New England School of Law OUTLaws

GLAD Internships

2005-11-29T16:54:00.000-05:00

GLAD has just announced its spring internships. Information below.
************************************************************
JOB DESCRIPTION AND INFO ABOUT GLAD:

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) is New England’s leading legalrights organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexualorientation, HIV status and gender identity and expression. GLAD iscurrently looking for interns for the 2006 Spring Semester. Below are jobdescriptions associated with the current intern openings. For full jobdescriptions and more information about GLAD, you can access our website atwww.glad.org.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS & EDUCATION INTERN
Public Affairs and Education Interns will assist the department in itsefforts to communicate GLAD’s groundbreaking legal victories to the publicand to make certain that LGBT and HIV-positive people are aware of and canexercise their legal rights. Interns will monitor media coverage of GLADand our issues, assist with outreach to the press, help research and writeeducational material for print and web publishing, maintain resource filesand coordinate educational forums. In addition, interns will represent GLADat community events and may spearhead specific projects aimed at increasingawareness of GLAD and our services.

Please send resume and cover letter to Emily Douglas at edouglas@glad.orgfor Public Affairs intern position.

DEVELOPMENT INTERN/ADMINISTRATIVE
The intern in this position will play an important role in raising fundsthat enable GLAD to meet its mission of ending discrimination against LGBTpeople. This is a great opportunity for someone who wants to have an impacton these issues in a very practical way. Responsibilities of this positioninclude assisting with mailings, drafting correspondence to donors,designing and producing newsletters and publications, conducting prospectresearch, attending donor receptions and fundraisers, and databasemanagement.

Please send resume and cover letter to Brianna Boggs at bboggs@glad.org forDevelopment Administrative position.

DEVELOPMENT INTERN/SPECIAL EVENTS
The intern in this position will play an important role in raising fundsthat enable GLAD to meet its mission of ending discrimination against LGBTpeople. The special events intern will have the opportunity to assist theDevelopment Department in planning special events and will also beresponsible for aiding in mailings, telephone solicitation, auction planningand procurement. In addition, this position will edit solicitation lettersand perform data entry/database management.

Please send resume and cover letter to Robbie Samuels, MSW, at rsamuels@glad.org for Special Events position.

Hours: Intern positions are full or part-time for a semester or full yearand are unpaid.

Dependability is a must.

Location: GLAD is easily accessible by T between Park Street and DowntownCrossing.

GLAD is located at 30 Winter Street, Suite 800, Boston, MA 02108

Reproductive Technology Bar

2005-10-04T22:09:00.000-04:00

Yikes. A proposed bill in the Indiana General Assembly would outright bar lesbians (and any women who can't prove their participation in church or faith-based activities, amont other requirements) from accessing reproductive technology, such as artificial insemination. This isn't a question of state funding - this would completely deny lesbians access to certain medical services.

I haven't found the full text of the bill, but check out some of the reported details here.

UPDATE (10/5/05): Here's the link to HFC004.

************************
UPDATE (10/6/05): "The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission," she said.

State Sen. Patricia Miller's entire statement regarding dropping the proposed bill.

NJ Domestic Partner Law - Doesn't Cover Inheritance

2005-09-17T12:39:00.000-04:00

New Jersey's domestic partnership law, which took effect in July 2004, provides some of the legal rights of marriage to same sex couples who register. Included are hospital visitation, some state tax benefits, and some benefits to state employees. It is silent, however, on the issue of inheritance and intestacy.

This silence is now being argued as not excluding inheritance by a registered domestic partner whose spouse died without a will. Betty Jordan and Rene Price registered as domestic partners in late 2004. They had been together for 19 years when Price died this past July. Their house, car and bank account had all been in Price's name, and she unfortunately did not leave a will. Under NJ law, the surviving spouse in a married couple inherits the estate if the decedent was intestate. The state has determined that this particular facet of the law does not apply to registered domestic partners. Jordan is challenging the interpretation of the domestic partner legislation. She is currently still in residence at the home and is using the car, however.

The lessons to be learned in the meantime? Don't believe it when those who opposed marriage equality but offer civil unions or domestic partnership registries as the legal equivalent. They're not. And as long as states and the federal government can choose not to recognize another state's legal marriage, civil union or domestic partnership system, even those rights aren't guaranteed.

Finally - think you don't need a will, or not yet at least? Think again.

Massachusetts: No Amendment

2005-09-14T15:02:00.000-04:00

The joint meeting of the state legislature has voted 157-39 against forwarding to the voters the proposed constitutional amendment that would bar same sex marriage but establish civil unions. The amendment passed last year 105-92 after days of heated and emotional debate, but needed to pass again this year in order to proceed. The debate on the issue this year was less than two hours.

Next up: The citizen's petition seeking to place a ballot question before the voters that would bar marriage equality, bar civil unions, and nullify existing marriages between same sex couples. The question's backers must collect 65,825 signatures before it can be brought before the legislature. A citizen's petition must be approved by 25% of the legislature in two sessions before it can go to the ballot, so the earliest we might see this at the polls is November 2008. But hopefully it will fail well before then.

Gay Couples Welcomed to British Military Housing

2005-09-12T11:00:00.000-04:00

Now that Britain has dropped its ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military, and now that Britain also has a civil union registry open to same sex couples, the Ministry of Defense has taken the next step and has opened up military housing, along with all other marriage-related benefits, to same sex couples who have registered their civil unions.

The United States, meanwhile, is getting ready to appeal a Third Circuit injunction against enforcement of the Solomon Amendment, which bars institutions of higher education from receiving federal funds if they don't provide access to military recruiters on campus. Many schools object to the US military's don't ask, don't tell policy which bars gay men and lesbians from serving openly. In Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, a group of law schools challenged the Solomon Amendment as an infringement of their rights to free expression and association. The case is scheduled for argument on December 6, 2005.

Weld Dares Not Offend

2005-09-09T16:13:00.000-04:00

Former Massachusetts Governor William Weld, now a contender for governor of New York, stated during a meeting with New York Republican party officials that:

...although he supports "100 percent equality of rights" he would not favor gay marriage because the idea offends many New Yorkers.

He also stated that unless he wins the governor's spot in New York, he no longer wishes to be addressed as "Governor," and that just "Mister" will do just fine.

Well Mr. Weld, I'm pretty sure there are a good number of voters in New York who are offended by the idea of a gubernatorial candidate catering to those who find equality offensive.

Honor Student, Forced to Transfer, Sues School

2005-09-08T14:03:00.000-04:00

A 17-year old honors student has filed suit with the ACLU against Garden Grove Unified School District for allowing discrimination and harassment. Last year she was told by the school that either she or her girlfriend would have to transfer to a different school because they kissed on campus. She had previously been suspended for a week because the two had hugged on campus. That suspension cost her a spot on the National Honor Society.

Charlene Nguon is in the top 5% of her class and takes several AP and other honors classes, but was forced out of the school for the same behavior that goes on each day by straight teen couples. After the ACLU contacted the district on Nguon's behalf this summer, she was allowed to return to her school, but with no assurances against similar disciplinary actions.

The complaint and statements from the parties can be found at ACLU of Southern California.

California: Veto

2005-09-08T06:22:00.000-04:00

California's elected Senate and Assembly passed legislation this week establishing marriage equality in the state of California. I mentioned in an earlier post that Gov. Schwarzenegger seemed to be changing his mind from his earlier statements that same sex marriage would be "fine" with him if established by court ruling or legislative action. Of course, that was when legislative attempts hadn't been successful, and a state high court ruling was perhaps years away (perhaps even past the time of the next election).

Now that an actual law has been presented to him, it's a different story. The governor announced last night that he will be vetoing the bill, and stated that the legislature's actions are in conflict with ballot initiative Prop 22, which bars California from recognizing out of state same sex marriages. Speaking once more through his press secretary: "We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote," Thompson, said. "Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto (the bill)."

Earlier this week the potential justification given was that the question is before the courts, "where it belongs." Which is it? Should this question be resolved by ballot initiative, by the courts, or by the elected legislature? It seems that the answer for antimarriage activists is that the answer should be found by whatever body doesn't favor equality.

California: One Signature to Marriage Equality

2005-09-07T07:12:00.000-04:00

The California Assembly late last night passed the Religious Freedom and Marriage Protection Act, which provides for marriage equality, while specifically stating that no religious group opposed to same sex marriage has to provide the ceremony.

The state senate already passed the legislation, so now it awaits Gov. Schwarzenegger's signature. Last year the governor stated that marriage equality would be "fine by me" if the state courts ruled on it or the legislature passed it.

His press secretary however, yesterday responded to the legislation and inquiries about whether the governor would sign it, by stating,
"The governor believes that the people spoke when they voted in Proposition 22,'' which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, Thompson said. "t's now before the courts, which is where the governor believes it belongs. He will uphold whatever the court decides.''

That doesn't sound like "fine by me." That sounds more like, okay, the legislature passed it, but let's hold off as long as possible by waiting for a court decision.

When Massachusetts courts ruled on marriage equality, the big push was that they were activist judges who should leave the lawmaking to the legislature - the elected representatives of the people. Now that California's elected representatives of the people have done their job, now it's up to the courts?

A proposed constitutional amendment to bar both marriage equality and the state's domestic partnership registry is making the rounds in California. I guess that way even if both the courts AND the legislature decide on equality, those who oppose it still have a chance to push their nonequality agenda.

Milan Hospital Under Fire for Refusing Gay Blood Donor

2005-09-06T10:02:00.000-04:00

The Policlinico hospital in Milan is under investigation by Italy's minister of health after turning away a blood donor after he stated that he is gay. Italy in the past had a blanket prohibition on men who had ever had sex with another man, but now the policy bars individuals who have had more than three sexual partners in the previous 12 months. Sexual orientation is not to be considered.

The hospital is relying on the "room for discretion" in the law, and maintain that their internal policy of barring anyone man who has had sex with another man in the previous five years as permissible.

United States policy bars men who have sex with any other man at any point since 1977. It also bars anyone who has ever exchanged sex for money or drugs. Anyone who has had sex in the last 12 months with anyone who would be barred for these reasons is also deferred.

The Roberts Court

2005-09-05T11:51:00.000-04:00

Now that Pres. Bush has modified his previous Roberts nomination to be Judge John Roberts, nominee for Supreme Court Chief Justice, we're back to our earlier question: who will he nominate to replace Justice O'Connor?

Vermont-Virginia Custody Case

2005-09-04T20:43:00.000-04:00

Last year a Virginia judge ruled in a custody case that the commonwealth did not have to acknowledge a custody judgment from Vermont, since that custody decision stemmed from a dissolved civil union, which Virginia law does not recognize.

The couple was originally from Virginia, but traveled to Vermont to obtain a civil union, then returned to Virginia. They had a child through artificial insemination, then later relocated to Vermont. About a year later they filed for a dissolution of their union. Lisa Miller, the birth mother, returned to Virginia with their daughter, while Janet Jenkins remained in Vermont. The Vermont court handling the dissolution has granted Jenkins visitation based on her parental status as the parent of a child of a civil union. Miller both appealed the Vermont judge's ruling, while also filing in Virginia court to have herself declared the child's sole parent, and to terminate Jenkins' visitations. The Virginia court did just that. The battle continued, and the Vermont Supreme Court will be hearing Miller's appeal this week, and the Court of Appeals of Virgina will hear Jenkins' appeal next week.

Of note is that both sides are waving federal laws to support their cases: Miller's attorney is relying on DOMA to support the claim that Virginia is not obligated to recognize the relationship or the judgments related to dissolution, while Jenkins' attorney is relying on the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA), which mandates that when a parent tries to override one state's custody decision by filing later in a second state, the first state's judgment must be honored.

