Ohio

...now browsing by category

Ohio gay rights and marriage equality news

 

Featured Gay Friendly Wedding Vendor: Colleen Good Ceremonies, Cincinnati, Ohio

Saturday, August 15th, 2015

Colleen Good Ceremonies

Periodically we’ll feature one of our vendors here to let our readers know about some great people who can help you plan the perfect wedding.

Your wedding is a vivid reflection of you! Every decision you make is a brush stroke on the work of art that will be your wedding day. The ceremony is the heart and soul of your wedding and no decision is more important than who you choose to be your CincinnatiCelebrant. I would be honored to work with you to create that profound and transforming ceremony.

See the Colleen Good Ceremonies Expanded Listing on Purple Unions Here

Gay Friendly Wedding Vendors

Featured Gay Friendly Wedding Vendor: Ludwig Photo & Video, Cincinnati, Ohio

Monday, August 3rd, 2015

Ludwig Photos

Periodically we’ll feature one of our vendors here to let our readers know about some great people who can help you plan the perfect wedding.

Around 1980 I was just starting my photography career when my cousin, who is gay, ask me to photograph a commitment ceremony. I was raised to be very accepting of people so I happily said yes. I borrowed some camera equipment from the photo studio I worked for so I could get some great images. When the photos came back through the studio I almost lost my job because my boss said I shouldn’t have used his cameras for such an event. It was difficult for me to understand why he was upset.

See the Ludwig Photo & Video Expanded Listing on Purple Unions Here

Gay Friendly Wedding Vendors in Ohio

Featured Gay Friendly Wedding Vendor: Jeannette’s Delicacies, Cincinnati, Ohio

Sunday, August 2nd, 2015

Jeannette's DelicaciesPeriodically we’ll feature one of our vendors here to let our readers know about some great people who can help you plan the perfect wedding.

Here at Jeannette’s Delicacies, we try our best to accommodate your vision for the ideal event or special occasion. We have experienced and passionate chefs who will help you customize a suitable menu as well as skilled and organized coordinators to assist you in planning any occasion.

See the Jeannette’s Delicacies Expanded Listing on Purple Unions Here

Gay Friendly Wedding Vendors in Ohio

Marriage Equality Round-Up – US Supreme Court Edition

Saturday, January 17th, 2015

US Supreme Court Color

There’s a lot going on around the US Supreme Court’s decision to take five marriage equality cases from the Sixth Circuit. Here’s a wrap-up of the current news and analysis

USA: The hearing will be held in April. full story

USA: The ACLU looks at where we’re at and how we got here. full story

USA: Time Magazine looks at the court’s options in the case. full story

USA: Lambda Legal asks “what happens if we lose?” full story

USA: New Now Next profiles the couples in the four cases. full story

USA: Just like the last time, it probably all comes down to Justice Kennedy. full story

USA: Not so fast, says the New Republic – Chief Justice Roberts may have a role to play too. full story

USA: Time also looks at the Supreme Court’s own history with the issue. full story

USA: Garrett Epps at The Atlantic looks at the odds. full story

USA: Time recaps what five of the Justices have written or said about marriage equality in the past. full story

USA: Prop 8 attorney David Boies thinks marriage equality will win out at the Court. full story

USA: Attorney General Eric Holder says he will file a brief with the Court in favor of marriage equality. full story

USA: While announcing the Court’s decision to take the cases, Fox News anchor Shepard Smith slammed the “continuing discrimination” by states that are still fighting same-sex marriage full story

USA: Steve Sanders at ScotusBlog looks at the issue of “animus” in the state bans and the upcoming decisions. full story

USA, Michigan: The plaintiffs here say they are in awe that the Court has decided to take up their case. full story

USA, Texas: Neel Lane, attorney the plaintiffs in the Texas marriage equality case, is calling on the three judge panel to issue a ruling even though the Supremes have now taken four marriage equality cases. full story

USA, Alaska: Attorney General Craig Richards said he would suspend his hopeless appeal of the decision striking down the state’s ban while the Supremes consider the issue. full story

US Supreme Court Takes Four Marriage Equality Cases

Friday, January 16th, 2015

US Supreme Court Color

This is huge – the Supremes just took all four cases from the Sixth Circuit:

The Supreme Court has just granted certiorari — i.e. agreed to hear oral arguments — in the Sixth Circuit marriage cases from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. They were consolidated. This means that the question of whether or not the United States Constitution protects the freedom of same-sex couples to marry is likely to be decided by the end of June. The Supreme Court order, issued this afternoon at approximately 3:30 PM, contains the following instructions: The cases are consolidated and the petitions for writs of certiorari are granted.

