MEUSA Celebrates Third Anniversary of New York Marriage Equality with Sea Tea Cruise
Celebrating the third anniversary of marriage equality in New York, over 100 Marriage Equality USA members and supporters boarded the Hornblower Yacht in New York City last Sunday for a night of food, fun, friends and music.
This annual MEUSA tradition has become one of the most fun events of the year. It is a chance for us to meet new friends from other organizations and local MEUSA supporters. Check out the photo gallery from the event!
Celebrating Today’s 4th Circuit Bostic Ruling -- Another Step Closer to the End of Amendment One!
As a gay person, North Carolinian, volunteer working against Amendment One, and now full-time marriage equality advocate, I was thrilled by today's 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer and its potential - eventually - to erase the stain of Amendment One from North Carolina's constitution. Like the other 28 court rulings since last year's landmark Windsor case, the 4th Circuit decision declares yet another& anti-marriage equality ban unconstitutional. Here is my favorite quote from the decision:
Civil marriage is one of the cornerstones of our way of life. It allows individuals to celebrate and publicly declare their intentions to form lifelong partnerships, which provide unparalleled intimacy, companionship, emotional support, and security. The choice of whether and whom to marry is an intensely personal decision that alters the course of an individual's life. Denying same-sex couples this choice prohibits them from participating fully in our society, which is precisely the type of segregation that the Fourteenth Amendment cannot countenance.
Though this decision was about the Virginia ban, implications have the potential to go beyond Virginia since the 4th Circuit has jurisdiction over other states without the freedom to marry, like North Carolina, as well as West Virginia and South Carolina. I say “potential” because the ruling does not take effect for at least 21 days and could be appealed to the full 4th Circuit or the Supreme Court of the United States(a.k.a. SCOTUS).
As Chris Brook, Legal Director of the ACLU of NC, explained to me, it’s likely that the ruling will not become final for a while. He thinks that SCOTUS will probably review the case. If this happens, Bostic could be the case, or one of the cases, SCOTUS will use to make an ultimate constitutional ruling. I fully expect SCOTUS to affirm that there is a constitutional right to the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. This 50-state-solution ruling, some lawyers predict, could come as early as June 2015 or 2016.
The more immediate “potential” of Bostic – as outlined by the ACLU of NC and Equality North Carolina – is if SCOTUS does not review the case. Then, couples can marry in Virginia and courts in North Carolina and the other two states can issue orders to apply the Bostic precedent in their state rendering those laws unconstitutional. Knowing that a similar law in Virginia has been ruled unconstitutional by the governing circuit court, local clerks and governmental officials might start marrying couples even before the state court issues orders. However, it's not clear if state or federal government would recognize those marriages.
In both the long-term and short-term cases, one thing is clear: Amendment One is one step closer to fading into history as an unconstitutional relic of our past. So I’m doing a “happy dance” anyway! 
You see, I have a history with Amendment One. I was deeply involved in doing field work to defeat it for about a year -- from before it passed the NC General Assembly in September 2011 (by one vote) to the months leading up to when it overwhelmingly passed on 8 May 2012. I even resigned from my full-time job as a research manager to do all I could to defeat it; running 33 phone banks, speaking around the state and even being in a documentary about it, One: A Story of Love and Equality – which will be screened at the NC Gay and Lesbian Film Festival on August 17th and 21st.
All along, I instinctively knew Amendment One was unconstitutional. I felt it most strongly when I woke up on 9 May 2012, the morning after it passed overwhelmingly. I felt like we LGBTQ people had been “voted off the island” by our fellow North Carolinians. It felt like the tyranny of the majority – where decisions of a majority place their interests above those of an often misunderstood minority group. Amendment One – and other laws like it - was against what I understood America was all about. When I rode my bike in the Fourth of July parade at age seven (pictured below with a rainbow sweater on -- and I didn’t know!), I was proud of what our country stood for – freedom and equal opportunity. When Amendment One passed, it was a vote to restrict some people’s freedom to marry as an abuse of religious freedom. It felt un-American. In America, we tolerate differences and we don’t deny people rights just because we don’t understand them – or at least, we don’t do this indefinitely. We eventually come to our collective senses.
Yet despite the profound disappointment and loss we LGBTQ North Carolinians and our allies felt when Amendment One passed, the light at the end of the long, dark tunnel of voter-approved bans on our freedom to marry appeared the very next day – and has only gotten brighter and brighter since then.