The Vermont cases (they have two being heard on September 7 at 11:00 am) are 2004-443 and 2005-030, Lisa Miller-Jenkins v. Janet Miller-Jenkins.

The Virginia case (will be heard on September 14 during the 9:00 am session) is 2654-04-4.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, 1924-2005

2005-09-04T09:19:00.000-04:00

Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist died yesterday of thyroid cancer, after having been diagnosed with the disease last fall. Already the United States is preparing for the confirmation hearings for Judge John Roberts, nominee to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. Judge Roberts' nomination has been decried by many progressive groups, including Human Rights Campaign.

Now with the Chief Justice position vacant, Pres. Bush will have the opportunity to exert even stronger and longer-lasting influence on the high court. The president has frequently stated his admiration for sitting Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, and it will not be a surprise to see Justice Scalia heading for nomination hearings for the center chair. The president will then select a nominee for Justice Scalia's vacant position. Justice Scalia is no friend of the gay and lesbian community, nor of most progressives in general. He holds the constitution out as a stagnant document that must be applied in terms of 18th century thought and understandings of society, rather than as a series of guiding principles designed to evolve and grow as does society. His most recent controversial remarks came just last week at Chapman University in California.

Fasten your seatbelts, we're in for a bumpy ride.

NC Anti-Marriage Amendment Dies

2005-09-03T09:06:00.000-04:00

Once again a proposed marriage limitation amendment to North Carolina's constitution has failed even to come to a vote. North Carolina does have a DOMA in place, but the constitutional amendment's backers have stated their intention to try again in the spring.

Closer to NESL, remember that September 14 is arriving shortly, and with it the next convening of the Massachusetts constitutional convention, at which they'll be considering and voting on the proposed amendment here. If it passes this round, it goes to the voters in 2006. NESL OUTLaws is joining up with some other area GLBT law student groups to be a presence outside the State House during the day. Contact me if you'd like to take part, and I'll send you the info.

Joint Effort: Bake Sale!

2005-09-02T08:38:00.000-04:00

In a demonstration of building bridges, NESL OUTLaws are teaming up with the NESL Christian Group to put on a bake sale, with all proceeds going to the Red Cross to assist with their hurricane relief efforts.

The event will be this coming Tuesday, 9/6, from 11:30 to 6:30 in the NESL main lobby. So stop on by and have some treats for a good cause, and to say hello.

OUTLaws members - can you contribute baked goods or some time staffing the table? Contact me!

The Politics of Marriage

2005-08-26T08:05:00.000-04:00

Yesterday Massachusett's House Speaker Sal DiMasi predicted that the proposed amendment against marriage equality will not pass when it comes to a vote at the constitutional convention in September. A number of reasons contribute to this prediction, including last year's election results, in which no supporters of marriage equality lost their seats, some of the anti-marriage incumbents lost, and some new supporters won. Then there's the proposed ballot initiative, which many marriage foes prefer since it does not establish civil unions as an alternative to marriage. Finally, there's the fact that same-sex couples have been getting married in the state for over a year now, and the sky has yet to fall. Some legislators have commented recently that they've changed their minds after seeing so many couples enter into marriage and create a more stable union, so to speak.

The whole machination of this amendment is mind-boggling, and has created strange alliances. The amendment is known as the Travaglini-Lees amendment, as it was fashioned by Senate President Robert Travaglini and Senate minority leader Brian Lees. The amendment bars same sex marriage but authorizes civil unions. This particular amendment passed largely due to the votes of many marriage equality supporters who voted for this amendment rather than have an even more restrictive one pass, which would not recognize civil unions (similar to the ballot initiative currently being reviewed by the Attorney General). The general thinking at the time it passed was that it probably wouldn't pass a second time around, since no one really likes it. People who support marriage equality don't like it because it would take away the marriage right, while those who don't support marriage equality don't like it because they in general also don't support civil unions or any other form of recognition of gay relationships.

Sure enough, now that this ballot initiative has been introduced, many of the legislative supporters of the Travaglini amendment have expressed their intent to abandon ship, to give their support to the more hard line citizen's petition.

But not so fast! The ballot initiative hasn't yet been given the yay or nay by Attorney General Tom Reilly. The deadline for decision is a week before the constitutional convention. This thing's a mixed bag. On the one hand, many are urging him to reject it as unconstitutional (see yesterday's post). And it would be good not to have this backwards-moving potential amendment floating around, just biding its time before going to the ballot to have the electorate vote on whether to discriminate against a minority portion of the population. On the other hand, if Reilly rejects it, many of the legislative supporters of the initiative have stated they'll likely support the amendment, as it's the only thing they'll have left. Representative Philip Travis (an ardent foe of marriage for same sex couples) went so far as to say, "[It] will have to be supported, because there will be nothing to protect marriage." From where I sit, the only marriages being threatened are ones like mine, and he's one of the threats.

So I guess the moral is this - don't be comforted by Speaker DiMasi's predictions. Get out there in the next few weeks and make your voices heard by your representatives. And be sure your voice is a voice of reason, justice and equality. Let the other side take the role of shrill, angry, unreasonable, hostile and illogical protest. Let them be dismissed, not us.

Marriage: Aruba v. Holland

2005-08-25T12:10:00.000-04:00

Aruba's Superior Court has ordered that the government must register and recognize the Dutch marriage certificate of lesbian couple Charlene and Esther Oduber-Lamers. Charlene is a citizen of Holland, while Esther is a citizen of Aruba. Both countries are autonomous republics but part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (along with the Dutch Antilles). All members of the Kingdom must recognize each other's legal documents, but Aruba is refusing to do so, stating that it would violate Aruba's civil code and morals.

Aruba's government plans its final appeal (this decision was after appeal from a similar decision at the lower court), which is to the Supreme Court of Holland. Meanwhile, the couple has relocated to Holland after being harrassed for trying to register their marriage. Also, Aruba's immigration laws only allow Esther to remain on the island for 6-months per year, and do not allow her to receive health benefits from Charlene's government employer, without their marriage being recognized. She would also likely not be allowed custody of her 2-year-old biological child, who was born to Esther from an egg harvested from Charlene (see this post for related story in California).

Mass. Constitutional Convention Scheduled

2005-08-25T07:55:00.000-04:00

The second Constitutional Convention to consider the proposed MA constitutional amendment to bar marriage equality (while instituting civil unions for gay couples) has been scheduled to commence on September 14. The proposed amendment passed last year after an intensely debated and highly emotional convention which drew throngs of people who voiced their opinions on both sides of the issue. The exact same amendment must pass again at this convention if it is to proceed to the ballot in November 2006.

By that point, marriage equality will have been a fact of life in Massachusetts for two and a half years (plus the 6 months between the decision in Goodridge in November 2003 and its going into effect in May 2004).

In other news, the September 7 deadline is looming for state Attorney General (and gubernatorial hopeful) Tom Reilly to certify or reject a citizen-proposed ballot initiative that would bar marriage equality with no allowance for civil unions. If he certifies the question, supporters would need to collect 66,000 petition signatures, then pass two consecutive legislative sessions (as do legislatively introduced amendments) before going to the ballot in November 2008.

Many argue the ballot initiative is barred by the state constitution as it would overturn a judicial decision, and because of its similarity to another initiative which failed in 2002 (an initiative cannot be certified if it is "substantially the same" as any other certified in the previous two election cycles).

California: Equal Parental Rights

2005-08-23T08:14:00.000-04:00

Summer's over, school's begun. Time to start posting more frequently. Serendipity struck this morning, when on my way to work I heard on NPR that yesterday the California Supreme Court ruled on three cases involving separated lesbian couples and their parental rights. I posted on one of these cases last year, here and here.

In that case (K.M v. E.G.), the California appeals court had affirmed the lower court decision that the biological mother who had had her eggs harvested for fertilization and implantation in her partner, who then gave birth to twins, had waived her parental rights as part of the egg harvesting process and therefore had no parental rights to her children, to whom she was not only biologically related but had parented for years prior to the couple's separation.

The California Supreme Court yesterday overturned that decision. The three decisions add up to an equalization of the law between heterosexual and lesbian couples when it comes to parental rights and reproductive technology (these cases all involved lesbian couples in which one partner became pregnant through a joint decision - unknown if or how the rulings might be used in cases involving gay men who coparent). Basically, the court held that when a lesbian couple decides jointly to have a child, their later dissolution of their relationship will not dissolve any parental rights or responsibilities of either partner, whether or not the couple had registered under California's domestic partner registry system.

The three cases were K.M. v. E.G. (above. Case summary. Opinion.), Elisa B. v. Emily B. (the nonbiological ex must pay child support. Case summary. Opinion.) and Kristine H. v. Lisa R. (the ex may not invalidate a previously made declaration of parental rights. Case summary. Opinion.).
******************
UPDATE (8:35): I attended the national convention of the American Constitution Society at the end of July. The video of one of the panels, "Sexual Orientation and the Battles over Adoption, Custody and Foster Care," is available at the ACS National website. It was a lively panel that included Judge Rosemary Barkett (dissented in the 11th Cir. Court of Appeals decision upholding Florida's ban on adoption by gay or lesbian individuals or couples), Matthew Coles of the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project, Prof. Lynn Wardle of Brigham Young University Law School , Prof. Kenji Yoshino of Yale Law School and moderator Prof. Suzanne Goldberg of Rutgers School of Law - Newark. Check out the video if you have some time available.
*****************
UPDATE (8/25/05): Interesting article on these decisions and how anti-gay groups are now arguing against "the best interests of the children."

Also, a similar case was argued before the Supreme Court of Washington earlier this year, but the decision has not yet come down. The case is In re parentage of L.B.; Sue Ellen (Mian) Carvin v. Page Britain, and is an appeal from 121 Wash.App. 460. In this case the nonbiological mother of a child conceived by mutual agreement and raised together was denied visitation or joint custody after the couple's breakup. The lower court dismissed her action seeking establishment of parentage, and the appeals court reversed and remanded in that she can petition for shared parentage or visitation, and also for visitation under a third-party statute. HRC has a concise rundown of Washington's laws guiding the courts in custody decisions.

Birth Certificate Strike Out

2005-07-22T11:13:00.000-04:00

Governor Romney, who has not been shy about his disdain for marriage equality or same sex parents, is angering town and city clerks again by advising hospitals to manually alter birth certificates issued to lesbian couples when one of them has given birth. The clerks have been receiving birth certificates from hospitals with the word "Father" crossed off, whited-out or highlighted with an asterisk, and replaced with the phrase "Second Parent."

You may be thinking, "Hey, what's wrong with that?" Marriage licenses have been changed now to say Party A and Party B, isn't this just an extension of equality?

The problem is that the official marriage license forms were changed at the printer. Nothing is struck out or altered. This change was done after Goodridge, with no specific legislation ordering that it be done. Romney now claims that he cannot order a change in the official birth certificate form without specific legislation ordering that it be done. This is a similar argument to the one he made in support of his pulling out the 1913 law barring couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would not be recognized in their home state.

With the birth certificates having been altered from their issued format, their legitimacy can be called into question by anyone to whom the recorded certificate is presented as identification or proof of parentage. By telling hospitals to alter the official birth certificate forms, the governor has both undermined the legal standing of legally recognized same sex parents and strengthened his own standing should anyone question his conservative values in any expected future presidential campaign. This is the same man who not so long ago vehemently called for John Kerry to resign his US Senate position because he was campaigning in a presidential race. He stated that Sen. Kerry could not adequately fulfill his obligations to his Massachusetts constituents while simultaneously courting a national audience.

Perhaps the governor should heed his own words instead of causing harm to the states' citizens in an effort to build his own political reputation.