We should know by June if the whole US has marriage equality!

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

Sixth Circuit Upholds Marriage Equality Bans

Thursday, November 6th, 2014

Sixth Circuit

My friends, we have a circuit court split – the Sixth Circuit became the first in the nation to uphold a ban on same sex marriage.

The Washington Blade reports:

A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that bans on same-sex marriage in each of the four states within its jurisdiction are constitutional, once again opening up the possibility for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue. In a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prohibitions on same-sex marriage in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee pass constitutional muster.

The 42-page majority opinion was written by U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton, an appointee of George W. Bush who was seen as the panel’s swing vote on marriage. Sutton bases much of the ruling on his determination that bans on same-sex marriage pass rational basis review and, much like he suggested during his questioning in oral arguments, that the democratic process should decide the marriage issue, not the courts.

“When the courts do not let the people resolve new social issues like this one, they perpetuate the idea that the heroes in these change events are judges and lawyers,” Sutton said. “Better in this instance, we think, to allow change through the customary political processes, in which the people, gay and straight alike, become the heroes of their own stories by meeting each other not as adversaries in a court system but as fellow citizens seeking to resolve a new social issue in a fair-minded way.”

Justice Ginsberg said recently that there was no reason for the Court to step in until and unless there was a split among the circuit courts. Will the Court now take another marriage equality case?

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

New Poll Shows 43% in Ohio Support Marriage Equality Referendum

Tuesday, November 4th, 2014

titleThere’s a new marriage equality poll out in Ohio, asking Ohioans if they support or oppose a proposed referendum to legalize marriage equality.

The Columbus Dispatch reports:

By 3 percentage points — 46 to 43 percent — they oppose a gay-marriage proposal currently getting signatures to appear on the statewide ballot, probably in two years. Of course, that’s still a huge turnaround for a state that a decade ago voted 62 to 38 percent to define marriage in the Ohio Constitution as solely between one man and one woman. And the poll was taken of likely voters for today’s election, which many Democrats are skipping. Ohio’s electorate could be far different in 2016, a presidential election year.

The biggest qualifier of all is that the U.S. Supreme Court may make the Ohio petition drive moot by ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage before it ever gets on the ballot. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Cincinnati, currently is mulling cases from Ohio and three other states. Many experts say the ruling by that three-judge panel — especially if it upholds restrictions on same-sex marriage — could set the stage for definitive action by the Supreme Court.

The last poll we had showed 50% support for marriage equality in the state. Of course, this one is slightly different, asking for support for an initiative to repeal the state’s ban. It doesn’t tell us if some of those are opposed because they don’t think that rights should be voted on at all.

Find more articles and gay wedding resources in Ohio.

In-Depth Analysis of the Sixth Circuit Hearing

Tuesday, August 12th, 2014

Sixth CircuitSitting in the federal courtroom in Cincinnati, listening to the Sixth Circuit arguments in six same-sex marriage cases, one theme seemed especially prevalent: state defenders of same-sex marriage bans argued that the issue should be left up to “the democratic process”, and their concerns were shared by Judge Jeffrey Sutton.

Judge Sutton asked the plaintiffs’ lawyer in one case, “assuming you win,” isn’t it better and more honest to win by way of the democratic process? Sutton, whose background is in leading litigation that promoted federalism, alternatively wondered aloud whether LGBT people should win their rights by changing every person’s mind, and whether states are permitted to move one step at a time, addressing issues incrementally, even though their approach may leave some groups without protection for long periods of time.

A short and rhetorical answer to this problem is Justice Jackson’s opinion in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, in which he said that “fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” That was one answer given by the plaintiffs. Judge Sutton seemed to suggest in his comments that the “dignity” that Justice Kennedy addressed in United States v. Windsor was tied to the fact that in New York, there was a decision by the state to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Without the state’s approval, he seemed to be saying, the win is less legitimate.

There are several problems with this line of thinking, and ultimately the Sixth Circuit may not adopt it because of those problems.

Authored By Scottie Thompson – See the Full Story at Equality on Trial

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

Will Sixth Circuit Be First to Rule Against Marriage Equality?

Saturday, August 9th, 2014

Sixth Circuit

Andrew Sullivan collects some of the views from pundits who see a possible end to the winning streak for marriage equality in the courts.