Below is a summary of the things that have helped erode support for Amendment One, and laws like it nationwide. It includes my perspective watching the movement unfold as a full-time advocate with an up-close view -- as either a spectator with a “front row seat” or as a “player on the field.”
1) On May 9, 2012, President Obama came out for marriage equality in a TV interview. Then on 19 May 2012, the NAACP - encouraged by NC’s esteemed NAACP leader William Barber - also endorsed marriage equality. This had a big “permission giver” effect. I recall one poll where support among African American voters in Maryland, for example, shot up shortly after.
From June until November, I worked for a pro-equality state senator who was running against someone I considered the “son of Amendment One.” After that unfortunate loss, and a new Republican super-majority in both houses, prospects of overturning Amendment One were even bleaker. North Carolinians had to look to other states for any movement on this issue.
2) Amazingly, four states won their marriage-related campaigns at the ballot in November 2012 – three to pass marriage equality (MD, ME and WA) and one (MN) to defeat another marriage ban. Having lived through the North Carolina experience (which had been common in about 30 other states before us), I was astounded at these results. I attended conferences in DC and Atlanta to find out how we won. It wasn’t just that sometime in 2012 many national polls showed a new majority supported the freedom to marry. Our movement had also gotten smarter about messaging in our campaigns. We dropped our focus on legal rights. Instead, beautiful TV commercials conveyed positive messages by “straight messengers” like:
- treat people as they would want to be treated
- same-sex couples marry for the same reasons everyone else does (i.e., love, family, protection and commitment)
- parents (not schools) teach their kids values
- it is not for us to judge
- freedom means freedom to everyone
3) In May 2013, I was lucky enough to get a job doing what I wanted to do – be a professional advocate for marriage equality. I moved to New York City to start working for Marriage Equality USA on May 8th – which was symbolically exactly a year after Amendment One had passed. Just after both Delaware and Rhode Island passed marriage equality, I began running phone banks in Times Square for Minnesota and Illinois, followed by New Jersey, Indiana and New Mexico for the National Equality Action Team (NEAT). MEUSA leads this coalition of nearly 50 organizations. For each state campaign, we had phone bankers calling voters in those states virtually from across the country -- including many volunteers I recruited from North Carolina. In fact, we set up a phone bank specifically for Illinois and then Indiana and New Mexico at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Raleigh. Our proudest moments were in assisting Illinois with over 700 voicemail messages left for 12 swing legislators – six of whom went our way – and marriage equality passed by just one vote. Likewise, in Indiana – which is arguably more conservative than North Carolina - we contributed to a close vote where legislators changed their extreme Amendment One-like bill, preventing it from going to the ballot in 2014 – and likely ever. At this point, I do not think it’s politically possible for any other state to even propose an anti-marriage equality amendment; their time has passed. North Carolina has the distinction of being the last state to pass one of these, and depending on what happens with SCOTUS and the Bostic case, it may be the shortest-lived amendment. 
4) The big game-changer was the Windsor decision on June 26, 2013. One cannot overstate its impact. It has bolstered the case for marriage equality in federal courts, resulting in victory after victory with no losses. There are now 76 lawsuits among all the states that do not have marriage equality, including three that challenge Amendment One directly.
I had the opportunity - though our former long-time Board Chair Cathy Marino-Thomas – to ask Edie Windsor what gave her the courage to persist despite people saying her case was premature and could backfire with SCOTUS. Here is her reply in this short video:
5) Immediately after Windsor, federal discrimination against legally married, same-sex couples started to end – agency by agency – when they based their definition of who was married on the state in which a couple was married rather than their state of residence. It gave the out-of-state marriages of my friends in North Carolina legal meaning, with several hundred federal rights being extended to them for the first time. When I flew back to NC to commemorate the two- year anniversary of Amendment One on 8 May 2014, I noticed how many couples I knew were having spring weddings in nearby states. And as part of the courageous and beautiful WE DO campaign to raise awareness about their desire to marry and injustice of laws that deny this freedom, many North Carolina couples including Clifton and Dennis (and couples throughout the South) applied for marriage licenses in their home counties with the Campaign for Southern Equality. I was able to be there that day in my home town of Raleigh, NC to witness this. 
6) And finally, public support in North Carolina is on the rise, at it is across the country. North Carolina’s public support for marriage equality rose from 34% in 2012 to 40% as of May 2014 according to Public Policy Polling. This figure lags behind the national average (now 54% according to a 2014 Pew Research Center poll) – but the trend is clear.