OUTLaws TWEN Board

2005-07-21T09:59:00.000-04:00

NESL OUTLaws now has our own TWEN board! You have to be a registered Westlaw user, with New England School of Law. Just go to TWEN, select Drop/Add Courses, and select the OUTLaws course. We'll still be maintaining our Yahoo! board, which is open to the general public, but the TWEN board will provide us lots of new tools to use for organizing OUTLaws over the course of the year. I've added a link to the TWEN site in the links section on the right-hand sidebar.

I'm looking forward to a successful 2005-2006 year for OUTLaws!

Marriage in Canada

2005-07-21T09:37:00.000-04:00

Marriage became an official option for same sex couples in Canada yesterday, when the bill that the legislature passed on Tuesday was signed into law. The new law applies across Canada. Prior to this, marriage equality was legal only in certain provinces. The legislation clearly excempts religious officials from performing marriages which their religion does not recognize.

Canada does not require that either party to a marriage be a Canadian citizen, but be aware that if you travel up north for your marriage, it might not be recognized when you return home.

Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands and Massachusetts also have marriage equality. I'm proud to say that I've now been legally married (so long as I remain within the borders of my state) for almost three weeks now, and my wife and I couldn't be happier.

Cheers, Canada!

Mass. Marriage Ban Initiative

2005-06-15T13:15:00.000-04:00

Not satisfied with the legislature's proposed constitutional amendment that would limit marriage to one man/one woman but at the same time allow civil unions for same sex couples, a group of Massachusetts anti-marriage activists, both citizens and lawmakers, announced yesterday that they will be announcing tomorrow their their ballot initiative petition for a state constitutional amendment both limiting marriage and barring civil unions.

First, let me just toss in an aside that these announcements of announcements make me nuts. They're not announcing it tomorrow - they announced it yesterday. They'll be providing more details tomorrow, both regarding the petition itself and the people and groups behind it. I know, I know - it's a strategy designed to ensure a large turnout at the "official" announcement tomorrow. It still bothers me.

But back to the initiative. While the legislative proposal has already passed the required simple majority votes at the Constitutional Convention last year, and if it passes again this year (the convention is expected this fall) will be presented to the state's voters at the 2006 elections, this ballot initiative will not be able to go to the voters until the 2008 elections. Before getting there, though, the initiative's backers must convince 66,500 registered voters to sign their petition to limit marriage and deny legal recognition of or protection to same sex couples by way of civil unions. These signatures must be gathered between September 21 and November 23. If they get these signatures (and enough of the signatures pass scrutiny), then 50 of the state's 200 legislators must approve the measure in two consecutive constitutional conventions before the measure could go to the voters. The earliest it could be on the ballot is in the fall of 2008, when it would need a simple majority in order to have the marriage limitation and civil union ban written into the constitution.

Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus co-chair Arline Isaacson (who spoke at NESL this spring) questions the group's strategy, as it will likely lead to defeat of the legislative proposal and delay the general vote for two years. Many who voted for the marriage limiting/civil union establishing compromise amendment oppose the idea of civil unions, but supported the measure as the one most likely to pass last year (which it did). If these legislators see an option more palatable to their desire to invalidate same sex relationships, they are likely to vote this one down at the constitutional convention this fall. At that point same sex couples could continue marrying until at least November 2008, giving the citizenry a total of 4.5 years to experience the world not ending while thousands more couples choose to enter into the legally binding committment of marriage.

Exactly who all the backers of this petition are isn't clear yet, but they include State Representative Emile J. Goguen, who last year led the effort to impeach the Supreme Judicial Court justices in the majority on Goodridge, and Ronald A. Crews, former head of the Massachusetts Family Institute. Crews lost his bid to become a state rep. in last fall's elections. The MFI is expected to back the petition, but it has not yet made a formal statement. If you're interested in keeping tab on what the MFI is keeping tab, you can check their weblog. Always good to know what the other side is talking about.

NJ Appeals Court: No Same-Sex Marriage

2005-06-14T12:40:00.000-04:00

An appellate court in NJ today affirmed 2-1 a lower court decision that barring same sex couples from marrying is not a violation of the NJ state constitution. The dissenter argued that denying same sex couples from marrying bars them from the right to marry their (individual adult, nonrelated, consenting, etc.) partner of choice, thereby effectively denying them the right to marry. The case will inevitably be appealed to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. This is the same course that Goodrich went through in Massachusetts, with the plaintiffs losing at the trial and appellate level, but prevailing at the state high court level.

The NJ trial and appellate courts held that the state legislature would have to amend the state's marriage laws before same sex couples could legally marry.

The appellate decision in Lewis v. Harris can be found here.

Boston Pride 2005

2005-06-10T18:29:00.000-04:00

NESL OUTLaws will be taking part in tomorrow's Boston Pride parade, so if you're in the area, please join us - remember that you don't have to be GLBT to be an OUTLaw, straight allies are always welcome!

We've been assigned to Section E of the parade, directly behind the Ramrod float - so expect it to be raucus!!!!! We'll be assembling on Exeter Street, between Boylston St. and Blagden St. They request that all marchers be in place "on the left side of the street" by 11:00 am tomorrow (6/11). We are Group E2.

I have to hit the registration table for us between 9:30 and 10:00, so after that I'll be at our assembly area. Remember that we're a marching only group, so no motor vehicles.
Please come join us if you possibly can, and bring your friends and families!!! Wear NESL clothing/schwag if you have it. Hope to see you there!

Texas Governor Angers Gay Veterans

2005-06-08T11:06:00.000-04:00

After signing a bill this past Sunday proposing a ballot initiative to ban same sex marriages, Texas Governor Rick Perry held a press conference in the library of the Calvary Christian Academy. The signing ceremony had been held in the gymnasium of the school. One of the questions presented to him was what, if anything, he would say about the bill to gay and lesbian service members returning to Texas after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. His response:

"Texans made a decision about marriage and if there's a state that has more lenient views than Texas, then maybe that's a better place for them to live."

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network and the Lesbian and Gay Rights Lobby of Texas have issued statements calling for the governor to apologize to the estimated 66,000 gay and lesbian veterans residing in Texas.

Keeping Pressure on Bloch

2005-06-08T08:24:00.000-04:00

Human Rights Campaign and Federal Globe are keeping up the pressure on the White House to do something about Special Counsel Scott Bloch's insistence that gay federal employees have no protection against workplace discrimination.

Following up on the initial criticism against Bloch's recent statements before a Senate committee, HRC and Federal GLOBE (GLBT federal employees' association) have issued a joint statement and sent a letter to President Bush, calling for the administration to convince Bloch either to change his official position or to resign.

Pseudo Marriages

2005-06-07T09:57:00.000-04:00

Pope Benedict XVI continued his pre-elevation assault on the GLBT community yesterday in Rome during an address on the family. "The various forms of the dissolution of matrimony today, like free unions, trial marriages and going up to pseudo-matrimonies by people of the same sex, are rather expressions of an anarchic freedom that wrongly passes for true freedom of man," he said.

He also condemned divorce and the use of contraception. Human Rights Campaign has issued a statement expressing concern at the Pope's blanket condemnation, citing a long church tradition of love and compassion, and reiterating that marriage equality legislation does not seek that any particular church perform or even recognize same sex marriages, but instead are concerned with governmental recognition.

Driving While Gay

2005-06-07T09:49:00.000-04:00

365gay.com reports that police in Sicily took it upon themselves to suspend a man's driver's license pending an investigation into his suitability to drive, when during a "routine road check" they discovered that he is gay. The twenty-three year old man challenged the suspension in court, where fortunately he prevailed, but unfortunately the written court ruling revealed an attitude not much better than that of the roadside officers:

"It is clear that sexual preferences do not in any way influence a person's ability to drive motor cars safely." The judges added that homosexuality "cannot be considered a true and proper psychiatric illness, being a mere personality disturbance."

The Italian GLBT community, and activists worldwide, are feeling personally disturbed over the judicial statement.

Transgender "Not a Good Fit" at Library of Congress

2005-06-02T14:57:00.000-04:00

Diane Schroer retired last year from her 25 year career in the US Army, with the rank of Colonel and a record that included service as an Airborne Ranger qualified Special Forces officer, 450+ parachute jumps, the Defense Superior Service Medal, and being the head of a "classified nation security operation."

For the next stage in her life, she applied for, was offered and accepted a job at the Library of Congress, as senior terrorism research analyst.

One catch - Schroer's military career and Library of Congress interview were as David Schroer, before she had completed her transition from male to female. Since her Army retirement she had been living as a man during work hours but as a woman on her own time. Prior to starting her new position at the Library of Congress, she met with her soon-to-be boss to discuss the situation, and to suggest that she be Diane from day one on the job. The next day, the no-longer-to-be boss called Schroer and rescinded the job offer, because it was "not a good fit."

The ACLU filed a discrimination suit against the Library of Congress today on behalf of Schroer. You can download a copy of the federal court complaint from this ACLU page.

SJC: No Halt to Marriage

2005-05-27T13:51:00.000-04:00

C.J. Doyle last year sought that the stay on the judgment in Goodridge (scheduled to go into effect in May of last year) be extended until such time as a possible constitutional amendment could be brought to the voters. His request was rejected by the single justice to whom he brought his request, and same sex marriage became a fact as of last May.

Doyle brought his appeal to the full court, asking that the now entered Goodridge judgment be recalled and a new, indefinite stay put on its enforcement. Today the full court affirmed the decision by the single justice.

Special Counsel: No Protection for Gay Federal Employees

2005-05-25T14:47:00.000-04:00

Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch is again receiving harsh criticism, this time for his statements to the Senate Homeland Security and Government affairs subcommittee on oversight of government management, the federal workforce and the District of Columbia. During his testimony, he stated that despite the executive order mandating that gay federal employees would be protected from discrimination signed by President Clinton, despite President Bush having pledged to honor that order, and despite the House of Representatives having affirmed support of the order when it was challenged early on (voting 252 to 176), gay federal workers have no protection from workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The White House last year stated:

"Longstanding federal policy prohibits discrimination against federal employees based on sexual orientation. President Bush expects federal agencies to enforce this policy and to ensure that all federal employees are protected from unfair discrimination at work."

When asked if this statement applies to his office, he replied: "It is binding on me," Bloch said, "but it is not something I can prosecute in my agency. . . . I am limited by the enforcement statutes that you give me."

Bloch's statements are being criticized by Log Cabin Republicans, Human Rights Campaign, and Federal GLOBE, and a number of Members of Congress, among others.

New FDA Rule On Sperm Donation

2005-05-06T14:44:00.000-04:00

365gay.com reports that the FDA's new rules that become live May 25 include a ban on anonymous sperm donation by any man who has had sex with another man in the last five years. There is no screening process on that addresses whether the prospective donor has engaged in high risk sexual activity, whether it is unprotected sex, encounters with prostitutes, straight or gay.

The FDA rejected criticism that screening procedures would be more effective, that routine procedures such as freezing donations for 6 months until a follow up HIV test comes back negative for the donor, and that HIV transission in the heterosexual population is rising. Instead the rules focus on a blanket ban on sexually active gay men. Lambda Legal has protested the rule change as "policy based on bigotry." Lambda Legal submitted a response to the FDA regarding the then-proposed changes.

Boston.com poll

2005-05-05T19:04:00.000-04:00

Subject: Boston.com Poll on Marriage, Please Vote!
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2005 8:10 AM

Boston.com has a story today about the state Democratic Party, which is expected to add support for same-sex marriage to the party platform when it meets at its convention next weekend.

Boston.com is running a poll:

The party is poised to add official support for gay marriage to its platform, despite a nationwide backlash.