The Dish reports:

At one rather awkward point, Sutton launched into a strange monologue about the gay rights movement’s tactics, one that seemed barely tethered to the merits of the case at hand:

I would’ve thought the best way to get respect and dignity is through the democratic process. Forcing one’s neighbors, co-employees, friends, to recognize that these marriages, the status deserves the same respect as the status in a heterosexual couple. … If the goal is to change hearts and minds … isn’t it worth the expense? Don’t you think you’re more likely to change hearts and minds through the democratic process than you are through a decision by five justices of the U.S. Supreme Court?

These words should be very unnerving for supporters of same-sex marriage. Don’t come to us with your demands for equal protection and fundamental rights, Sutton implied; take your case to the voters instead. Being a legal stranger to your spouse and child isn’t so bad, he suggests, that you need to turn to the federal courts for relief.

How soon will the court rule? And if it does rule against marriage equality, will this help to create incentive for the US Supreme Court to step in?

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

Sixth Circuit Hears Marriage Equality Cases From Four States

Thursday, August 7th, 2014

Sixth Circuit

The Sixth Circuit heard marriage equality cases from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee yesterday.

Freedom to Marry has a nice collection of quotes from the decisions that got the cases here:

“Once you get married lawfully in one state, another state cannot take your marriage away, because the right t remain married is properly recognized as a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.” –Obergefell v. Wymyslo ruling, Ohio

“No one has offered any evidence that recognizing same-sex marriages will harm opposite-sex marriages, individually or collectively. One’s belief to the contrary, however sincerely held, cannot alone justify denying a selected group their constitutional rights.” Bourke v. Beshear ruling, Kentucky

“In attempting to define this case as a challenge to “the will of the people,” state defendants lost sight of what this case is truly about: people. Today’s decision affirms the enduring principle that regardless of who finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail.” Deboer v Snyder ruling, Michigan

Joe.My.God also has a couple videos from the marriage equality rally before the hearing:

During the hearing, at least one of the judges, Martha Daughtrey, openly mocked Mark Regnerus, author of a discredited study on gay parenting (from a reporter’s tweet and notes):

“Even the Texas professor’s University doesn’t believe anything this man says… What harm comes? It doesn’t look like the sky has fallen in other cases.”

Judge Daughtrey also pressed a Michigan Attorney on the comparison between bans on same sex marriage and interracial marriage.

She also pressed him to differentiate between banning same-sex marriage and prohibiting interracial marriage, which was prevalent in many states until a 1967 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia. “That was a vote by the people of many states against interracial marriage,” she said. Lindstrom countered that race doesn’t play a role in the fundamental definition of marriage.

The two GOP appointees on the panel appeared to give some weight to the “will of the people” argument, while the Democratic appointee appeared to clearly favor marriage equality:

Republican appointee Judge Jeffrey Sutton repeatedly questioned whether voters rather than courts should decide whether gay marriage is legal. Sutton is respected within legal circles and his views could help sway the five conservative members of the Supreme Court. The panel’s sole Democratic appointee, Judge Martha Craig Daughtrey, was the only member who clearly signaled support for plaintiffs seeking recognition for gay marriage. The third judge, Deborah Cook, gave fewer indications of where she stood. But like Sutton, Cook indicated that deference should be given to voters.

The New York Times has their own take on the three judges:

Judge Sutton did suggest that the arguments offered against marriage equality were weak, saying that marriage bans would be hard to defend if subjected to the intense “heightened scrutiny” that courts apply when fundamental civil rights are at stake. But he also wondered whether legal precedents in the Sixth Circuit and the Supreme Court should prevent the panel from declaring same-sex marriage to be a fundamental right deserving court intervention.

In often caustic questions, Judge Martha Craig Daughtrey, the Clinton appointee, left no doubt where she stood. When the lawyer for Michigan said that the courts should not tamper with an institution as deeply rooted as marriage, she replied that bans on interracial marriage were also deeply rooted before the Supreme Court found them unconstitutional. “That was the law across a huge swath of the Southern states,” she said.

The third judge, Deborah L. Cook, another Bush appointee, spoke little during the unusual proceeding in which one state’s case followed another without any breaks. But she seemed to favor the right of states to ban same-sex marriage.

The audio files for the hearings have now been posted.

So now we wait for a few months for the rulings. Yes, two judges were GOP appointees, but there are a number of GOP-appointed judges among those who have ruled for marriage equality over the last year.

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.