Connect with us

Prop 8 Unconstitutional: Marriage And Rights Groups Respond

Published

on

Upon today’s news that the Ninth Circuit has reaffirmed California’s Prop 8 unconstitutional, a flurry of responses from LGBT rights groups have come. Here’s a sampling.

Freedom to Marry

NEW YORK – Today, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that found that Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment that stripped the freedom to marry away from gay and lesbian couples in California, violates the U.S. Constitution.

Evan Wolfson, founder and President of Freedom to Marry, the campaign to win marriage nationwide, issued the following statement in response to the ruling:

“Today’s powerful court ruling striking down the infamous Prop 8 affirms basic American values and helps tear down a discriminatory barrier to marriage that benefits no one while making it harder for people to take care of their loved ones. The Ninth Circuit rightly held that a state simply may not take a group of people and shove them outside the law, least of all when it comes to something as important as the commitment and security of marriage. We salute the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought this challenge to Prop 8.

“This monumental appellate decision restores California to the growing list of states and countries that have ended exclusion from marriage, and will further accelerate the surging nationwide majority for marriage. As this and other important challenges to marriage discrimination move through the courts around the country, Freedom to Marry calls on all Americans to join us in ensuring that together we make as strong a case in the court of public opinion as our legal advocates are making in the courts of law. By growing the majority for marriage, winning more states, and tackling federal discrimination – Freedom to Marry’s ‘Roadmap to Victory’ – we maximize our chances of winning when one case or another finally reaches the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Mayors for the Freedom to Marry

LOS ANGELES – Today, Mayors Michael Bloomberg of New York City, Annise Parker of Houston, Jerry Sanders of San Diego, and Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, who are all Chairs of Mayors for the Freedom to Marry, the bipartisan group of more than 130 mayors from across the nation who have pledged their support for ending marriage discrimination against gay and lesbian couples, released the following statement:

“As Mayors for the Freedom to Marry, we know how important marriage is to our neighborhoods, our cities, and our nation.  When committed couples are able to pledge their love to one another and share in the responsibilities and protections of marriage, our communities flourish and our cities are more competitive. Today’s decision by the 9th Circuit reaffirms that the American Dream is possible for everyone and brings us one step closer to ending marriage discrimination once and for all.  We look forward to a day when all of our citizens will be able to share fairly and equally in the freedom to marry.”

Evan Wolfson, founder and President of Freedom to Marry, the campaign to win marriage nationwide, added:

“America’s mayors understand why marriage matters – to loving and committed couples, to their families, to communities navigating tough economic times.  Today’s important court ruling affirms basic American values, and helps tear down a discriminatory barrier to marriage that benefits no one and make it harder for people to take care of their loved ones.”

GLAAD

Los Angeles, CA, February 7, 2012 – GLAAD, the nation’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) media advocacy and anti-defamation organization, today applauded the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision affirming the unconstitutionality of Proposition 8.

“Today’s historic decision reflects the growing support for marriage equality among a majority of Americans who believe all couples should have the same opportunity to take care of and be responsible for each other,” said GLAAD’s Acting President Mike Thompson. “Though the road to securing full equality for every American remains long, we are deeply encouraged by today’s ruling.”

HRC

WASHINGTON – The Human Rights Campaign – the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization – today praised the historic decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirming the August 2010 conclusion of U.S. Chief Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Perry v. Schwarzenegger (now Perry v. Brown) that the amendment to the California Constitution barring marriage for same-sex couples, adopted in November 2008 as Proposition 8, violates the U.S. Constitution.  In a 2-1 decision authored by Judge Reinhardt, the court agreed that Proposition 8’s only purpose in denying gay and lesbian Californians the freedom to marry was anti-gay animus, something the Constitution does not permit.

“Today’s decision affirms what we all know to be true – our Constitution protects the basic civil rights of all Americans, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese.  “Proposition 8 does nothing to strengthen or protect any marriage.  Instead, it singles out thousands of loving California families for different treatment, simply because they are gay and lesbian couples.  We applaud the Ninth Circuit for recognizing that our Constitution cannot tolerate such egregious discrimination.”

