Scalia yes oconnor no. “Morality is our culture”. Judge: Challenge may be to balance individual rights vs. moral argument. Lawyer Not merely a question of morality. Marriage cannot bhe proven to have just a procreative value. Procretion is a feature not a function. Judge: Hoew excluding glbt interferes with this purpiose of procreation? Lawyer: Does state’s concern with procret marrige further marrige? “quibble” on gender. In a generation or two of ss marr the state is saying you do not bneed a mother or father. Judge If stab is the goal then by denying ss vouples arent you going against your argument. L: Undoubtlyu thats possible. Law doesnt have to be a perfect fit. 

Judge: Heightened scrutiny: one’s orientation/gender does not affect abiltiy to operdform in society. You admit there has been disc of glbt. lawyer: Equal protection not valid. “Loving is based on race” 

Procreation: If priomary basis, how does recog of ss marriage result in less child born. “IUt doesn’t. but it could. Legitamte fear is when state encour ss marr teaches that marriafe ios no longer abt procreation, says pro not important. Judg; how is this having real purpose. more child born out of wedlock. Nofault divorce is a problem . ss marr defriving child of right of child to know theuir parents. J: Happends in borth couples, issue odf allowing artificial birthing. Judge: Is sealing of adopt records against state law? next week we could be opening iup polygamy.

History: Four thousand years

Equal protection:

“There is no ban there is no exclus to ss marr.” to reach the con that ss marr is bigoty flies in the face of 

 

Dennis Johnson: plaintiffs

firstwords of iowa constitution all men and women are crerated equal. 1857 free and indep changed to free and equal. 

If there were studies that showed there were problems with ss marriage those studies would be in the records. If there were good evidence they would be in the record. 

Its clear diff sex couples will have children. Its est policy in this state that says gl are valid parents.

concern about limiting marr between 2 people. Polygamy would require new array of statutes and laws. 

Attribute of right not who historicasllty exercises it. 

Mariage bundle of legal rights and responsibilities, morte than just procreation, intimate combining opf two lives forever, most revered institution in our socuiety. You dont grow up thinking about the financial rights you think about the intimate rights. 

Dual gender parenting: socioliogical evidence most imp is for child to have 2 partents good relationship with primary, then secondary giver, then financial. There is no evidence to suggest 

By allowing same sex couples to adot court has est that ss parents are sufficient. 

we will allow convicted pedofiles to get married without blinking an eye. optimal environment: 

Is glbt suspect class? politically powerless. 

Marriage is declining, less personal responsibility, cortrossive effect:

“no basis in fact. sheer speculation.” No interest in maintaining ss exclusion. all the reasons of marriage are right. quesrtion is why is glbt excluded. not been able to articulate rerason to say why excluded. Marriage is changing. I dont know how barring ss marr wouold have an effect on what diff sex couples are doing in their lives. No plausible credible reason for exclusion. Religious notions of marriage shouldn not be examined. Trad is no just to continue discrimination. weve been dis for so long that we should be able to continue. Marr is ultimate statement about committ,. civil union is badge of second class. Turn argument on yourself. 

Brown vs boe: Would hurt their hearts andf minds in weay they mifght never recover. 

 

——

 

Plaint taken prob of disc of homo sex. 

B/c homo not criminal they are no lionger minority. 

Goiung to knock down the inst og marr to gain equality.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation

Published

on

Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.

Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”

“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”

In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”

He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”

“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”

“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”

“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”

The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.

“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”

Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”

Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.

Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs

Published

on

President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.

“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”

The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”

Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”

TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”

Critics blasted Trump.

“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.

One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”

Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”

The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.

According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.

Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”

“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”

Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.

Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.

The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.

“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.

The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.

“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.