Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Puerto Rico Appoints Openly Lesbian Judge To Head Supreme Court

Judge Maite Oronoz Rodriguez will become the first lesbian and the third woman to be named the president of the Supreme Court.

In an historical decision, senators in Puerto Rico have named openly lesbian judge as the new president of the Supreme Court.

Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla proposed Oronoz’s candidacy, and lawmakers approved the governor’s decision 14 votes to 12, paving the way for her to replace former Supreme Court President Liana Fiol Mata.

140715-maite-oronoz-rodriguez-01_92d16d719b01ce447a18408f9def6575

When the governor first appointed her, Oronoz said,

The moment for change and renovation in Puerto Rico’s justice has come. This is the moment to strengthen justice and face all the future challenges. This is the moment to pass along the administration of justice to the present generations that will experience its outcomes.”

Before the appointment to the Supreme Court, Oronoz was an associate justice of the Supreme Court since June 2014.

The possibility of her appointment had generated controversy among the island’s most conservative sectors, including the highest authority of the Catholic Church, San Juan Archbishop Roberto Gonzalez Nieves, who at the time expressed “concern” that an openly lesbian judge could lead the court.

Supreme Court Sides With Lesbian Mother In Alabama Adoption Case

The Supreme Court has blocked an Alabama court from denying parental rights to a lesbian woman who was granted an adoption in Georgia.

The high court’s action could restore the woman’s visitation rights with the three children, now 13 and 11-year-old twins, while the justices decide whether to hear her appeal of the ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court.

Adoption rights for same-sex couples is one of the issues remaining in the wake of the high court’s June decision legalising same-sex marriage. More than 20 states allow gay and lesbian couples “second-parent adoptions.”

Such adoptions benefit adults who do not share a biological connection, while ensuring that children have two legal parents — particularly in case one dies or is incapacitated.

The case was brought by “V.L.,” as she is identified in court papers, against her former partner “E.L.”

The Alabama couple had three children in 2002 and 2004, but E.L is the birth mother. To get adoption rights for V.L., the couple established temporary residency to Georgia.

Now that they have split up, E.L. agrees with the Alabama Supreme Court, which ruled in September that Georgia mistakenly granted V.L. joint custody. Her lawyers argued that

“the Georgia court had no authority under Georgia law to award such an adoption, which is therefore void and not entitled to full faith and credit.”

Lawyers for V.L., including the National Center for Lesbian Rights, say the case has broad implications for any gay or lesbian adoptive parents who travel or move to Alabama.

They told the justices in court papers that same-sex adoptions “have been granted since at least the mid-1980s, long before same-sex couples could marry.” They estimated that hundreds of thousands of such adoptions now exist; the most recent statistics from the Williams Institute at UCLA indicate an estimated 65,000 adopted children live with a lesbian or gay parent.

Obama Finally Backs Law To Protect LGBT Workers In All 50 States

Though same-sex marriage is now legal across all 50 US states, there is still a lot need to do to protect LGBTs in American.

Anti-discrimination laws vary from state to state – meaning that you can still legally be fired for being LGBT in 28 states.

However, now President Obama is throwing his weight behind a proposed anti-discrimination law, which would protect LGBT workers in all 50 states.

Obama previously signed an Executive Order outlawing discrimination, but this only extends to federal contractors.

The President had declined to openly back the Equality Act last month – but this week vowed to support the law, which already has backing from most Democratic lawmakers.

His press spokesperson Josh Earnest said:

The administration strongly supports the Equality Act. That bill is historic legislation that would advance the cause of equality for millions of Americans.

We look forward to working with Congress to ensure that the legislative process produces a result that balances both the bedrock principles of civil rights… with the religious liberty that we hold dear in this country.”

Over 100 Democrats have co-sponsored the bill – which would outlaw discrimination and ensure a range of protections for LGBT people – and it also has numerous endorsements from large corporations including Google, Microsoft and Apple.


[interaction id=”560c2d3377aa6c1a034e607b”]

 

 

LGBT Rights Campaigners Tackle Job and Housing Discrimination Following Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

Last month, history was made when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 in favour of same-sex marriage. While some states around the county have been steadily bringing same-sex marriage into law, in many others it remained illegal to marry a same-sex partner, meaning that same-sex couples may have to travel across the other side of the country just to get married.

Thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling, same-sex marriage is now legal in all of the United States, and same-sex couples can get married wherever they would like.

This is a monumental achievement and it follows the growing acceptance of the LGBT community  – something also signified by the fact that many straight allies and many companies have turned their social media icons ‘rainbow’ in support. However, it’s not the be all and end all of the LGBT rights movements and much needs to be done.