These are some of the events that have chipped away the legal credibility and morality of what was only two years ago an amendment which passed overwhelmingly. I am grateful that the 4th Circuit Bostic decision is the latest and most direct hit to Amendment One. The rising tide of justice across the United States and in our neighboring state of Virginia all help lift the gloomy cloud of Amendment One to clear the way to truer, bluer skies in my home state. I know that in a few days, when I leave New York -- which just celebrated its third anniversary of marriage equality last week -- and drive through Virginia back to North Carolina, I will come home with an even greater sense of hope that we LGBT people will be treated as the constitutionally and morally equal citizens that we know we are.
By Tracy Hollister, Program Manager, Marriage Equality USA. Tracy lived in North Carolina for nearly 20 years and worked as a volunteer marriage equality advocate for several years before moving to New York City to help advance marriage equality across the country. Now, the same week as the landmark Bostic decision, Tracy is moving back home to North Carolina to continue her work for MEUSA. To hear how and why she became a full-time advocate, listen to this half hour podcast.
A Four-Decade March Down the Aisle
Not every couple celebrates their first and 25th anniversaries in the same year. Then again, not every couple has navigated a roller coaster quite like the one Michael Sabatino and Robert Voorheis have – that of legal recognition of same gender relationships both as activists and a committed couple.
After a short courtship, the couple held their first nuptials in the form of a commitment ceremony in 1979. “We knew it wasn’t something that was done but it was something that was important to us,” says Robert. “Our gay friends couldn’t wrap their heads around two men having a ceremony. People in the (LGBT) community were having trouble with it.”
Friends and family also had various reactions. No one from Robert’s family attended their commitment ceremony although, he says, “Michael was accepted as a member of the family.” While Michael’s mother was open to attending, the two had kept the ceremony a secret from Michael’s father. They knew of no way for the mother to be away for so long without arousing suspicion. Michael points out, however, that some of his cousins attended, and one of his maternal aunts gave them a gift. “She accepted the ceremony as a wedding and gave us the same gift she had given to all of her nieces and nephews at their weddings,” he says.
Robert and Michael took another interim step in 2002, becoming the second couple in Westchester County (in New York State) to register as domestic partners. “Domestic partnership was a non-entity,” says Robert, “though we were thrilled it was happening. This was the first step to full marriage equality.” Never-the-less, the couple did not treat their domestic partnership as anything other than a legality and held no ceremony to mark the occasion.
Dealing with the palpable discomfort among friends within the LGBT community after their 1979 commitment ceremony would prove to be a valuable experience. The couple encountered substantial resistance among established LGBT organizations during their early participation in the movement for marriage equality.
Michael remembers the push back in the early years of campaigning for marriage equality. “All of the major organizations were against us. The first inkling that we were getting somewhere was when Massachusetts got it, or maybe when Canada approved marriage. I think that, to us, was one of the turning points,” he says, both for them and the established LGBT organizations.
“I happened to be on a business trip, that Robert had joined me on, and Robert had just gone back home,” says Michael, reflecting back on the day when Canada joined the ranks of marriage equality countries. “I remained in Canada. I called him back and asked if he wanted to get married.”
Then, in 2003, 24 years after their commitment ceremony, Michael and Robert legally married each other in Niagara Falls, Canada, in front of approximately 50 guests. This time, rather than issues pertaining to cultural acceptance, it was geographical distance that kept the event from being even larger. “My cousin who, we thought, would never accept the invitation was the first to accept,” notes Michael. “My mom gave us away.”
Their wedding in Canada added impetus to their quest for full equality at home. The couple, represented by Lambda Legal, intervened on behalf of the Westchester County Executive, who was sued by an outside party for recognizing out-of-state marriages like theirs. The case, Godfrey vs. Spano, would go to New York’s highest court and set the precedent for statewide legal recognition of gay couples married in other jurisdictions.
In addition to their early involvement as litigants, Michael and Robert were among the original founders of Marriage Equality New York, which later would merge with Marriage Equality USA. “I think we were one of only two couples among the early participants, the other being Cathy Marino Thomas and her wife, Sheila,” says Robert. “The rest were all single. There were 10 in the core group.” Although the two have partaken in more than their fair share of rallies, their emphasis has always been on education and engagement. “Education is the key — you have to make people aware of the issues,” says Robert.
Once married, the two quickly realized their work as activists and educators was far from finished. Upon returning from their wedding, the priest at their local Catholic parish ejected them from the choir. “Making people realize you cannot separate the church from this issue,” says Robert, was one of key elements the two considered critical. “LGBT groups backed away from us, characterizing it as a religious issue. But it is not just a religious issue, it is a civil rights issue. LGBT groups experienced in lobbying told us at MENY that we could not ask our legislators what their position was on marriage for same sex couples. It was too controversial.”