Is this a good idea?

Please vote!

The choices are:

Yes, It's the law in Massachusetts and it's the right thing to do
No, Gay marriage is wrong
No, Politically, this is a bad idea

So far, YES is winning, let's keep it that way!

Solomon Amendment On the Docket

2005-05-02T11:49:00.000-04:00

The Supreme Court announced today that it will hear the government's appeal of the 3rd Circuit decision that invalidated the Solomon Amendment. The law was challenged by a group of 25 law schools who opposed the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell restrictions on gay service members. Solomon would pull federal funding from any school which restricts military recruiters on campus. Interestingly, the 3rd Circuit's decision cited the Supreme Court's decision that allowed the Boy Scouts to bar gay scoutmasters based on the group's right of free expression, and extended that right to law schools, which the court held have the right to bar discriminatory groups such as the military. The schools have specific policies barring discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The case is Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (docket 04-1152). The original case has not yet been tried. The challenge is to an injunction barring enforcement of the Amendment until the completion of the lower court trial. The lower court denied the injunction, but the 3rd Circuit found it likely that the plaintiffs (Forum) would win their case on the First Amendment claims. The 3rd Circuit's decision has been stayed until the case is heard at the Supreme Court next term.

The District Court's denial of preliminary injunction (and of the government's motion to dismiss) can be found at ACLU-NJ. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal's reversal can be found at the 3rd Circuit's website. The government's petition for cert. can be found at the Dept. of Justice.

In February, a US District Court in Connecticut found the Solomon Amendment to be constitutional, in a case brought by faculty members at Yale Law School.

Some Good News in Virgina (For a Change)

2005-04-22T18:37:00.000-04:00

The Virginia Supreme Court today ordered the Virginia Department of Vital Records to issue birth certificates to same sex parents of children born in Virginia. The commonwealth allows single gay men and lesbians to adopt, and in some cases those adoptive parents have then moved to states that permit co-adoption.

"I killed them so that we could be together."

2005-04-15T10:26:00.000-04:00

Girls Get Life for Murdering Grandparents

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=718&e=10&u=/ap/20050415/ap_on_re_us/grandparents_stabbed
FAYETTEVILLE, Ga. - A 15-year-old girl and her ex-girlfriend pleaded guilty Thursday to stabbing her grandparents to death last summer so the young couple could be together. Holly Harvey told the judge that while she was knifing her 73-year-old grandmother, "my eyes were closed the whole time."

Harvey pleaded guilty to two counts of malice murder and was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences. She will not be eligible for parole for 20 years. Sandy Ketchum, 16, was sentenced to three life terms for murder and armed robbery, to be served concurrently. She could be eligible for parole in 10 years.

As part of her plea, Harvey detailed how she killed the couple.

She said she and Ketchum had stayed out all night, then spent the morning of the killings listening to music in her basement bedroom. That was when Ketchum suggested stealing the grandparents' truck "to get something to calm us down," Harvey said.
"'We'll have to kill them to do that,'" Harvey said she responded.
"But I didn't mean nothing by that," she told Judge Pascal English.
Ketchum first suggested hitting them in the head with a lamp, then suggested getting a knife, Harvey said. "I got the biggest knife I could find out of the kitchen," she said, adding that they practiced stabbing a mattress to see if the knife was sharp enough.

When the grandparents came downstairs to get a suitcase, Harvey said she stabbed her grandmother. Harvey said her grandfather pinned her down, and she stabbed him in the chest. She chased him as he ran upstairs and tried to call for help, pulling the phone out of the wall, Harvey said.

"He grabbed the knife and I thought he was going to stab me," Harvey said. She said she took the knife from him and started attacking him.

When the judge asked Harvey why she did it, the teen said, "For Sandy," and added, "So that we could be together."

The girls were arrested the day after the killings at a beach house on Tybee Island, about four hours away. Police say they found a to-do list of sorts scrawled in ink on Harvey's arm: "kill, keys, money, jewelry."

Does anyone see a problem with this? Is this what the world has come down to?!?!

"We are the face of gay marriage. We are a family."

2005-04-13T12:29:00.000-04:00

Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend the Judiciary Committee hearing on same-sex marriage at the State House. I arrived at 2PM and promptly donned an “I DO: support Mass. equality” sticker before I wedged myself into a small and stuffy courtroom. For three hours I stood stock still while listening to testimony on three proposed bills; one which would define marriage as between one man and one woman (DOMA), one which would nullify gay marriages that have occurred since May 2005, and one that would have Margaret Marshall (who decided the Goodridge case) removed from the bench.

In front of the room sat the panel, which consisted of senators, representatives, and other legislators. The panel heard a variety of witnesses, who could sign up to speak for three minutes each. I’ve never seen such an array of people in my life, and I’ve never felt such concentrated hatred in my life. The first man I had the pleasure of hearing started off with how Mass. let “4 black folks run rampant on the Constitution.” Needless to say, my blood began to boil almost immediately. During my three-hour stay, I heard everything from how legalized gay marriage made a comedienne’s job harder to how we had to act quickly to stop “renegade” judges from making Mass. a “lawless” state to a song-and-dance from a “former homosexual.” Luckily, I also got to hear testimony from the other side. A group of lesbian mothers brought their children into the court and told their stories, standing behind their motto of “We are the face of gay marriage. We are a family.” The waterworks started soon after, when a clean-cut man in a business suit got on one knee in front of the panel and re-enacted proposing to his now-husband. He turned to Senator Creedon, the chairman, and with tears choking his voice said, “This was the first time I had ever legally been able to do this. This is my life; don’t take it away from me.”

Clearly, the emotional level was quite high. But, I also learned a lot from being at the hearing. For one, did anyone know that there are 10,000 children in MA alone being raised by gay and lesbian parents? And has anyone considered the effect on these children if their recently-married gay parents lose their marriage license? I was up in arms for most of the meeting, but one thing that the pro-amendment side said sliced through me like ice and sobered me up – Margaret Marshall engaged in judicial activism. She spoke at a MGLBA dinner prior to deciding this case, and although we don’t remove our judges from the bench because we don’t like their decisions, some are claiming that Marshall was not an impartial judge. They put aside their hate for a minute to attack the legality of the trial, and I was afraid. I don’t think a lot of people understood this, but I did, and I felt sick to my stomach. I don’t think that her conduct justifies removal from the bench, but then again who am I?

The bottom line is, this fight is not over. It may never be over. When Goodridge was decided, we rejoiced and moved on with our lives. We must not forget that we need to protect our recently-acquired equality. We are just normal people looking for some permanence and security in our normal lives. Like in the past, Massachusetts is ahead of the rest of the nation in ending discrimination and we need to do everything we can to help make sure these bills are not passed. As one man shouted in his testimony, we need to “Defend, not Amend, the Constitution!” We need to remind those who don’t agree that our founding fathers meant what they said – they created the Constitution to protect the people, and they meant that “all men are created equal,” and this includes the homosexual population. We cannot stop this fight.

State House Judiciary Committee Meeting April 12

2005-04-11T19:02:00.000-04:00

MassEquality has sent out an alert that the Massachusetts Joint Committee on the Judiciary will be having a hearing tomorrow (4/12/05) at 1:00 pm in Room B-2 of the State House. The committee will be addressing a number of bills relating to marriage equality, some in favor, some not. MassEquality is requesting that supporters of marriage equality show up if they can to counter the anti-equality people that are also expected.

One of our executive board members may be able to attend. Perhaps she'll post a report from the front lines later on tomorrow!!!

Event - Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition

2005-04-10T12:25:00.000-04:00

Forwarded from GLBT folk at Harvard Law School:
**********************************************************
The Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition is organizing a meeting to share information and coordinate strategies for ending discrimination against transgender people on college campuses in Massachusetts.

Who: Anyone associated with a college--students, staff, faculty, and alumni.

What: We will discuss current and future organizing around issues such as adding "gender identity and expression" to non-discrimination policies, trans-friendly housing and health care, gender-neutral bathrooms, trans 101 trainings, and more.

Why: We want to create a college activist network so that everyone can share strategies, tools, and success stories.

When: Wednesday, April 13, 7-8 p.m.

Where: Harvard College, Sever Hall 209, NOTE THE ROOM CHANGE!

Directions: From the Harvard Square T main exit, make a u-turn and head down Mass Ave. Cross Mass Ave. at the light opposite Au Bon Pain. Do not enter the gate, but walk down Mass Ave. away from the T stop. Turn left into the next gate (opposite Holyoke St.). Walk straight ahead and bear right once you walk past the beige Boylston Hall. Head diagonally past Widener Library and keep heading diagonally across the quad until you run into Sever.
http://map.harvard.edu

For questions about the meeting, email Noah Lewis or call MTPC at 617-983-0219.

To learn more about MTPC, visit the MTPC website.

Seminar On Same Sex Divorce

2005-04-07T10:00:00.000-04:00

The BBA and the MLGBA Family Law Section will be holding a family law seminar on same-sex divorce on April 12, 2005 at the BBA from 5-7PM. Featured speakers are: Joyce Kauffman, Esq.; Betsy Zeldin, Esq.; Probate and Family Court Judges Angela Ordonez, Edward Donnelly, Jr. and Benjamin Kaplan; and Appeals COurt Judge Barbara Lenk.

For those of you who are not already members of the MLGBA, I encourage you to join. Membership is only $15 per year for students. For more information, visit www.mlgba.org

General Meeting and Elections

2005-03-28T13:18:00.000-05:00

We'll be having a general meeting to hold elections for next year's executive board on Wednesday, April 6. We've got Room 501 from 4:30-5:45, but don't feel like you can't take part if you can't be present the whole time.

For next year, we'll be returning to the format of President and Vice-President rather than having Co-Chairs. There will also be a Secretary and Treasurer, as in the past.

As you may know, one of our current Co-Chairs, Spencer Jenkins, is Editor in Chief of the Law Review for next year, so he will be stepping out of the running for the OUTLaws executive board for next year.

Our other current Co-Chair, Casey Smith, is running for Vice-President for next year.

I'll be running for President for the coming year, which leaves my current Secretary post open.

Chris Reamer, our current Treasurer, may be away first semester next year. She has offered her assistance if she is here, and definitely in the second semester, but we do need someone to run for the post.

Any and all OUTLaws members are welcome to put their names in the running for any of these four posts. Please contact me or any of the current board members if you want to run or have any questions. If anyone cannot attend but wishes to vote or run, please let me know and we will make accomodations for absentee voting and to have statements posted/read for absentee candidates.
****************************
UPDATE (3/30/05 4:48 pm): Terri Harkins has put her name in the ring for the Secretary post on the board for next year. We still have an opening for Treasurer, and of course anyone is welcome to put their name in for any of the other positions.

Road Block for Atlanta

2005-03-17T17:38:00.000-05:00

The gay couples hoping to gain family membership at the Druid Hills Golf Club in Atlanta have hit a major obstacle: the Georgia legislature has sent a bill to Governor Sonny Purdue which will:

Allow private clubs to exclude gays.
Nullify any portion of an ordinance which requires equal treatment of same-sex and married couples.
Bar munipalities from requiring organizations to offer domestic partner benefits to gay couples.

This will strip Atlanta's Human Relations Ordinance of its requirement that city-licensed businesses not discriminate against GLBT persons. Two members of the Druid Hills Golf Club had been relying on this ordinance in their efforts to include their partners in family memberships rather than having to purchase separate individual memberships.

In December Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin had imposed $500/day fines against the club for their noncompliance. The club immediately filed suit, and it is largely understood that this battle is what prompted the present anti-human rights state action.