“We thank the courageous plaintiff couples, the American Foundation for Equal Rights, and attorneys Ted Olson and David Boies for their years of work leading to today’s decision.  This is not the end of the road, for this case or for the larger struggle for marriage equality.  We must all continue our work – in courthouses and statehouses, in church pews and living rooms – until equality is reality for LGBT people and our families everywhere.”

In response to a 2008 decision by the California Supreme Court ending marriage discrimination in the state, anti-equality forces succeeded in placing a constitutional amendment on the November ballot. Despite over 18,000 same-sex couples having married, California voters adopted the amendment, known as Proposition 8. After the California Supreme Court determined in 2009 that the adoption of Prop 8 did not itself violate the California Constitution, two plaintiff couples — Kris Perry and Sandy Stier and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo – filed suit against the State of California in federal court, represented by attorneys Ted Olson and David Boies and supported by the American Foundation for Equal Rights. The proponents of Prop 8 intervened in the case to defend the constitutionality of the amendment. Judge Walker held a historic trial in January, in which the plaintiffs presented substantial testimony and evidence to show that Prop 8’s only purpose is to discriminate against same-sex couples.  His historic decision in August 2010 was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The proponents of Prop 8 are now likely to appeal this decision, either to be considered by a larger panel of the Ninth Circuit (referred to as an en banc rehearing) or for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Family Equality Council

Washington, DC  – (Feb. 7, 2012) – Family Equality Council, the national organization that connects, supports and represents the one million families with parents who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT), today issued a statement following the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to uphold the ruling in Perry V. Brown – the  federal court case to overturn California’s Proposition 8.  The Federal Appeals Court ruled that California’s 2008 amendment banning same-sex couples from marriage is unconstitutional.

 

“Today’s decision heartens and gives hope to the 15,698 loving couples in California who are raising more than 30,000 children,” said Family Equality Council Executive Director Jennifer Chrisler.

 

“They, like all Americans, understand that while love makes a family, there is no denying that marriage strengthens it,” said Chrisler.  “These parents have raised their children to love their country, support their friends and treat their neighbors with respect.   Now they only ask for the fundamental American freedom to demonstrate their love and commitment to their family through marriage.  We join them in looking forward to the day when we can win the freedom to marry for them and all Americans.”

 

This weekend, Family Equality Council will celebrate this step forward on the journey toward the  freedom to marry and family equality for all when it honors Chad Griffin and other LGBT family advocates at the 2012 Los Angeles Awards Dinner. ( www.familyequality.org/losangeles)

 

Griffin is Co-founder and Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights – the group behind the effort to overturn California’s Proposition 8.

 

Courage Campaign

Los Angeles — After three years of Prop 8 weaving its way through the federal and California court system, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld Judge Walker’s August 2010 ruling that Prop 8 is unconstitutional. Marriage equality proponents throughout the state, including Courage Campaign members who worked valiantly to overturn Prop 8, cheered the historic decision.

The 9th Circuit did what it must: it ruled that Judge Walker is competent, not somehow diminished for being gay and it ruled that the Constitution of the United States indeed provides equal protection and due process to all Americans, not just some Americans,” said Rick Jacobs, chair and founder of the Courage Campaign, a progressive, grassroots online organization with more than 750,000 members around the country. “Having live-blogged every piece of this trial, especially in Judge Walker’s courtroom two years ago, it became patently clear that the fringe opponents of equality would never prevail. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the dynamic duo of attorneys Ted Olson and David Boies and their colleagues at the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) who took to heart that real people are hurt by Prop 8 and its evil cousins across the nation. The time for waiting has ended.”

The Courage Campaign has played a leading role in informing and organizing around the entire Prop 8 trial. The organization collected nearly 140,000 signatures in support of televising the trial — the first time the U.S. Supreme Court ever cited such an online effort in an opinion. Upon learning that the historic trial would not be televised, Jacobs live-blogged daily from the courthouse and documented every important motion and court ruling on Prop 8 Tour Tracker (www.Prop8TrialTracker.com), a project of the Courage Campaign Institute. Over the course of almost three years, the widely-read blog has logged in over four million views and 150,000 comments. It is also the #1 Google result for “Prop 8 trial.”