For example, in 27 states, employees can still be fired for being gay. While President Obama did recently sign an executive order that banned federal agencies and contractors from discriminating based on sexual orientation or gender identity, that doesn’t include everyone.
civilrights-02

civilrights-01

Furthermore, some local governments have antidiscrimination laws (even if the state does not) but Ruth Colker, an expert on discrimination law at Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University, told The New York Times that

typically, the penalty for violating a city ordinance is more akin to a traffic violation” and that “state-level penalties can be much more significant.”

As a result, LGBT rights activists will be tackling job and housing related discrimination as their big, post-marriage equality fight. While there has been a lot of push back previously, specially from right-wing religious groups who feel that discrimination law will be used to persecute them for their religious beliefs, things do seem to be looking up.

Chai R. Feldblum, a commissioner at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, says that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, LGBT discrimination is illegal and that they have pursued over 200 cases based on this. Meanwhile, Shannon P. Minter, legal director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, says that

I think there’s a very strong consensus now among advocacy groups that we need a broader bill that puts discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity on the same footing as race, religion and gender”

It is yet to be seen how activists’ efforts will pay off, or the work of politicians such as Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon (who wants to specifically add LGBT protections to the Civil Rights Act), but hopefully the Supreme Court’s ruling will snowball into comprehensive equality.

 

Mexico’s Supreme Court Effectively Legalises Same-Sex Marriage

The Supreme Court in Mexico has legalised same-sex marriage in a landmark legal ruling.

However, the country doesn’t have equal marriage rights just yet.

A court has decreed that it is unconstitutional for Mexican states to bar same-sex marriages.

As the purpose of matrimony is not procreation, there is no justified reason that the matrimonial union be heterosexual, nor that it be stated as between only a man and only a woman. Such a statement turns out to be discriminatory in its mere expression.”

Whilst no official legislation has been brought forward in parliament to introduce marriage for gay and bisexual couples, the court ruling represents a precedent that will require courts throughout the country to follow suit.

This means that same-sex marriage has effectively been legalised throughout Mexico.

Estefanía Vela, a legal scholar at a Mexico City university told the New York Times of the ruling:

Without a doubt, gay marriage is legal everywhere. If a same-sex couple comes along and the code says marriage is between a man and a woman and for the purposes of reproduction, the court says, ‘Ignore it, marriage is for two people’.”

However, same-sex couples might still run into a few snags because local registrars are not required to follow this ruling; however gay couples denied marriage rights in their states are able to seek injunctions from district judges since the jurisprudential thesis now requires the judges to grant them.

Unfortunately, it’s not as easy as just ignoring the discriminatory code or the local registrar. Even though judges are now required to provide marriage licenses, if a registrar denies a same-sex couple, it is up to that couple to appeal the courts.

That process can cost $1,000 or more and the legal process can take months. While this means marriage is not 100% equal, the recent ruling in Mexico is definitely a step in the right direction.

A number of Latin American countries have allowed same-sex marriage in recent years. Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay have already done so, whilst Chile and Ecuador are set to do so in the near future.

Hillary Clinton Hopes the Supreme Court Will Make Marriage Equality Legal Nationwide

Earlier this month, Hillary Clinton made headlines when she finally announced that she would be running for President in the 2016 election. The former Secretary of State was widely regarded as the only possible presidential candidate for the Democratic party due to her long career in politics and her name recognition – few candidates on either the Democratic or Republican side are as well-known.

Many also believe that Hillary has a strong chance of winning. Despite the recent controversy surrounding her decision to use her personal email address to send out confidential emails (rather than her official government email), her stance on women’s rights (she is a huge supporter of them) and immigration (she supports the path to citizenship for illegal immigrants) makes her a hit with women and people of colour; two important demos that Republicans have mostly offended and failed to appeal to thus far.

She also stands a strong chance of winning the majority of the LGBT vote too. Clinton has been an outspoken advocate for LGBT rights for several years and a statement from her campaign spokesperson Adrienne Elrod explained that:

Hillary Clinton supports marriage equality and hopes the Supreme Court will come down on the side of same-sex couples being guaranteed that constitutional right.”

Clinton’s statement comes as the Supreme Court gears up for a monumental ruling on marriage equality, regarding the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit to uphold same-sex marriage bans in the states of Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan and Kentucky. The Supreme Court will be deciding whether the United States Constitution requires a state to issue marriage license of two people of the same sex and if a state is required to recognise a same-sex marriage if their marriage was (lawfully) licensed in a different state. Essentially, a ruling in favour of marriage equality here would make it legal across the entire United States and would make it illegal for states to try and ban same-sex marriage, as several have tried to do already.