Movie Night - The Wedding Banquet

2005-03-15T13:58:00.000-05:00

OUTLaws and the Minority Students Association are cosponsoring a movie night this week, with a showing of Ang Lee's award-winning (and Academy Award and Golden Globe nominated) film The Wedding Banquet.

The event will be in Room 301 on Thursday, March 17, from 8-10 pm, and Chinese food will be served. All are welcome!

Mass. SJC to Hear 1913 Law Challenge

2005-02-23T13:04:00.000-05:00

The out-of-state couples who lost their lower court challenge to the 1913 Massachusetts law which bans issuance of marriage licenses to out-of-state couples whose marriage would not be allowed in their home state have been granted a direct appeal to the state's high court. Final briefs are due at the Supreme Judicial Court by May 27. No oral argument date has been set.

Governor Romney, meanwhile, has been courting national support for an expected presidential run in 2008. Part of his challenge has been trying to reinforce the idea that he opposes both gay marriage and civil unions, although for political reasons he supported the "compromise" amendment which would ban same-sex marriage but establish civil unions. Last year Gov. Romney exhausted all his possible means (and tried some that probably weren't actually within his power) to prevent the Goodridge decision from coming into effect on May 18.

Part of his recent speech in South Carolina to a Republican group included a discussion of Goodridge and this statement regarding gay families: "Some are actually having children born to them."

Yes, Governor. Gay couples are having children. Gay couples have been having children for decades. Gay people can legally adopt their partners children in Massachusetts. Gay individuals and couples can foster and adopt children in Massachusetts. Gay couples can legally marry in Massachusetts. And these people, their friends, relatives, and other supporters of their rights all vote.

Right now you are our governor. It would be nice if you remembered that we are equal citizens of your state.

No Massachusetts Con-Con Until the Fall

2005-02-10T09:05:00.000-05:00

Boston.com reports today that State House insiders have stated that Senate President Robert E. Travaglini will not call a constitutional convention until the fall. The main purpose of the con-con would be to hold a second vote on the proposed amendment that would ban gay marriage but establish civil unions. Travaglini reportedly wants the legislature to spend the spring and summer focusing on more pressing issues.

In related news, the American Constitution Society of NESL will be hosting Sen. Pres. Travaglini on Wednesday, April 20 to speak to the NESL community. The event will be from 3:30-4:30, in the Cherry Room. I hope everyone will take advantage of this opportunity to hear from the senate president, to ask questions and to make your positions known on the issue of the proposed amendment, which Travaglini co-sponsored.

NYC to Appeal to NY High Court

2005-02-08T16:12:00.000-05:00

New York City will be requesting the Court of Appeals to take a direct appeal of Hernandez v. Robles, last week's lower court case which cleared the way for same sex marriage in New York City. If the state's high court accepts the direct appeal of this case which turns solely on a state constitutional question, a decision could be reached within one or two months. That decision would be binding statewide.

NY Court: Marriage Licenses for Gay Couples

2005-02-04T14:42:00.000-05:00

A lower court in New York has held that the state's Domestic Relations Law violates the state constitution by barring gay couples from marrying, and has enjoined the City Clerk of NYC from refusing to issue licenses to otherwise qualified couples. Enforcement of the order has been stayed for 30 days.

HRC on State of the Union 2005

2005-02-03T09:41:00.000-05:00

The Human Rights Campaign sent Pres. Bush a letter containing some suggested statements for his then upcoming State of the Union address.

Sadly, but as expected, he did not heed their advice. The HRC has now issued a response to the speech. In the HRC's view, the bad news was the renewed call for a constitutional ban on marriage for gay couples; the good news was the call to reauthorize the Ryan White CARE Act; the concern is that the government will continue to bar full dissemination of information regarding HIV.

US District Court, CT: Solomon Amendment Unconstitutional

2005-02-02T16:13:00.000-05:00

From How Appealing comes the news that on Monday the US District Court for the District of Connecticut decided in Burt v. Rumsfeld that the Solomon Amendment, as applied to Yale Law School, is unconstitutional. Judge Janet Hall included in her decision in this case brought by faculty members of Yale Law School that the application of the Solomon Amendment violated the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights, by compelled speech and association. From the decision: Accordingly, the Solomon Amendment is hereby declared unconstitutional as applied, and the defendant is enjoined from enforcing it against Yale University based upon Yale Law School’s Non-Discrimination Policy. The Clerk is ordered to close the case.

The decision can be found in two parts on LegalAffairs.org, here and here. In addition to the bottom line of the holding, the decision is extremely detailed and informative about the Solomon Amendment, the history of Department of Defense and Congressional activities regarding military recruitment, and the First Amendment.

Additionally, here is a message published today from the Harold Hongju Koh, Dean of Yale Law School regarding military recruitment at YLS in light of this decision. Bottom line: I am gratified by Judge Hall's judgment, which seems to me clearly correct. I believe that her ruling brings us closer to the day when all members of our community have an equal opportunity to serve in our Nation's armed forces. This Thursday, February 3, 2005, the Spring 2005 Interviewing Program will begin. In light of the District Court's opinion and injunction which parallel the Third Circuit's ruling, I am notifying military recruiters that the Yale Law School will enforce its nondiscrimination policy during the Spring 2005 Interviewing Program without exception.

Go, Yale!

Southwestern Univ. Law Review Symposium

2005-02-01T15:57:00.000-05:00

Oh, to live in L.A. I did for a short while, but now I'm firmly in Boston, 3,000 miles away from this week's symposium at Southwestern University School of Law: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Issues and the Civil Rights Agenda.

The symposium takes place this Friday, February 4 - full brochure here - and is cosponsored by the Lesbian and Gay Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, the Native American Law Student Association and OUTLaw.

South African Airline Discrimination Case Tossed

2005-01-27T19:15:00.000-05:00

Last October NESL OUTLaws posted about a discrimination case being brought against British Airways based on an incident that started when he kissed his partner during the flight.

After that post, British Airways had the case dismissed on the grounds that the suit was based on the Warsaw Conventions, which only apply to cases of death or serious injury. The plaintiff has appealed, and has lost again. He was given the option to amend his claim to be grounded on a different premise, however.

Out in the Workplace

2005-01-25T13:19:00.000-05:00

The various LGBT student groups from Massachusetts law schools and the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Bar Association are presenting a workshop: "Out in the Workplace: A Workshop for Law Students and New Lawyers" on Tuesday, February 1st at 6:00 pm at Suffolk University Law School. Here's the official announcement:
***************************************************

Tuesday, February 1, 2005 at 6:00pm, Suffolk University Law School, First Floor Function Room.

Come listen to a panel of distinguished guests speak about the issues(and non-issues) of being out in the workplace. Law students and newlawyers are encouraged to attend. Guests will include:

Dr. Alex Coleman, psychologist and attorney
Nima Eshghi, Esq., Director of Professional Development, Palmer &Dodge LLP
Alec Gray, Esq., General Counsel and Director of Legal and Support Services, Massachusetts Trial Court
Robert Quinan, Esq., Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General, Government Bureau
Mark Weber, Esq., Assistant Dean for Career Services, Harvard Law School
Steve Weiner, Mintz Levin

Directly afterward, the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association will host a social event at Silvertone Bar and Grill. This event was organized by queer student organizations from several Massachusetts law schools in conjunction with MLGBA.

Arline Isaacson Speaking at NESL

2005-01-20T17:04:00.000-05:00

Arline Isaacson, co-chair of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, will be speaking at New England School of Law this coming Tuesday, January 25, at 6:00 pm in the Cherry Room.

Come hear one of Boston’s leading lobbyists, who will share insight about her work on Beacon Hill, and will field your questions about Goodridge, the proposed constitutional amendment, life as a lobbyist and her predictions for the coming months.

The topics will include her experiences as a political lobbyist during the 2004 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention and about what is to come at the 2005 Convention.

Adoption: Good News, Bad News (Maybe)

2005-01-10T13:44:00.000-05:00

Two Supreme Court actions today regarding adoption by gay men and lesbians.

First, the good news. Israel's Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in a case involving a lesbian couple that each partner may legally adopt the other's children. The couple have three children through in vitro fertilization. From the decision: "The need to provide the children and the family unit in which they are growing up a legal framework, fits the court's obligation to create social norms and stand strongly against the intolerance of parts of society toward those who are different," said Justice Saviona Rotlevi, writing for the majority.

Now for the bad news (maybe). The United States Supreme Court declined without comment an appeal challenging Florida's blanket bank on adoption by gay men and lesbians. Previously a 3-judge panel (including controversial Bush recess appointee Judge William Pryor) on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ban, and the full Court of Appeals declined to review the panel decision.

So the ban remains in place in Florida. However, I would say that I'd rather have the Supreme Court hold off for a while and perhaps improve the chances of success for those challenging the ban than to have the Supreme Court hear the case and likely issue an opinion supporting the current Florida law.

Israel Will Not Deport Gay Partners of Citizens

2004-12-31T13:28:00.000-05:00

Judge Uzi Vogelman of the Tel Aviv District Court, in deciding in favor of a gay couple who had filed an emergency petition against deportation, has ruled that Israel's ban on deporting foreign citizens who are married to Israeli citizens should apply to common law marriages as well, and has included same sex relationships in this category.

The couple were represented by The Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

Fines for Druid Hills Golf Club

2004-12-28T08:55:00.000-05:00

There's been a move in the long standoff between the City of Atlanta and the Druid Hills Golf Club over the club's refusal to treat same sex spouses on equal footing as opposite sex couples.

Atlanta has had a human relations ordinance in place since 2000, and at the start of this year the commission that reviews allegations of violations determined that the golf club was indeed operating contrary to the requirements of the ordinance. The club refused to change their policies, and Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin attempted to have the two sides (the club and the members requesting the benefit) work out the issue through mediation, but those efforts failed.

Mayor Franklin has now announced that the city solicitor will be fining the golf club $500 per day for a maximum of 180 days ($90,000) unless the benefits are extended to domestic partners of gay club members. The club's board of directors has announced their intention to maintain their current policies and to fight the validity of the fine. Georgia state law bars gay marriage, and some state legislators are attempting to invalidate the Atlanta ordinance. Mayor Franklin is having the ordinance reviewed, and if necessary modified to strengthen it against possible legal challenges.

HRC Report on GLBT Related Legislation, 2004

2004-12-22T13:18:00.000-05:00

The Human Rights Campaign has published their 2004 report on state legislation with GLBT impacts over the past year. The comprehensive report gives summaries and state-by-state breakdowns of various types of bills introduced in state houses across the country, as well as a thorough appendix in which you can find the text of each bill.

Good light reading for any GLBT law students who are now celebrating a few weeks off between semesters. It's only 62 pages long, and full of colorful graphs!!!!!

Social Security and Marriage Licenses

2004-12-21T11:32:00.000-05:00

Apparently the Social Security Administration has for months now had a policy that it wouldn't recognize marriage licenses as ID for name changes, not only from New Paltz, but also from Asbury Park, NJ, Multnomah County, OR, and Sandoval County, NM - all the hotbeds of contested same sex marriage events this year. The nonrecognition applies to ALL marriage licenses, regardless of the parties involved.

But now the SSA has withdrawn their exclusion of licenses as ID from Multnomah County and New Paltz. Asbury Park and Sandoval County, however, are still on the no-go list.

Apparently it's no problem for Massachusetts couples, but it won't get you anything but a name change since Social Security is a federal benefit, and federal agencies are barred from recognizing same sex couples.

An earlier story revealed that SSA publicly issued a directive regarding not recognizing San Francisco marriage licenses, but this new article doesn't mention what became of that order. A Philadelphia Inquirer article today reports that SSA will accept San Francisco issued licenses that list "Groom" and "Bride" but not those that list "First Applicant" and "Second Applicant."