Courage Campaign’s Testimony: Equality on Trial project staged re-enactments of the trial, including many from the general public. It was designed to educate the public on what happened in the courtroom, more vital now since the tapes have been forever sealed from public view. Two video re-enactments were used as evidence in federal court by the legal team from AFER. The first video was staged with Academy Award-winner Marisa Tomei (playing Kristin Perry, the plaintiff in Perry v. Brown) and actor Josh Lucas.

When the California Supreme Court decided it would take six months to offer its advice to the 9th Circuit, thus adding nearly a year to the process, the Courage Campaign asked members to submit their stories on what the delay meant to them and their families. Three hundred stories came in, including one from Ed Watson and Derence Kernek in Palm Springs, a couple for over 40 years. Ed had Alzheimer’s and his health was quickly deteriorating. A video of their story prompted a front page Los Angeles Times story. Ironically, Ed died on the eve of the last Prop 8 hearing in the 9th Circuit.

The decision made by the 9th Circuit, to be honest, is a bittersweet one for me,” said Mr. Kernek, who still lives in Palm Springs. “I know that my partner of 41 years, Ed, would’ve been thrilled to have heard the news. He missed it by less than two months because he passed away in December. Even as he took his last dying breaths, Ed spoke of wanting to marry me. Even though he did not get his last wish, I am heartened to know that other gay couples who love each other will be able to take sacred vows and fully commit their lives to one another. And that makes it a glorious day for gay people in California.”

SLDN

(Washington, D.C.) Army Veteran and SLDN Executive Director Aubrey Sarvis released the following statement regarding today’s ruling on Proposition 8 by the Ninth Circuit:

“SLDN welcomes today’s important ruling by the Ninth Circuit affirming the lower court decision that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional; indeed, fairness and equality have carried the day. This victory strengthens our case on behalf of married gay and lesbian service members and veterans as we seek to gain equal recognition, support, and benefits for them and their families.  This is an historic win for supporters of full equality in the military and in our country,” said Sarvis.

Transgender Law Center

Transgender Law Center Celebrates Appeals Court Ruling Striking Down
Prop 8

Today the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in the Perry
v. Brown case holding that California’s Proposition 8, which
restricted marriage in the state to different-sex couples, is
unconstitutional. The appeals court also squarely rejected the
argument made by Prop 8’s sponsors that the trial court judge who
issued the initial decision finding Prop 8 unconstitutional should
have been required to recuse himself from the case because he is gay
and in a long-term relationship.

Statement by Transgender Law Center Executive Director Masen Davis:

“We’re thrilled that today the Ninth Circuit reaffirmed that under our
constitution, all loving couples must be allowed to marry, regardless
of the gender of either partner. The state should not be in the
business of policing who can marry based on gender. I’m optimistic
that full equality for all our families is on the horizon.”

 

National Gay And Lesbian Task Force

Task Force Executive Director Rea Carey in response to today’s historic ruling:
“The court’s ruling affirms what millions of people all across the country already know — loving, committed same-sex couples and their families should be able to share in the celebration and responsibilities of marriage. People from every background and every circumstance get this; they understand because being able to marry the one you love and care for your family are shared values that strike at the very core of who we are as a people. Denying loving couples and their families something so fundamental is to deny our common humanity. Congratulations to the plaintiffs and their families. This is a great day for them, for all Californians, and for all Americans.”

 

NOM, the National Organization For Marriage

NOM Condemns Ninth Circuit Ruling Finding Prop 8 Unconstitutional, Imperiling the Marriage Laws of 43 states

Group will support efforts to take the issue to the US Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. — “As sweeping and wrong-headed as this decision is, it nonetheless was as predictable as the outcome of a Harlem Globetrotters exhibition game,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “We have anticipated this outcome since the moment San Francisco Judge Vaughn Walker’s first hearing in the case. Now we have the field cleared to take this issue to the US Supreme Court, where we have every confidence we will prevail.”

San Francisco federal court judge Vaughn Walker ruled in 2010 that Proposition 8 violates the 14th amendment of the US Constitution. If allowed to stand, the ruling could invalidate the marriage laws of 43 states that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The case is widely expected to go to the US Supreme Court for resolution.

