brief

...now browsing by tag

 
appeal australia ban bill california civil unions dadt defense of marriage act doma don't ask don't tell events gay gay couple gay couples Gay Marriage gay marriage ban gay rights gay wedding gay weddings gop illinois iowa lawsuit lesbian weddings marriage equality maryland minnesota national organization for marriage new hampshire new jersey new york nom north carolina poll prop 8 proposition 8 rally repeal rhode island ruling same sex marriage senate supreme court united kingdom vote
 

CA: Olson, Boies File Brief in Attempt to Lift Prop 8 Gay Wedding Stay

Friday, March 18th, 2011

Yesterday, the legal team at the American Foundation for Equal Rights, led by Ted Olson and David Boies, filed the reply brief in their effort to lift the stay on California marriages while the appeal proceeds. From AFER’s press release:

[T]he American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) and its legal team — led by Theodore B. Olson and David Boies — filed a reply brief in support of its motion with the Ninth Circuit asking that the Court immediately lift an order preventing gay and lesbian couples from marrying in California. That order, issued in August 2010, stayed the injunction issued by the U.S. District Court that barred further enforcement of Proposition 8.

This is the final brief regarding this motion before the Ninth Circuit issues a ruling. If the stay is lifted, it will be the first time that gay and lesbian Californians will be able to legally marry since Prop 8 was passed in November 2008.

Full Story from AmericaBlog

Click here for gay marriage resources. in California

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , ,

Obama Justice Department Again Defends DOMA

Thursday, January 13th, 2011

President Obama seemed to have mended his difficult relationship with his the gay rights movement by getting the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell done, but this evening brings another flare-up.

Gay groups are furious with a Justice Department brief defending — though in quite narrow terms — the Defense of Marriage Act, which Candidate Obama, unlike even his Democratic rivals, had pledged to repeal in full.

“DOMA is supported by rationales that constitute a sufficient rational basis for the law. For example, as explained below, it is supported by an interest in maintaining the status quo and uniformity on the federal level, and preserving room for the development of policy in the states,” says the government’s brief (.pdf) in two cases in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The brief focuses solely on the virtues of keeping the federal law while state’s experiment, and not the underlying question of marriage.

Full Story from Politico

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , ,

CA: SF Brief Calls Prop 8 “Irrational”

Tuesday, October 19th, 2010

California Gay MarriageThe city of San Francisco told a federal appeals court Monday that “Proposition 8 is peculiarly irrational under California law.” Lawyers for the city made the argument in a brief asking the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold an August ruling in which U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker struck down California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Supporters of the ban, enacted by state voters as Proposition 8 in 2008, have appealed to the 9th Circuit. The appeals court will hear arguments in San Francisco in early December and in the meantime has stayed Walker’s ruling. In an appeal brief filed in September, Proposition 8 sponsors argued the measure was justified to promote “responsible procreation and child-rearing” by biological parents within heterosexual marriages.

But that reasoning makes no sense because California law treats gay and lesbian parents the same as heterosexual parents and makes no distinction in the rights and responsibilities of biological and adoptive parents, city lawyers argued Monday.

Full Story from KTVU

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , ,

Ten States File Brief Against Gay Marriage in Perry vs. Schwarzenegger Case

Friday, September 24th, 2010

Wyoming and nine other states will file a legal brief today saying a federal court “exceeded its judicial authority” when it ruled that the U.S. Constitution requires legal marriage to include same-sex couples. In the amicus brief, which will be filed late this afternoon in the case of Perry vs. Schwarzenegger, the states disagree with the court’s ruling that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right.

The brief also asserts that individual states, not the federal court system, have final say in decisions about whether to allow same-sex marriages.

In August, a federal district judge ruled in the case that California’s Proposition 8, a voter-passed ban on same-sex marriage, was illegal on federal constitutional grounds. All previous court cases on gay marriage cited state constitutions.

Full Story from Trib.com

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

CA: Imperial County Files Prop 8 Brief to Claim Standing in Case

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

Imperial County not only has standing to appeal Proposition 8, but it has a significant interest in keeping the ban on gay marriage, claim lawyers representing the county.

Advocates for Faith and Freedom filed its 77-page brief Friday near midnight in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that seeks to appeal two rulings made by a federal court judge in August: that a ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional and that Imperial County doesn’t have a direct interest to intervene in the case.

Proposition 8, a 2008 ballot measure that banned gay marriage in California, was ruled unconstitutional in early August. The county had filed to intervene in the case in December to ensure a party would be able to file an appeal should the proposition be overturned.

Full Story from IV Press Online

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

WA: Is State’s Referendum 71 Supreme Court Brief Poorly Written?

Saturday, April 24th, 2010

On Wednesday, the proponents of Referendum 71 ( the unsuccessful effort to repeal last year’s everything but marriage domestic partnership law) will face off against the State of Washington in the United States Supreme Court to determine whether the First Amendment protects against the release of the identity of initiative/referendum petition signers under the Washington Public Records Act. Though this dispute has been the subject of prior articles, I reviewed the briefs filed before the Supreme Court to see how the parties’ respective arguments developed.

The Briefs of the Referendum 71 proponents are very strong. They focus well on the notion that signing an initiative is political speech subject to the broadest protection of the first amendment against intimidation, arguing corruption and intimidation are the two biggest threats to a democracy. The biggest weaknesses of their argument are (1) the lack of a record of harassment in connection with referendum 71 and (2) the question whether signing a petition is an anonymous act.

The Proponents anticipated both these issues by arguing the record of harassment during the Proposition 8 campaign in California (the successful effort to constitutional the ban on gay and lesbian marriage) and constructing a multi-step analysis of anonymity suggesting that while signers agreed to disclose their identities to the petition signature gatherers and other signers who see their signatures and to the State to confirm the validity of the signatures, they did not agree to disclose their identities to the public through the public records act.

Full Story from Publicola

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , ,