Connect with us

DISCRIMINATION

US State Dept. Goes to Court Again to Try to Tear Apart This Married Same-Sex Couple’s Twins

Published

on

The U.S. State Dept. lost a federal court ruling that found it was discriminating against a legally-married same-sex couple. And now it’s appealing that ruling, hoping to block that couple’s child from being granted U.S. citizenship.

At issue: one of two twins. The twins are the biological children of Andrew and Elad Dvash-Banks, who married in 2010. Andrew is an American citizen, Elad is not.

Were Andrew and Elan a different-sex couple, the State Dept. would not be trying to block granting U.S. citizenship to one of their two twin boys, Aiden and Ethan Dvash-Banks.

The Daily Beast reports “the State Department has held the Dvash-Bankses to a different standard, requiring the family to undergo DNA testing to establish that Aiden—but not Ethan—was the biological son of a U.S. citizen.”

A biological link is not necessary to confer citizenship to children of different-sex couples.

It’s discrimination, pure and simple, and a federal judge agreed.

“The basis for the State Department’s imposition of a biological requirement is its strained interpretation” of existing immigration law, U.S. District Judge John F. Walter wrote, as The Daily Beast noted.

Aaron C. Morris, executive director of Immigration Equality says previous decisions in other cases have already established precedent. That would  make the State Dept.’s argument unlawful.

“This is settled law in the Ninth Circuit, which has already established that citizenship may pass from a married parent to a child regardless of whether or not they have a biological relationship,” Morris says.

“We’re outraged that the State Department is so intent on harming our family and the LGBTQ community,” Andrew and Elad said in a statement. “The fight is not over, and we will not rest until our family is treated fairly and equally. Nothing can tear us apart. The four of us are unbreakable.”

Here’s a video from Immigration Equality about the couple’s case:

 

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly described the children as adopted.

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.

DISCRIMINATION

Arizona Supreme Court Hands Major Pro-Discrimination Decision to Anti-Gay Christian Conservatives

Published

on

The Arizona Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of a calligraphy and wedding invitation company whose owners claim their religion forbids them to sell to same-sex couples. Brush & Nib Studio owners Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski are represented by Alliance Defending Freedom. ADF also wrote their business operating agreement, according to ABC 10, before filing the lawsuit on the couple’s behalf.

The court ruled 4-3 that the City of Phoenix “cannot apply its Human Relations Ordinance … to force Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski … to create custom wedding invitations celebrating same-sex wedding ceremonies in violation of their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

This is a narrow ruling in that the court noted that its decision applies only to wedding invitations.

“We do not recognize a blanket exemption from the Ordinance for all of Plaintiffs’ business operations.”

“Duka and Koski’s beliefs about same-sex marriage may seem old-fashioned, or even offensive to some. But the guarantees of free speech and freedom of religion are not only for those who are deemed sufficiently enlightened, advanced, or progressive. They are for everyone. After all, while our own ideas may be popular today, they may not be tomorrow,” the court added.

At issue is the City of Phoenix’s six-year old anti-discrimination ordinance, which ADF attacked in court.

The lawsuit was first filed in 2016. The Duka and Koski are not suing because they have been accused of discrimination. They are preemptively suing for the “right” to reject lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender customers. The business owners lost a 2017 judgment and appealed in 2018.

The Southern Poverty Law Center includes the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) on its list of anti-gay hate groups. SPLC in 2017 reported Brush & Nib is also a vendor on Etsy, and “voluntarily and willingly agreed to the vendor terms of service for the site, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

AZ Central notes that the state’s Supreme Court “has been packed by Gov. Doug Ducey with judges to his liking.” Ducey is a Republican.

Like many local non-discrimination ordinances, Phoenix’s bans discrimination “based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability,” AZ Central adds.

Next month the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in three cases of anti-LGBTQ discrimination. Their ruling will have historic effects.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

 

Continue Reading

DISCRIMINATION

Georgetown Law Professor: Top Broadcaster ‘Likely’ Killed Interview Because Buttigieg Is Gay

Published

on

A prominent Georgetown Law professor says Cumulus Media likely blocked an interview one of its country music station hosts had conducted with Pete Buttigieg from airing because the Democratic presidential candidate is gay.

After Huffpost reported that Blair Garner had been told by Cumulus Media he could not air any part of his interview with Buttigieg, Cumulus – the number three broadcaster in the nation of AM and FM radio stations – claimed the decision was based on the “equal time rule.”

Many quickly blasted Cumulus online.

But Talking Points Memo reached out to an expert, Georgetown Law Professor Andrew Schwartzman, who details his explanation but sums it up by saying Cumulus “likely” blocked the interview because Buttigieg is gay.

Schwartzman, a noted media attorney, told TPM the “equal time rule” does not apply to legitimate interviews.

“This was almost certainly a bona fide news interview,” Schwartzman says. “If another candidate asked for equal opportunity, equal time, the station could say no.”

TPM says Cumulus blocked the interview “under false pretenses.”

“This is much more likely to be about Cumulus not wanting to be seen as promoting a candidate who may not be particularly consonant with the proclivities of country station listeners since he is — how should we put this — gay,” Prof. Schwartzman concludes.

If there are any questions about Schwartzman’s bona fides, his stellar bio at Georgetown should put those to rest. It includes this:

From 1978 through 2012, Schwartzman headed Media Access Project (MAP). MAP was a non-profit public interest telecommunications law firm which represented the public in promoting the First Amendment rights to speak and to hear. It sought to promote creation of a well informed electorate by insuring vigorous debate in a free marketplace of ideas. It was the chief legal strategist in efforts to oppose major media mergers and preserve policies promoting media diversity.

 

Continue Reading

DISCRIMINATION

WATCH: Minnesota Mayor Angrily Chastises LGBTQ Locals After She Refuses to Sign Gay Pride Proclamation

Published

on

Columbia Heights, Minnesota Mayor Donna Schmitt has signed proclamations for Arbor Day, National Library Week, Polish American Heritage Month, and even for a local pastor. She recently supported the “second annual Peace Fest, put on by the Science of Spirituality,” but she steadfastly is refusing to sign a gay pride proclamation, and the local LGBTQ community is speaking out.

During Monday’s city council meeting Mayor Schmitt angrily chastised LGBTQ citizens, banging and waving her gavel at them and threatening to “ask some of you to leave,” as video from Fox 9 (below) shows.

“You don’t need a piece of paper from me,” Mayor Schmitt told LGBTQ residents Monday.

The Columbia Heights Pride Organization and other groups tried for weeks to get the mayor to recognize this upcoming Saturday’s LGBTQ Awareness Day and Pride festival. It wasn’t until last week that they finally got to talk with her, and her answer was no.

The mayor claims the group did not follow proper guidelines, and as a result she was unable to sign a proclamation for them.

But Mayor Schmitt admitted to a local news station that those guidelines were developed the same week that the LGBTQ groups began asking for the proclamation.

“It is not about a group, it’s about, let’s follow the guidelines,” Schmitt told ABC 5. “They can go out and celebrate, they are more than welcome to rent our parks and have a family friendly event as they have requested.”

And after Monday’s city council meeting Mayor Schmitt went after the LGBTQ citizens.

“I just hope they realize, they don’t represent everyone in the city either,” she said.

 

Watch:

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 AlterNet Media.