Name Changes in New Paltz

2004-12-16T15:24:00.000-05:00

In a move that puzzles pretty much all involved, the Social Security Administration is refusing to accept (link via QueerDay) as proof of identity for name change any marriage license issued in New Paltz, NY, and claims that this policy has been in effect since February 27, the date when Mayor Jason West began conducting marriage ceremonies for same sex couples.

SSA spokeswoman Jane Zanca stated that the policy originated with the state of New York allegedly deciding not to recognize any marriage certificates issued in New Paltz as valid documents. Trouble is, no one else seems to recall this decision, no one from the state has yet corroborated the policy, and no marriage licenses or certificates were ever issued to any of the gay couples.

The NY Dept. of Health oversees marriages, and denies every issuing or having knowledge of this "state policy." Same response from the NY Dept. of State, which handles state records. The Town of New Paltz Clerk denies every receiving any information about such a state or federal policy. The Social Security Administration headquarters in Washington, D.C. did not respond to inquiries about the issue.

According to the Social Security Administration's webpage concerning name changes (the link is conveniently placed in the special "For Women" section of the site - why isn't there a comparable "For Men" section on the site? But that's a rant for another time), there's nary a mention of any exclusion on the use of marriage licenses from New Paltz, NY. In fact, a search of the entire SSA site for the word Paltz turned up nothing.

Is this one overzealous SSA beaurocrat overstepping her authority? A simple miscommunication at some level? Are the citizens of New Paltz being singled out because of their many shows of support for the actions of Mayor West and a number of area ministers who performed the ceremonies?

"Civil Rights is Not a Popularity Contest"

2004-12-14T09:24:00.000-05:00

The above statement was made by Candian Prime Minister Paul Martin in response to demands that the issue of same sex marriage be determined by a national referendum.

Justice Minister Irwin Colter put expressed similar sentiments in response to Alberta Premier Ralph Klein's national vote concept: "He's trying to do an end run around the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Cotler said of Klein's position. "And it's not going to work. "You don't subject minority rights to a referendum,'' Cotler told the Toronto Star over the weekend. "That's not what we do in Canada."

If only Justice Scalia could embrace this idea for the United States as well.

Texas Steps Up

2004-12-11T11:03:00.000-05:00

The Texas Department of Safety has suspended a DPS Trooper who approached two men sitting on a bench outside the State Capitol and told them they couldn't kiss, as "homosexual conduct is against the law."

Trooper Michael Carlson received a 6 month suspension and a written reprimand, and is to receive more training on Texas law. He has been a trooper for three years. Perhaps the Texas DPS should also give Trooper Carlson some additional training on the DPS motto:
Courtesy - Service - Protection
The announcement was made Friday. The incident occurred on September 16th.

Military Appeals Court Upholds Sexual Privacy

2004-12-09T08:42:00.000-05:00

The Washington Post reports that last week the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the conviction of Army specialist Kenneth Bullock, who had been charged with having oral sex with a civilian woman, a violation of UCMJ Article 125, the sodomy article. While this case involved heterosexual activity, it is the same article used to uphold the military ban on any same sex activity.

The decision adds to Lawrence v. Texas, which declared unconstitutional any laws criminalizing consensual sexual activities.

FYI - Article 125 falls right in between Maiming and Arson in the list of UCMJ Punitive Articles. Just in case you were wondering.

Utah Judge Recognizes Parental Rights for Gay Ex-Partner

2004-12-08T13:41:00.000-05:00

The Casper Star-Tribune reports that last week a trial level judge awarded visitation rights to the ex-partner of a woman who now claims to be straight and to have religious objections to exposing her child to her previous lifestyle.

Kerri Lynne Jones and Cheryl Pike Barlow took part in a Vermont civil union when Barlow was pregnant, in 2001. The couple broke up in 2003, after having spent the intervening years taking equal part in parenting the now 3-year-old girl, whose birth certificate shows a joint last name.

The judge in the case, Third District Judge Timothy Hanson, described the case as not being about gay parents vs. straight parents, but:

''What this case is about, is whether or not a child is better off in this rather uncertain world, with as many people as possible taking an interest in the child, both financially and emotionally,'' the judge said in an October court hearing.

Last week, Hanson granted supervised visitation to Keri Lynne Jones, of Taylorsville, on two days a month and on Christmas Day. After six months, visitation will increase to alternating overnight weekends, and Jones will be required to support the child financially.

Barlow has filed an appeal, and is asking that the visitation not begin until the case is resolved, citing in part that Jones has not had significant contact with the girl in the last year.

What a great strategy! Bar the ex from seeing the child, then use the person's absence as a reason to bar further visitation!!! I'll have to remember that one...

Suit Filed in Boston to End Don't Ask, Don't Tell

2004-12-06T14:42:00.000-05:00

A dozen former servicemembers whose military careers were terminated under Don't Ask, Don't Tell have filed suit today in U.S. District Court in Boston, seeking to have the policy declared unconstitutional. The group is hoping that their challenge will succeed where others have failed, since the previous suits were prior to the Supreme Court's 2004 finding in Lawrence v. Texas.

The group is represented by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which has more detailed information on the case, titled Cook v. Rumsfeld, posted on their website. You can also link to the text of the complaint. Also representing the plaintiffs is Boston law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP.

Among the requests made to the court are that the policy and related statutes be declared unconstitutional and that the military be enjoined from enforcing them, and that each of the plaintiffs be reinstated at their previous rank, pay and specialty if they are still able to meet all requirements of their last held position.

Mixed Message From Naval Academy

2004-12-03T08:26:00.000-05:00

The Naval Academy Alumni Association governing board has once more rejected the affiliation application from the chapter formed for gay, lesbian and straight ally alums. The chapter is the only applicant ever denied affiliation status from the Alumni Association, and now it's been denied twice.

After last year's denial, the group took steps to address several of the previously given reasons for rejection. The Association expressed concern that the group was narrowly focused on a special interest group and would be exclusive. The chapter rewrote their bylaws to specify that straight alums were welcome, and indeed one of their 68 current members is straight. The Association stated last year that new chapters must be "geographic in nature," so the chapter established a headquarters in the Castro. The Association in this year's rejection cited an existing chapter that already serves the San Francisco area.

In their news release announcing the decision, the Alumni Association praised their own decision as "reaffirm[ing their] commitment to diversity and inclusiveness." The Association also stated and directed that existing chapters "should not and did not discriminate against gay and lesbian alumni." Because it would be so unusual to discover any instances of discrimination against gays in the military. And it's not like alums who are still active in the military would suffer any career repercussions by coming out in their mainstream alumni chapter.

On a related note, congratulations to Harvard Law School for responding so quickly to the 3rd Circuit's injunction (3rd Circuit opinion link here, but it seems to be down right now) barring enforcement of the Solomon Amendment.

NESL OUTLaws Blog Mentioned in ABA's Student Lawyer Magazine

2004-12-03T08:03:00.000-05:00

In the current edition of Student Lawyer magazine (Vol. 33, No. 4) is an article by Todd Chatman (a George Washington Law School 2L and author of Ambivalent Imbroglio) on blawgs (law related blogs). Included is a selection of blawgs, one of which is this very one. I'm familiar with most of the other blogs listed, and we should be quite proud to be included in such outstanding company! The article has also been published online at ABA.net [link via Notes from the (Legal) Underground].

My fellow OUTLaws and I have been a little sporadic in posting this month, but perhaps this will be just the spark we need to renew our diligence.

Thanks Todd! And congrats to Denise at Michigan for being interviewed. You didn't get a link for your blog in the article, so here's one instead.

Massachusetts Marriage Law Stands

2004-11-29T14:32:00.000-05:00

LARGESS, ROBERT P. v. SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MA
04-420
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
2004 U.S. LEXIS 7727
November 29, 2004, Decided

JUDGES: Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer.

OPINION: The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

**************************************************************************************
Here are the proposed Questions Presented that had been submitted to the Supreme Court.

They lost at the District Court, they lost on appeal, and now the Supreme Court has denied cert without comment.

Marriage in Massachusetts continues without restrictions against same-sex couples.

Societal Anxiety and Marriage

2004-11-08T08:26:00.000-05:00

Newsobserver.com has an interesting brief interview with Duke University history professor Felicia Kornbluh on societal anxiety, marriage, political divisiveness and the barriers to reconciliation between those who voted for Bush and those who did not.

Prof. Kornbluh specializes in legal, political and gender history in the U.S.

Duke University News has a more in-depth related article.

Indecent and Hopeless

2004-11-07T14:19:00.000-05:00

Karl Rove stated this morning on Fox News Sunday that Pres. Bush would once again push Congress for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Why? This was Rove's reasoning: "If we want to have a hopeful and decent society, we ought to aim for the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a union of a man and a woman," Bush political aide Karl Rove told "Fox News Sunday."
So basically, I can't marry my girlfriend (of course, we live in Massachusetts and are planning our wedding, so I guess that actually makes her my fiancee) because to do so would destroy all hope and decency in American society.

Not that Karl Rove would ever do anything to violate the pedestal upon which he would have us place exclusively heterosexual marriage, such as a strategy of pushing constitutional amendments against gay marriage in those states with high concentrations of evangelical Christian voters in the hopes of bolstering their numbers at the polls during the election in which George Bush would coincidentally also be running for re-election. No, he would never dream of such a thing.

Hope and decency. Guess what - Massachusetts has it in truckloads, along with legalized marriage for gay couples. I'm just hoping for decent weather on a particular Saturday late next June...

Ellen Degeneres at Harvard Law

2004-11-05T08:05:00.000-05:00

It seems that our esteemed colleagues across the river really do get everything. Ellen Degeneres will be speaking at Harvard Law School's Class Day, their annual event that occurs the day before commencement.

We get Bill O'Reilly, and they get Ellen? It's just not freaking fair. Well, at least we may be able to watch the event after the fact. The webcast of last year's event is still available for viewing at the HLS website.

Marriage Amendment Analysis

2004-11-04T14:09:00.000-05:00

This hour on NPR's Talk of the Nation they are doing an in depth analysis of the 11 marriage amendments that passed in the states this week, as well as a larger discussion of the topic, and what's next for those on either side of the issue. NPR will have the archived audio available on the website later today.

Note that at this point NPR has the topic misidentified as the 25th anniversary of the hostage taking at the American embassy in Tehran. Hopefully that will be corrected shortly.

The Morning After - Massachusetts Races

2004-11-03T11:34:00.000-05:00

I inadvertently posted this on my own blog. I'm leaving it up there, but here it is in its intended location:
***************************************

Despite the determination of gay marriage opponents to send a message to Beacon Hill by ousting those legislators who voted against the proposed amendment, they failed. Despite Mitt Romney's determination to increase the number of Republicans on the Hill, he failed.

Not a single Democratic incumbent lost. The Republicans lost three seats - one in the state senate and two in the house.

Massachusetts' delegation to Washington is still entirely Democratic. Particularly satisfying to me is the defeat of rabidly anti-gay (marriage and otherwise) Massachusetts Family Institute President Ron Crews, who was vying for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. Incumbent Jim McGovern defeated Crews 71% to 29% in District 3, where most of my rather large family resides.

Congratulations should go out to Republican Jeff Perry, who retained his seat as State Rep. for 5th Barnstable. Jeff is also a second year student in NESL's evening division. I don't particularly agree with his politics, but good for him for winning 66% to 34%.

British Airways to Gay Couples: No Kissing, Please

2004-10-15T07:54:00.000-04:00

Cape Argus Online (via QueerDay) reports that a South African man is seeking to file a discrimination suit against British Airways after being arrested for an altercation that began with British Airways flight attendant instructing him that he could not kiss his male partner, as it was "offensive to the other passengers." The flight was from South Africa to London.