The statement from Clinton is also important as it was previously unclear just what her stance on marriage equality was. Back in 2008, Clinton along with then-Senator Barack Obama, both agreed that although same-sex couples should be able to have civil partnerships, neither of them supported same-sex marriage. The stance seemed unsurprising at the time given that her husband Bill Clinton introduced the restrictive Defense of Marriage Act during his presidency (although he later said that he regretted it) and LGBT rights were significantly less popular in 2008 as they are now. And, although Clinton has spoken in favour of LGBT rights, just last year she said that marriage equality should be left up to the states to decide.

Unfortunately, Clinton hasn’t revealed what has led to her change of heart. Many will chalk it down to the fact that it would reflect badly on her if she didn’t support LGBT rights wholeheartedly, given that President Obama has issued many statements (and some executive orders) both supporting and protecting LGBT rights. However, regardless of her reasoning, her position on marriage equality should be seen as a good thing.

8 States Where Same-Sex Marriage Has Passed, Are Now Among Those Urging the U.S. Supreme Court to Uphold Same-Sex Marriage Bans

Eight states where same-sex couples can marry are among 15 states urging the Supreme Court to uphold gay marriage bans and leave the matter to voters and lawmakers.

The 15 states are telling the justices in a brief filed Thursday that the court would do “incalculable damage to our civic life” if it decides that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry everywhere in the United States.

The states say they should be free to decide the issue for themselves.

Those seeking a nationwide decree in favour of same-sex marriage “urge the court to declare that the Constitution compels all 50 states to adopt this new form of marriage that did not exist in a single state 12 years ago. The court should decline that invitation,” the states wrote.

Plaintiffs from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee are asking the court to declare that the Constitution forbids states from denying same-sex couples the right to marry. The justices are scheduled to hear arguments on April 28.

Same-sex couples can marry in 37 states as a result of court decree, voter approval or legislative action.

The eight states on Thursday’s legal filing where gay and lesbian couples can marry after courts struck down bans on gay marriage are: Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Utah and West Virginia.

Seven other states where same-sex marriage remains illegal also joined the brief. They are: Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas.

US Supreme Court Action Could Lead to #MarriageEquality in 11 More States

In a surprise development, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would not accept for review any of the seven appeals from five states. The action means that the stays placed on lower court decisions in all five states – decisions that struck down bans on marriage for same-sex couples — are immediately lifted, making way for the lower courts to issue orders requiring the states to stop enforcing their bans.

The action also means that six other states in the same federal circuits as the five states which had appeals before the high court will have to abide by the federal appeals court rulings in those circuits. All three circuits –the Fourth, Seventh, and Tenth—struck down the bans on marriage for same-sex couples.

That means that very soon, same-sex couples will be able to marry in 30 states plus the District of Columbia.

“We are thrilled the court is letting the Tenth Circuit victory stand. This is a huge step forward for Utah and the entire country. We are hopeful that the other cases pending across the country will also vindicate the freedom to marry, so that all couples, no matter where they travel or live, will be treated as equal citizens and have the same basic security and protections for their families that other Americans enjoy.”

Shannon Minter, Legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights

The announcement does not legally affect the remaining 20 states, but it could give courts in those other states and circuits some pause before upholding similar bans in those states and circuits. Some experts say they expect the Supreme Court will almost certainly take up an appeal should a federal appeals court rule such bans to be constitutional.

Prominent constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe of Harvard University, who argued against bans on sodomy in the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick case, said he thought there was only a 50-50 chance the court would have granted one of the existing appeals.

“As soon as a solid split emerges, I fully expect the Court to grant cert. I’d watch the Sixth Circuit if I were you.”

Laurence Tribe, Harvard University

A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit heard oral arguments August 6 in six marriage equality lawsuits from four states: Kentucky,Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. The panel has yet to issue its opinion, but questions from two of the three judges during the argument gave repeated voice to various justifications for the bans.

Alaska’s Same-Sex Marriage Battle – ‘Citizens, Not The Courts Should Decide Whether Marriage Definition Includes Same-sex Couples’

Court papers filed Friday in Alaska, say Citizens, not the courts, should decide whether the definition of marriage includes same-sex couples.

The state is defending in federal court an amendment to Alaska’s constitution that bans gay marriage. In May, five same-sex couples – four married outside of Alaska and one unmarried couple – sued to overturn the ban approved by voters in 1998, saying it violates their rights to due process and equal protection under the U.S. Constitution.