In spite of opposition from all sides, Robert says that, from the beginning, “We knew we were going to ask about one question -- marriage. MENY sent out a statewide questionnaire. Most legislators ignored them. Of those who returned them, there were certainly more ‘no’s’ than ‘yes’s.’” Picking up where his husband left off, Michael adds that, “within a year after Canada, they (LGBT organizations) were starting to embrace the idea. MENY coined the term ‘marriage equality.’”
The couple also lays claim to another milestone in the marriage equality movement, having been instrumental in making the connections to get Edie Windsor and Thea Spyer to Canada for their wedding. Windsor vs. U.S. would become the landmark decision requiring the federal government to recognize marriages performed in marriage equality states. The opinion cited Godfrey vs. Spano, in which Robert and Michael had been lead participants to prove their marriage was recognized in New York State.
Since Windsor, when same gender couples could finally receive all of the rights, responsibilities and privileges of marriage afforded by federal law, the couple has contemplated the reality of true marriage equality. Discussing the reality of a potentially larger federal income tax liability because of the marriage penalty, Michael notes, “That is one of the responsibilities of marriage, to pay that marriage penalty. I was happy to pay those taxes because I am now an equal citizen. It comes with the whole enchilada. You want to be treated equally, that’s part of the whole enchilada. That’s what comes with the rights and responsibilities of marriage. You can’t just take the pluses and eliminate the minuses. But you now also have the rights that we have been denied for so long.”
With equal marriage rights having been secured in New York and much of the country, Robert will be stepping down from the MEUSA board. "Each of us owes a huge debt of gratitude to Robert and Michael for their work and personal sacrifice in making both MEUSA and the entire marriage equality movement a success,” says MEUSA Executive Director Brian Silva. "Their successful lawsuit early in our struggle was critical in bringing recognition for LGBTQ New York families. And Robert's leadership on our Board as we have merged, transitioned and grown in these past few years will be sorely missed."
US Air Force Base in Conservative Utah Embraces LGBT Equality
I work at a military installation where traditions run high. Being proud of who we are and what we do to support our warfighters is part of everyday life. I have been a contractor for 27 years at Hill Air Force Base, UT, and never expected our base, located in conservative Utah, to take the lead in standing up for LGBT Pride.
I’ve never been more proud of where I work than when I received an email stating the following: “The Department of Defense (DoD) joins the Nation in celebrating Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month during the month of June. We recognize gay, lesbian and bisexual service members and LGBT civilians for their dedicated service to our country. The LGBT community has written a proud chapter in this fundamentally American story by reminding us that integrity and respect remain cornerstones of our military and civilian culture. Let's encourage our DoD personnel to recognize the accomplishments of all members of our workforce, and in doing so, celebrate the significance of diversity in building a brighter future for all citizens.”
The email was soliciting volunteers to head up a Hill Pride Committee. I sat alone in my office, raising my hand to volunteer to no one, as I desperately wanted to be part of this committee. When I approached my boss about getting involved, he said I was cleared to take part as long as the meetings didn’t interfere with my work. I’d also have to participate on my own time and use vacation to attend meetings and events planned. That was minor, as I was already eager to get started.
As it turns out, Hill AFB is the first military installation in the United States to stand up and support LGBT activities during the month of Pride. This couldn’t come at a more important time in our state of Utah either, as the Kitchen v. Herbert case is currently awaiting a decision from the 10th Circuit Court out of Denver.
The word is just starting to get out that Hill AFB is supporting Pride by holding activities on the Base. The Hill Pride Committee has been working on three major activities: 1) an LGBT Information Fair; 2) Pride Night event; and 3) Keynote Luncheon. All three activities will take place after the Utah Pride Festival events unfold the first full weekend in June in Salt Lake City.
The Base is holding an LGBT Information Fair where my wife and I will sponsor a booth representing Marriage Equality USA. Other organizations attending the Info Fair include Restore Our Humanity, Utah Pride Center, Human Rights Campaign, Equality Utah, PFLAG Utah, Volunteers of America, Department of Veterans Affairs LGBT Veterans Program, Family Acceptance Project, Rainbow Law, among several other noteworthy organizations within our community. The LGBT Information Fair is being held on Wednesday, 11 June.
In addition, a Pride Night is also being held on Saturday, 21 June. The evening will feature a variety of performances from people in our LGBT community to include a slam poet and several talented musicians.