In their 2-1 split decision, the Ninth Circuit opinion [PDF] written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, held that:

• The proponents of Proposition 8 have the legal standing to appeal the lower court’s ruling, as suggested by an earlier ruling of the California Supreme Court;
• Judge Vaughn Walker did not have a duty to disclose that he was in a long-term committed homosexual relationship throughout the time he was hearing and deciding the case;
• The US Supreme Court ruling in Baker v Nelson, which found there is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage, does not preclude this challenge to Proposition 8;
• Laws enacted that particularly impact same-sex couples are subject to “heightened scrutiny” legal analysis;
• Under a heightened scrutiny analysis, Proposition 8 violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and is thus unconstitutional.

“Never before has a federal appeals court – or any federal court for that matter – found a right to gay marriage under the US Constitution,” said constitutional scholar John Eastman, who is chairman of NOM. “The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the most overturned circuit in the country, and Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the author of today’s absurd ruling is the most overturned federal judge in America. Today’s ruling is a perfect setup for this case to be taken by the US Supreme Court, where I am confident it will be reversed. This issue is the Roe v Wade of the current generation, and I sincerely doubt the Court has the stomach for preempting the policy judgments of the states on such a contentious matter, knowing the lingering harm it caused by that ruling.”

Eastman is the founding Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Claremont Institute and is a constitutional law professor and former Dean at Chapman University School of Law. A former US Supreme Court Clerk, Eastman has participated in over 60 cases before the US Supreme Court.

 

Image of San Francisco march today, by Will Kane via Twitter.

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

Speaker Johnson on Why He Thinks Hunter Biden’s Conviction Is Valid but Donald Trump’s Is Not

Published

on

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who could gain tremendous power if Donald Trump is elected president in November, explained to reporters his belief that Tuesday’s jury conviction of Hunter Biden on three federal felony gun charges was absolutely legitimate while Donald Trump’s conviction on 34 state felony charges was not.

“Every case is different,” Johnson told CNN’s Manu Raju (video below) when asked if “the president’s son being convicted on three counts” undercuts the Republican Speaker’s claims of a “two tier system of justice.”

Johnson added, “clearly the evidence was overwhelming” in the Hunter Biden prosecution, one which some legal experts said should not have been brought and at least one member of the jury who spoke to CNN said was a waste of the taxpayers’ dime.

“I don’t think that’s the case in the Trump trials, and all the charges that have been brought” against Trump “have been obviously brought for political purposes. Hunter Biden is a separate instance.”

READ MORE: Secret Audio of Justice Alito’s Wife Exposes His Plans and Her ‘Bitterness’: Critics

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) issued a strong response to the Johnson’s claims.

“We should be very very worried that Republicans are so brazen in their belief that convictions of Democrats are fine but convictions of Republicans are illegitimate. This is a political party TELLING US OUT LOUD that they plan to use the justice system to persecute opponents.”

Speaker Johnson and Senate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and members from both their GOP conferences will be meeting with Donald Trump on Thursday, reportedly to create a gameplay to pass major right-wing legislation if the convicted ex-president wins back the White House on November, NBC News reports.

Watch below or at this link.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Insists No Mandatory Military Draft Advisers Have Been Planning

Published

on

Presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump slapped down a report revealing his top advisors, including former high-ranking administration officials working on Project 2025, want to reinstate the mandatory military draft.

“Influential figures in Donald Trump’s orbit, including his former acting defense secretary, have proposed making military service mandatory,” The Washington Post reported Tuesday in a morning brief. “Christopher Miller, the former acting secretary of the Defense Department, shared his pitch for a national service mandate in Project 2025, the outline for a second Trump term prepared by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.”

In an expanded report, The Washington Post revealed if Trump is elected and if Miller becomes his Secretary of Defense, high school students across the country could be required to take a military assessment, “the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a standardized test developed by the Defense Department decades ago to help the military funnel recruits into occupations that match their skills and intellect.”

In an interview with the Post, Miller “detailed his vision for the ASVAB and a range of other changes as part of Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s aspirational government-wide game plan should the presumptive Republican nominee return to the White House. Though Trump has not publicly endorsed its policy proposals, Miller is among a cluster of influential former administration officials and GOP lawmakers who have mused aloud about a national service mandate and other measures to remedy what they see as a ‘crisis’ facing the all-volunteer military.”

READ MORE: ‘False’ and ‘Irresponsible’: DOJ Smacks Down Jim Jordan’s ‘Conspiracy’ in Sharp Letter

“Miller said a national service requirement should be ‘strongly considered.’ He described the concept as a common ‘rite of passage,’ one that would create a sense of ‘shared sacrifice’ among America’s youth.”