Neal Vincent Potgieter's attorneys have filed papers with the Cape High Court, in which the initial incident of affection display is described as the couple having "kissed each other good morning and hugged in a manner which anyone would have accepted had such a kiss and embrace been between two heterosexual people."

Potgieter took issue with the restriction, and the situation escalated into a verbal argument with the crew, for which Potgieter was arrested upon arrival at Heathrow, and held in custody for 14 hours. He pled guilty to "disobeying a lawful command on board a UK-registered aircraft."

The surprise twist in the case is that while Potgieter's claim against British Airways is that "in allegedly discriminating against him on the basis of his sexual orientation, British Airways breached a "partially verbal, partially written and tacit" contract with him," the airline argues that because the claim is not for damages from death or injury, they can't be sued. They also argue that South Africa's antidiscrimination sections of the South African Constitution do not apply to international flights. The claim limitation argument is based on the Warsaw Convention of 1929. Potgieter argues that the damage limitation clauses do not exclude claims for discrimination.
**************
UPDATE (11:10 am): 365Gay.com has a more detailed article on the incident, which answers some of the questions I had upon reading the initial article.

-Why were they "kissing good morning" on the plane? It was an overnight flight, and the flight crew had awoken the passengers to prepare for landing.

-Why would he have pled guilty to a lawful command if he feels the command was solely based on discriminatory motivations? Is "stop kissing" really considered a lawful command? Apparently he was so angered about their treatment that he refused to fasten his seatbelt. That was the action for which he was arrested and for which he spent three days in jail awaiting a hearing.

The incident took place in September 2000, and the plaintiff is seeking $260,000.

Log Cabin Republicans File Suit Over Don't Ask, Don't Tell

2004-10-12T15:54:00.000-04:00

The Log Cabin Republicans announced today that they will be filing a suit against the government in an effort to have the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy declared unconstitutional, and to bar the military from enforcing the law.

Law firm White & Case LLP is handling the case pro bono for LCR, and lead attorneys Dan Woods and Marty Meekins will be filing Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America in US Federal District Court for the Central District of California.

Log Cabin Executive Director Patrick Guerriero described the reason for the suit as follows:

"Public opinion, the experience of our allies, and the national security interests of our nation all lead to the inescapable conclusion that gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly and honestly in our military," said Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director Patrick Guerriero.

"A lawsuit should not be necessary, when public opinion overwhelmingly favors gays and lesbians serving openly and honestly. A lawsuit should not be necessary when the experience of our allies in the war on terror, including Great Britain, Israel and Australia, all allow gays and lesbians to serve openly and honestly. A lawsuit should not be necessary when our military has lost thousands of needed military personnel under this policy. However, under these circumstances, where we are a nation at war fighting a global war against terrorism, we can no longer sit by and wait for our elected officials to find the political courage to do the right thing," said Guerriero.

The suit charges that the "policy imposes a discriminatory set of rules on gay and lesbian members of the Armed Forces in violation of their constitutional rights of due process, freedom of speech, and equal protection."

White and Case attorneys agreed to take on the new challenge based on Supreme Court decisions in Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld.

Louisiana Amendment Struck Down

2004-10-06T09:15:00.000-04:00

Louisiana District Judge William Morvant has declared that the recently approved marriage amendment to Louisiana's constitution violated a requirement that proposed amendments address only a single issue. The amendment bars gay couples from both marriage and civil unions. A similar pre-election argument was rejected as not being possible until such time as the amendment had been approved. Amendment supporters say they will appeal the decision.

DeMint: No Gay Teachers

2004-10-04T13:51:00.000-04:00

As an update to last week's post on the homophobic e-mail from the campaign of SC Representative and Senate candidate Jim DeMint, here's news (via QueerDay) that during a no-holds-barred debate with opponent Inez Tenenbaum, Rep. DeMint stated that gay men and lesbians should be prohibited from teaching in public schools. From the article: Tenenbaum, the state education superintendent, called DeMint’s position “un-American.”
DeMint said after the debate that he would not require teachers to admit to being gay, but if they were “openly gay, I do not think that they should be teaching at public schools.”
Tenenbaum later told reporters that “the private life of our teachers should stay private. I was shocked to hear him say that.”

Don't Ask, Don't Tell for the public school system? DeMint doesn't mind gay teachers, as long as they act straight? I'd hate to imagine what how he would propose the schools handle openly gay students.
***************
UPDATE (10/7): Rep. DeMint has issued no apology for his statements regarding the fitness of gay teachers, but he has apologized for another statement he made Tuesday while trying to explain his earlier comment about banning openly gay teachers. Apparently he was speaking "as a dad," not as an aspiring senator, when he said: "I would have given the same answer when asked if a single woman, who was pregnant and living with her boyfriend, should be hired to teach my third grade children," DeMint told the newspaper for Wednesday editions. "I just think the moral decisions are different with a teacher."

Hmm - how many other groups of voters can he offend before election day?

Falwell on Preaching, Politics and Taxes

2004-10-04T13:18:00.000-04:00

365Gay.com reports that Jerry Falwell held a three day conference this weekend at his Liberty University School of Law, to help other ministers expand their parishes and improve communications. He also gave a seminar on how to talk politics in church without running afoul of IRS regulations. This is something Falwell knows about, having run afoul of those very laws in the past, and being once more questioned about repeating his politics from the pulpit activities.

Among the favored political topics is advocating church members to fight same-sex marriage, promote passage of a Federal Marriage Amendment, and re-elect George Bush. Here is Falwell's summary of the conference.

The seminar on politics from the pulpit was cohosted by Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, one of the organizations at the front of the effort to overturn gay marriage in Massachusetts and to prevent it everywhere else.

General Meeting 10/7

2004-10-04T13:03:00.000-04:00

OUTLaws will be having our first official meeting of the academic year this Thursday, October 7, from 4:00-5:30 in Room 301. There will be pizza, so stop on by.

We're hoping to do some event planning, so if you have any ideas, bring them along!

Gay News From 365Gay.com

2004-09-29T16:40:00.000-04:00

If you have the time, write him and thank him for his courage and conviction.

Gay News From 365Gay.com

Queer Grad Student Mixer

2004-09-28T14:43:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Terri, another of our new members, we have news of the upcoming Queer Graduate Student Mixer this Friday, October 1st, at Club Cafe, from 7-9 pm. The event is monthly during the school year, and this Friday is the third anniversary of the event. The mixer is for all queer and queer-friendly grad students in the Boston area, so get out there, mix, mingle and network your little hearts out!

Judiciary and Elections

2004-09-28T11:33:00.000-04:00

Human Rights Campaign president Cheryl Jacques and Lambda Legal exec. director Kevin Cathcart have published a joint statement on the importance of this year's election on the future of our judiciary, particularly on GLBT issues. The article opens with contrasting statements of Justice Anthony Kennedy and Judge Robert Bork, and continues with some recent events relating to a variety of cases, such as the protests against "activist" judges.

The statement is in part to announce the HRC's publication of Justice For All. According to HRC, "the publication clearly outlines the unique relationships between gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and allied voters, legislators and judges." They also have an entertaining web movie about the importance of voting, the judicial nomination and approval process, and constitutional interpretation.

Lambda Legal also has a separate campaign focusing on educating Americans on the issue of "activist judges" and how to counter some of the commonly used arguments.

DeMint Senate Campaign Worker "Admonished"

2004-09-28T10:40:00.000-04:00

Three term U.S. Representative from South Carolina Jim DeMint is currently the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, and his campaign was recently brought under the spotlight (link via QueerDay) due to an e-mail error by his campaign Director of Operations, Ginny Allen.

Both DeMint and Democratic opponent Inez Tenenbaum had been invited by the Central Savannah River Area Rainbow Alliance (CSRARA) to a town hall meeting to discuss "issues of interest to gay voters." Tenenbaum's campaign responded that a representative would attend, but DeMint's campaign did not reply, so CSRARA chair Lisa Hall sent a follow up e-mail inquiry. Ginny Allen replied to Hall, but apparently thought she was forwarding it to someone else in the campaign. The message was as follows: “Come on, fag, give this dike a reply,” Allen wrote.

Hall was not amused by the faux pas.

The Congressman sent a written apology for the "extremely inappropriate remarks" to Hall: “Mrs. Allen’s remarks do not reflect my beliefs or the character of the campaign,” DeMint wrote. “I am running a positive campaign of ideas, and that includes personal respect for others.”

He assured Hall that Allen had received been admonished, and DeMint's campaign director stated that Allen had been "written up," meaning that another problem would mean termination.

Given DeMint's adamant stances against gay-related issues and homosexuality in general, I don't find it a stretch of imagination to believe that had the e-mail remained in house as intended, it would have been met with a laugh. The following is from one of DeMint's Issues pages, highlighted on his Congressional website: I have always opposed special contracts for homosexuals, homosexual civil unions and homosexual marriages because it is impossible for society to grant special rights to homosexuals without also legitimizing or endorsing the homosexual lifestyle.
The law is our protector, but it is also our instructor. Granting special rights to homosexuals, on the state or federal level, sends the wrong message to our children.
Sociological studies have consistently shown that homosexual unions are harmful to homosexuals and society as a whole.
Traditional marriage, on the other hand, produces more societal benefits than any other system or institution devised by man.

There's also his "Protect"ad on his campaign website, in which the first portion is about protecting America from terrorists, and the second part is about protecting marriage from homosexuals. Nice equation - can't understand where Ms. Allen got the idea that her e-mail was acceptable. Sounds like DeMint is modeling his political strategies after Tom DeLay's.

A copy of the original e-mail and the apology can be viewed at CSRARA's website. I should note that although the article about the incident quoted the e-mail as including the word "fag," the copy posted at CSRARA appears to have the word "farg," which I might guess is the uncapitalized name of the person to whom she thought she was forwarding the message. She still uses (the misspelled) "dike" in reference to Hall, however.

The apology letter reveals another mystery. Rep. DeMint issues a second apology for an e-mail that he sent: I also apologize for the email that I sent. I was directing my campaign staff to act in a courteous and respectful manner in addressing the concerns in the email. However, I was responding on my Blackberry and did not see the original email and did not realize that the derogatory comment had been made.

I wonder what was in that e-mail? And why hasn't the Member of Congress or his staff learned two of the most important lessons in e-mail usage:

Never put anything in e-mail that you wouldn't want someone other than the intended recipient to read. It can and likely will be forwarded to others, who will forward it to still more others.
Alway check the address before you hit Send.

Oh yeah, and actually treat people with respect.

MLGBA Reception

2004-09-26T11:21:00.000-04:00

Courtesy of one of our new first years, we've received a reminder of the annual Mass. Gay and Lesbian Bar Association and GLAD Wine & Cheese Reception that's coming up this Tuesday, September 28 from 6:00-7:30. More info at the MLGBA Events page, including directions and map to Greenberg Traurig LLP at One International Place. The featured speaker will be Mass. Appeals Court Justice Barbara Lenk.

I'm glad to see it's on a Tuesday this year, so evening students can attend!

UPDATE: Several of us will be going as a group, and will be departing the NESL lobby at 5:30. See you there, and bring your umbrellas!

Study on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

2004-09-22T08:35:00.000-04:00

A new study has been released on GLB (no mention of T) military personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. More information here. The study, published by UCLA's Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, is titled "Gays and Lesbians at War: Military Service in Iraq and Afghanistan Under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell, '" can be found here.