The first-ever Hill Pride activities will culminate with a Keynote Luncheon on Tuesday, 24 June, where Kristin Beck, a former decorated Navy Seal and transgender woman will be the keynote speaker. She recently finished a movie called Lady Valor which chronicles her life.
The Hill Pride Committee is working hard to set the bar high and lead the way for other military installations to follow us in the years ahead. Hill AFB intends to celebrate Pride month every June so we want to ensure this first-ever occurrence is successful!
By Colleen Mewing, Local Organizer, Utah Regional Operating Committee, Marriage Equality USA.
Keep Informed on the Latest Marriage Equality Updates: May 13th Community Call Focuses on 4th Circuit Case
MEUSA invites you to join its national community call Tuesday, May 13, 9PM EDT. The conversation will focus on the latest developments in Virginia, where one of the more promising court challenges to a state constitutional amendment banning marriage equality is moving forward. Register for the call and we'll send you the dial-in information by email Tuesday morning.
Policy and Legal Update - March 24-30, 2014
POLICY & LEGAL UPDATES
News reported March 24 – 30, 2014
NATIONAL MAP
NATIONAL POLLS
- On 27 March 2014, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research surveyed 1,000 likely 2016 voters, and reported that 55% favor it, 40% do not, with 5% unaccounted for. Separately, 62% believe same-gender civil marriage will be legalized by the U.S. Supreme Court, and 33% do not, with 5% unaccounted for. • MEUSA Summary • News Source
STATE POLLS
WISCONSIN • On 26 March 2014, Marquette Law School surveyed 801 registered WI voters on same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 48% support it, 24% support only civil union, and 24% support no legal recognition for same-gender couples, with 4% unaccounted for. Separately, regarding the 2006 constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage, 59% would repeal it, and 36% would continue it, with 5% unaccounted for. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceNATIONAL LEGISLATION PENDING
NATIONAL LEGISLATION ENACTED
LAWSUITS PENDING
ALABAMA • On 20 March 2014, in Paul Hard v. AL Governor Robert Bentley, et al., a federal lawsuit to: (1) overturn the 1998 AL law and the 2005 AL constitutional amendment which ban same-gender civil marriage; (2) issue a revised Death Certificate for Charles Fancher showing Paul Hard as the surviving spouse, based on their 2011 MA marriage; and (3) disburse the proceeds of a wrongful death suit to Paul Hard, Ms. Pat Fancher, mother of Charles Fancher, asked to intervene because (a) she opposes same-gender civil marriage; and (b) she wants to remain her deceased son’s next of kin and receive all the wrongful death proceeds of his estate. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARIZONA • On 24 March 2014, in Nelda Majors & Karen Bailey, et al. v. AZ Attorney General Tom Horne, et al., a federal lawsuit for 7 couples, and the surviving spouses of 2 additional same-gender couples, challenging the AZ 1996 and 1999 laws and the AZ 2006 constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage, plaintiffs asked that their case be (1) merged with Joseph Connolly & Terrel Pochert, et. al., v. Pinal County Superior Court Clerk Chad Roche, and (2) decided by the same judge. • MEUSA Summary • News Source LOUISIANA • On 18 March 2014, in Forum for Equality Louisiana v. Louisiana Revenue Secretary Tim Barfield, et al., a federal case for 4 same-gender couples challenging the LA constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriages performed in LA or elsewhere, and challenging LA’s refusal to recognize both spouses as parents to children that are born to them or children that they adopt, the court consolidated this case into Jonathan Robicheaux & Derek Pinton, et al. v. LA Attorney General James Caldwell. The common issues (equal protection; due process for recognizing out-of-state same-gender civil marriages) will be decided first; the non-common issues (1st Amendment; LA marriage rights; Full Faith and Credit between states) will be decided later. The consolidation caused a revised 2014 schedule: cross motions for summary judgment (due 17 April), amicus briefs (12 May), cross responses to motions (19 May), replies (2 June), oral arguments (25 June), ruling (1 July), appeal to 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (1 August). • MEUSA Summary • News Source LOUISIANA • On 18 March 2014, in Jonathan Robicheaux & Derek Pinton, et al. v. LA Attorney General James Caldwell, a federal lawsuit for 2 couples challenging the LA constitutional amendment and state law banning same-gender civil marriage, and seeking LA recognition for same-gender couples married elsewhere, the court consolidated into this case Forum for Equality Louisiana v. Louisiana Revenue Secretary Tim Barfield, et al., a federal suit for 4 same-gender couples challenging the LA constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriages performed in LA or elsewhere, and challenging LA’s refusal to recognize both spouses as parents to children that are born to them or children that they adopt. The common issues (equal protection; due process for recognizing