Despite the facts, Trump blasted The Washington Post and its report.

“The Fake News Washington Post came up with the ridiculous idea that Donald J. Trump will call for Mandatory Military Service,” the ex-president and now convicted felon wrote on his Truth Social platform. “This is only a continuation of their EIGHT YEAR failed attempt to damage me with the Voters. The Story is completely untrue. In fact, I never even thought of that idea. Only a degenerate former Newspaper, which has lost 50% of its Readers, would fabricate such a tale. Just another Fake Story, one of many, made up by the DEAD Washington Compost!”

It’s unclear if by “DEAD” Trump was referring to The Post’s official slogan, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” instituted the same year he became president.

The concept of “national service” is far from new, but the United States has not ever had mandatory military service, where everyone of a certain age was required to serve. Up until 1973 America still had the draft, before transitioning to an all-volunteer military.

President Barack Obama expanded opportunities for Americans to serve in non-military agencies, including AmeriCorps, FEMA Corps, and School Turnaround AmeriCorps.

Trump has kept his distance publicly away from Agenda 2025, but some experts believe should he be elected in November, that massive project, including its 920 manual, could easily become the national policy of the Trump administration.

The Biden administration has been campaigning against Project 2025.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Secret Audio of Justice Alito’s Wife Exposes His Plans and Her ‘Bitterness’: Critics

Continue Reading

News

‘False’ and ‘Irresponsible’: DOJ Smacks Down Jim Jordan’s ‘Conspiracy’ in Sharp Letter

Published

on

Calling Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan’s allegations “speculation,” “conspiratorial speculation,” “unfounded,” “baseless,” “irresponsible,” and “false,” the U.S. Dept. of Justice in a strongly-worded and trenchant letter smacked down the House Republican’s suggestion the New York State criminal prosecution of Donald Trump was a project of the Biden administration.

Assistant Attorney General Carlos Felipe Uriarte from the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs writes that Jordan’s Judiciary Committee “has demanded information from the Department because of what you describe as a ‘perception that the Justice Department is’ behind the District Attorney’s so-called ‘politicized prosecution’ and a ‘perception that the Biden Justice Department is politicized and weaponized’ to that end.” [Italicized words original to DOJ document.]

“The Department does not generally make extensive efforts to rebut conspiratorial speculation, including to avoid the risk of lending it credibility. However, consistent with the Attorney General’s commitment to transparency, the Department has taken extraordinary steps to confirm what was already clear: there is no basis for these false claims.”

READ MORE: Secret Audio of Justice Alito’s Wife Exposes His Plans and Her ‘Bitterness’: Critics

Describing their “comprehensive search for email communications … between any officials in Department leadership, including all political appointees in those offices, and the District Attorney’s office regarding any investigation or prosecution of the former President,” Uriarte says:

“We found none. This is unsurprising. The District Attorney’s office is a separate entity from the Department. The
Department does not supervise the work of the District Attorney’s office, does not approve its charging decisions, and does not try its cases. The Department has no control over the District Attorney, just as the District Attorney has no control over the Department. The Committee knows this.”

Continuing his remarks, Uriarte also notes that despite finding no emails Jordan demanded, “information-sharing between a U.S. Attorney’s Office and local prosecutors is standard and happens every day all over the country.”

And he issues a warning:

“The self-justifying ‘perception’ asserted by the Committee is completely baseless, but the Committee continues to traffic it widely. As the Attorney General stated at his hearing, the conspiracy theory that the recent jury verdict in New York state court was somehow controlled by the Department is not only false, it is irresponsible. Indeed, accusations of wrongdoing made without—and in fact contrary to—evidence undermine confidence in the justice system and have contributed to increased threats of violence and attacks on career law enforcement officials and prosecutors.”

“Our extraordinary efforts to respond to your speculation should put it to rest.”

ABC News adds that “last week, Attorney General Merrick Garland repeatedly rebuked the allegations as baseless and dangerous, pointing to an uptick in threats department officials have seen directly stemming from such conspiracy theories.”

READ MORE: Many Republicans Don’t Believe Trump Was Indicted or Aren’t Sure – But Say He’s Not Guilty

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.