The study was announced last week, and now additional reaction is starting to be published. This MercuryNews.com article mentions that the author and one of the subjects (former Army Ranger Brian Hughes) met with congressional staff in Washington this week to discuss Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

DOD spokesman Army Lt. Col. Joe Richardson criticizes the findings of the study, stating that the study is based on anectdotal reports, and that the DOD has not heard any criticism as is mentioned in the study. He believes that Don't Ask, Don't Tell works as intended. If the intention was to keep skilled personnel out of the military, and to impair the functioning of skilled personnel who are in the military, then yeah, I guess it's working as intended.

Lavender Law 2004

2004-09-16T20:31:00.000-04:00

This year's annual conference of the National Lesbian and Gay Law Foundation and the National Lesbian and Gay Law Association will be held in Minneapolis from September 30 to October 2. There will be panels, symposia, courses and plenary sessions, as well as a career fair. The keynote speaker will be Evan Wolfson, of Freedom to Marry, and who this year was named one of Time Magazine's 100 most influential people in the world. You can register for Lavender Law 2004 online here.

Gay El Salvadoran May Get Relief Under Convention Against Torture

2004-09-15T13:26:00.000-04:00

QueerDay.com reports on a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision which determined that an immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in ruling that Luis Reyes-Reyes could not have relief from deportation under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) because he had not alleged that he had been tortured by an El Salvadoran government official, but instead claimed his abuse had been at the hand of private individuals. At the age of 13 he had been kidnapped, beaten and raped because he is gay, and he was threatened with reprisal if he reported the incident. He left the country at age 17 (in 1979), and has been living illegally in the United States since that time, living as a woman for many of the intervening years.

While the court determined that it lacked jurisdiction on the asylum question under 8 U.S.C. Section 1158(a)(1) because Reyes-Reyes had to have filed such a claim within one year of arrival in the country, it did have jurisdiction to review the lower courts' decisions on the CAT claim. The court determined that the lower decision had been based on the wrong legal standard, and that the petitioner did not have to show that he had suffered at the hands of a government official, but that if he had been tortured by private individuals, he needed to show that the action had been taken with the government's "consent or acquiescence," and that "willful acceptance or willful blindness" on the part of the government would suffice.

The case is remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

The 18-page opinion, written by Judge M. Margaret McKeown, can be found here. The Metropolitan News-Enterprise has this summary of the decision. The audio file of the arguments can be downloaded here.

US Immigration Policy on Transgender Marriage

2004-09-15T11:12:00.000-04:00

The Empty Closet reports (via QueerDay) that GenderPAC is protesting a recent policy announcement by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), a subset of the Office of Homeland Security. The policy will bar recognition of: "any marriage in which either party has changed or plans to change their sex.
The policy would prevent foreign spouses from obtaining immigration rights in marriages — or engagements to be married — where one spouse is transgender and either one is an American citizen."

A memo approving the policy stated that although recognizing such marriages would be the most consistent approach, such an approach would be "politically controversial."

NGLTF on Girlie Men

2004-09-14T13:52:00.000-04:00

I came across this press release from Matt Foreman, Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and it made me smirk.

It's an open letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in response to his "economic girlie men" comment during his address to the Republican National Convention. When I clicked on the link I was expecting an analysis of the issue of stereotyping, the difference between a satire of a character and actually making such statements, etc. Instead he took another approach - that girlie men, contrary to his comparison to "pessimistic critics," are typically "hopeless optimists," and he cites icons to make his point: I've never known girlie men to be pessimistic about much of anything. Think of our leading girlie men icons - Liberace, Paul Lynde, Charles Nelson-Reilly, Freddy Mercury, Nathan Lane, and Harvey Fierstein - all hopeless optimists, smiling and fighting on in the face of adversity.
Foreman then speculates that perhaps Schwarzenegger meant to suggest that the critics "BE girlie men."

It's refreshing to see a sense of humor being used as a tool while still making a serious statement.

National Black Justice Coalition Supports Marriage Equality

2004-09-14T13:31:00.000-04:00

The National Black Justice Coalition unveiled their new print ad in support of marriage equality for gay couples at the 34th Annual Congressional Black Caucus Legislative Conference. From the press release: The print advertisement features photos depicting Black gay and lesbian families and urges African-Americans to resist discrimination in all forms, especially against gays and lesbians. NBJC's advertisements also focus on building opposition to conservative attempts to write discrimination into constitutions around the country.

NBJC also organized a breakfast for conference attendees, together with the Gill Foundation, Human Rights Campaign and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and also had a booth in the exhibit hall. A copy of the ad can be found here. A copy of their first ad can be found here.

Florida Foster Parents

2004-09-10T11:41:00.000-04:00

This week a gay couple won a suit to retain custody of two girls, after the state had attempted to overrule the foster placement agency's recommendation that the couple should be granted long-term custody. Over the years the two men have fostered 29 children, and had had particular success with this particular placement. One of the girls had been in 17 homes in two months, and had a history of emotional problems and violent outbursts. Since last year the children have both thrived, which led the agency to recommend the long-term placement. Florida law bars gay men or lesbians from adopting children, although they can be foster parents.

In ruling for the couple, Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Irene Sullivan not only found in their favor, but heaped praise on them for their dedication and skill, and recommended them as role models for other foster parents. From 365Gay.com: "In her ruling Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Irene Sullivan denied the state motion to reopen the case saying that the state owes the two men "a debt of gratitude".
"I'm going to personally thank Dad and Daddy here, for in their way, stopping the cycle of abuse," Sullivan said. She even suggested the state use the men to train other foster parents. "It's not just love, it's love, experience, background, intelligence. They seem to have it all," Sullivan said of the couple."
The state is reviewing the ruling before deciding whether to appeal.

In related news, the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar Association is working to win over enough support from the other Sections to support an effort to lobby the Florida legislature to repeal the nation's only complete ban on adoption by gay adults.

No Log Cabin Endorsement

2004-09-08T06:30:00.000-04:00

Advocate.com reports that the national board of the Log Cabin Republicans has voted 22-2 not to endorse George Bush in the presidential campaign. The group's bylaws allow them only to endorse or not endorse the Republican candidate in a presidential election, so don't look for their endorsement to land on John Kerry.

An official announcement is expected from LCR today at noon.
******
UPDATE: 10:30 am - Something is up with Blogger's publishing process today, so this post of breaking news I tried to publish at 6:30 this morning is now out of date. Log Cabin has officially announced that they will not be endorsing President Bush.

Hopefully this updated post will be published sometime before the actual elections...

Same Sex Harassment Cases

2004-09-07T09:15:00.000-04:00

ACSBlog posted yesterday on a recent Montana Supreme Court decision which denied the sexual harassment claim of a male worker against his male colleagues. Blogger Brian Simmonds compares the outcome of Campbell v. Garden State Plumbing with the U.S. Supreme Court's 1998 decision in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services. Oncale was the case which held that Title VII prohibits workplace same-sex harassment. Links to the related court documents can be found in the ACS post.

OUTLaws Social Event

2004-09-07T09:10:00.000-04:00

Our first social gathering of the semester will be this Friday, September 10, from 5 pm until whenever, at Club Cafe. Come one, come all, and join the fun! Club Cafe is just a few blocks from NESL. Directions can be found here. Hope to see you there!

Breakaway Churches and Ownership

2004-09-01T09:28:00.000-04:00

Today's Advocate.com has a short news item on three Los Angeles area churches which have broken away from the Episcopal Church, largely over the confirmation of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire last year. A number of conservative parishes have objected to a gay man being placed in this position of church authority. The current news is about the ongoing dispute over the parish property and assets, over which the Los Angeles Episcopal Diocese is asserting ownership. The parishes dispute this.

This summer LegalAffairs.org had an in depth article, Exodus. Numbers. Judges. on this story and how it is unfolding in other parishes around the country. Included is history, current issues and the authority given to church law by the secular courts.

UPDATE: Interestingly, a lawsuit has been filed here in Massachusetts, but with rather different circumstances. The Archdiocese of Boston is closing 82 churches this year, but the parishioners at St. Albert the Great in Weymouth are fighting the decision. They are at this time engaged in a sit-in, and have filed suit claiming that the church building and assets belong to the members of the church, not the Archdiocese. The results of these different cases, one in which the Church hierarchy wants to keep the property (but the parishioners want out of the fold), and the other in which the Church wants to get rid of it (while the parishioners want to stay with the church).

Coming Out In the Jury Pool

2004-08-28T10:10:00.002-04:00

L.A. Vess has a column at LesbiaNation.com about her recent experience in a jury pool in South Carolina. For her, it became more than a day of reading and waiting when she and her fellow potential jurors were told the list of facts they would all be required to state about themselves: name, address, length of residence, employment, education, legal marital status and spouse's employment.

The remainder of the column discusses her reaction and response to being legally forced to declare herself single due to her being legally barred from being legally otherwise with the person she loves, and what she learned about equality, visibility and coming out.

RAF: Ask, Tell and Be Proud

2004-08-27T09:08:00.000-04:00

While here in the US the continued application of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is ending military careers, keeping some of the bright and the best from enlisting in the first place, and in some cases leaving the military short-handed (such as in Arab language translators), such is not the case in the UK.

Gay men and lesbians were similarly barred from service in England's military until January 2000, after the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK had violated a man's human rights by discharging him because he is gay. The case was Lustig-Prean and Beckett v UK.

Well, the RAF has straightened up and is flying right (so to speak), and is taking part in this Sunday's Pride Parade and Festival in Manchester. In addition to having a float carrying eight waving RAF members, they will also have a mobile recruiting station. This is no small event, either. Manchester Pride is "ten starry days and nights of partying, parade, film, arts & entertainment, sport and debating." Perhaps the RAF's presence will mark the beginning of a true Manchester United.

Child Custody Rulings

2004-08-25T14:22:00.000-04:00

There have been a couple of rulings of interest this week in child custody cases.

In a Virginia case, Frederick County Judge John R. Prosser has determined that the Virginia court has jurisdiction to hear a child custody case between two women who had entered into a civil union in Vermont, although the case is already being handled in Vermont. The civil union has been dissolved in the Vermont courts, and a temporary custody decision has already been issued there.

Here in Massachusetts, the SJC in a 4-3 decision has determined that a woman (listed as B.L.) is not required to pay child support to her former partner, who had become pregnant while the pair were a couple, but who had not yet given birth at the time of their breakup. Justice Cowin wrote the opinion, with Justice Greaney penning the dissent.
**********
UPDATE: If the above link to the MA SJC opinion doesn't work (it seems to be intermittent), the case is T.F. vs. B.L. SJC-09104 August 25, 2004. You can get to it through the SJC site, or a legal database.

1913 Marriage Law Still Stands After Round One

2004-08-18T18:37:00.000-04:00

Boston.com reports that the Superior Court Judge assigned the challenge to the 1913 marriage statute which is being used to deny marriage licenses to out of state gay couples has declined to enjoin the state from enforcing it. Judge Carol Ball did note that she felt the law does violate the spirit of Goodridge, and that she is troubled by the timing of the state's decision to enforce the long-ignored law.

The plaintiffs in the case plan to appeal, and all parties anticipate that the case will ultimately go before the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court. The decision can be found here, at GLAD's website.

Copyright Clarification Two

2004-08-12T17:49:00.000-04:00

Professor Geoff Hull also kindly replied to my inquiry for clarification on the question of problematic transfer of copyright. See related posts here and here. Prof. Hull's response:
Beth.

There are several cases, and the language of the statute itself, which suggest that the codified sequence takes precedence over any will. The executor or administrator of an estate are only in the picture if there is no surviving spouse, children or grandchildren. Many people, including my Copyright Law students, find it surprising that sometimes even where there is a will, there is not a way.

Geoff Hull

So there you have it. Thanks to Prof. Hull for taking the time to assist!