In a filing Friday, attorneys for the state said citizens have a fundamental right to decide whether to make changes to important institutions through the democratic process.

“The State of Alaska does not dispute that the residents of individual states have the right to change their marriage laws. … However, the State urges that residents of Alaska possess the same fundamental right to retain the traditional definition of marriage. This basic premise of democratic government should not be usurped by the judiciary absent compelling circumstances which the State respectfully urges are not present in this case.”

The attorneys said that allowing Alaska residents to decide whether to keep the traditional definition of marriage, of being between one man and one woman, “serves the important governmental interests of supporting the democratic form of government.”

The attorneys said there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage under the due-process clause of the U.S. Constitution. The state also argues that Alaska laws prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriages from other states or countries do not violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.

The state said recent court decisions across the country in support of gay marriage don’t point to a foregone conclusion in this case but to intervention by some courts into a law-making process that should be reserved for the people.

Oral arguments in the case have been set for next month.

Virginia’s Gay Marriage Ban Struck Down by Appeals Court

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled Monday that Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

The 2-1 ruling upheld a previous decision issued earlier this year by a Virginia district court, which struck down the state’s ban on gay marriages.

“Virginia has failed to advance a compelling state interest justifying its definition of marriage as between only a man and a woman. Virginia’s laws declining to recognize same-sex marriage infringe the fundamental right to marriage and are therefore unconstitutional.”

Reads the ruling

The circuit court also has jurisdiction over three other states with similar bans: North Carolina, South Carolina and West Virginia. As noted in the 4th Circuit’s ruling, the Southern District of West Virginia stayed a challenge to the state’s ban pending Monday’s ruling.

In the ruling, Judge Henry Floyd argued that personal opposition to same-sex unions is not a legitimate legal basis for banning gay marriage.

“We recognize that same-sex marriage makes some people deeply uncomfortable.However, inertia and apprehension are not legitimate bases for denying same-sex couples due process and equal protection of the laws. … The choice of whether and whom to marry is an intensely personal decision that alters the course of an individual’s life. Denying same-sex couples this choice prohibits them from participating fully in our society.”

Judge Henry Floyd

As the Associated Press notes, the Virginia ruling is one of several gay marriage cases that may be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Alaska Unanimously Rules that Same-sex Partners of Workers Killed on the Job Must Receive compensation

The Alaska Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that same-sex partners of workers killed on the job should have access to compensation under Alaska law.

In the lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal, Deborah Harris sought compensation for the work-related death of her partner Kerry Fadely. Kerry was tragically killed in 2011 when a disgruntled former employee shot and killed her.

Though workers’ compensation is usually paid by insurance companies, Alaska law requires employers to provide survivor benefits to the spouse of a person who is killed from a work-related injury.

Same-sex couples were unable to access survivor protections prior to this ruling because Alaska does not recognise same-sex marriages.

In a statement – Peter Renn, Lambda Legal Staff Attorney said

“This is a wonderful ruling for same-sex couples in Alaska who have built lives and raised families together but were at risk because they were barred access to a critical safety net created specifically to catch families at moments of crisis.

Like the avalanche of decisions we’re seeing from every corner of this country, the court recognized that loving, committed same-sex couples should have equal access to the law’s protection.”

 

Last Ditch Efforts in the War on Gay Marriage

Last year the Supreme Court of the USA ruled that the federal government should and must recognise same-sex marriages. Since then twenty judges around the nation have struck down state bans on gay marriage.

Some opponents of gay marriage now expect a Supreme Court ruling to legalise same-sex unions right across the US while others will never give up the fight. Thousands are expected on the upcoming March for Marriage in Washington, DC.

The National Organization for Marriage is behind the march and rather optimistically speaks of a ‘road to victory’ on its website. ‘A competition is won by those who take the field, not by those who sit on the sidelines,’ so said Brian Brown, the President of the NOM. Sounding not unlike a Roman general, he added: ‘Friends, we need to take the field for marriage — and fight to win!’

NOM supporters want the Supreme Court to assure the right of states to establish their own marriage laws, rather than instituting a nationwide same-sex marriage ban. If the Supreme Court were to do the opposite – legalie gay marriage nationwide – Brown has said that he and the NOM ‘won’t go away’.

Predictably for a conservative, he has compared the anti-gay marriage struggle to the anti-abortion movement since the Supreme Court’s 1973 landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade which legalised abortion in every state in the Union.

What is most worrying about NOM is its affiliations with outright bigots – both religious and secular. A number of gay rights advocates and liberal politicians penned an open letter in which they castigated the March on Washington for scheduling speakers who ‘denigrate lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens.’