out-of-state same-gender civil marriages) will be decided first; the non-common issues (1st Amendment; LA marriage rights; Full Faith and Credit between states) will be decided later. The consolidation caused a revised 2014 schedule: cross motions for summary judgment (due 17 April), amicus briefs (12 May), cross responses to motions (19 May), replies (2 June), oral arguments (25 June), ruling (1 July), appeal to 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (1 August). • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN • On 24 March 2014, in Virginia Wolf & Carol Schumacher, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al., a federal lawsuit for 4 couples challenging the 2006 WI ban on same-gender civil marriage or civil union, and WI's unique ban on marrying elsewhere, for which each spouse faces up to $10,000 in fines and 9 months in prison as soon as they return to WI, the judge denied the WI motion to stay this case until the WI Supreme Court rules on the WI domestic partner registry case (Julaine Appling, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al.), saying that a such stay would be pointless, and scheduled the 2014 trial for August 25-29. • MEUSA Summary • News Source MICHIGAN • On 25 March 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al.,a challenge to the MI laws that deny adoption to certified foster parents when they are not married, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals stayed the district court ruling pending the outcome of the MI appeal. • MEUSA Summary • News Source PUERTO RICO • On 26 March 2014, in Ada Conde v. PR Health Secretary & Vital Records Registrar,an attorney filed a federal lawsuit to have her 2004 same-gender civil marriage from MA recognized in PR. • MEUSA Summary • News Source MICHIGAN • In late March 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al.,a federal challenge to MI laws that deny adoption to certified foster parents when they are not married, and the constitutionality of the state’s 2004 ban on same-gender marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, and joint adoption, the court set the appeal deadlines: 7 May (MI brief), 9 June (plaintiff brief), and 26 June (MI response brief). • MEUSA Summary • News Source MISSOURI • On 26 March 2014, in Kerry Messer, et al. v. MO Governor Jeremiah Nixon, et al., the MO Family Baptist Convention Christian Life Commission and the MO Family Policy Council sued to stop MO from accepting tax returns from same-gender couples with legal civil marriages who file joint federal and MO returns, because the plaintiffs claim that they are already suffering “immediate and irreparable damage.” • MEUSA Summary • News Source NEVADA • On 27 March 2014, in SmithKline Beecham Corporation v. Abbott Laboratories, one or more judges at the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals requested re-review of this previously decided appeal (which both parties already decided not to pursue any further), so the court asked both parties to state by 17 April 2014 whether their case should be re-heard by all 11 judges of the 9th Circuit, after which the 11 judges will vote whether to re-review the case. On 21 January 2014, the appeals court ruled that “heightened scrutiny” is the new standard by which all future sexual orientation discrimination cases will get decided, so that could change if all the court decides to re-hear the case by all 11 judges. • MEUSA Summary • News Source MICHIGAN • On 28 March 2014, In late March 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al., a federal challenge to MI laws that deny adoption to certified foster parents when they are not married, and the constitutionality of the state’s 2004 ban on same-gender marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, and joint adoption, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed that the federal government is recognizing the 322 same-gender civil marriages performed in MI between the time that the MI marriage ban was ruled unconstitutional and the time that MI appealed that ruling, even though MI is ignoring those marriages. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TENNESSEE • On 25 March 2014, in Valeria Tanco, et al. v. TN Governor William Haslam, et al., a federal constitutional challenge to the TN law that bans recognition of same-gender civil marriages, TN asked the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals for a stay on the district court’s order banning TN from enforcing the TN ban on same-gender marriage against the 6 plaintiffs. • MEUSA Summary • News Source OHIO • On 28 march 2014, in Alfred Cowger & Anthony Wesley, Jr. v. Ohio & U.S. Government, et al., a federal lawsuit because the Affordable Care Act doesn’t recognize out-of-Ohio marriages, the plaintiffs dropped their case, after finally obtaining a family health insurance policy. • MEUSA Summary • News Source NEBRASKA • On 28 March 2014, in Bonnie Nichols v. Nebraska, Ms. Nichols petitioned the NE Supreme Court for permission to divorce Margie Nichols, whom she married in IA in 2009. In August 2013, a district court dismissed the case because the NE 2000 constitutional ban on same-gender marriage bars recognition of same-gender marriage and same-gender divorce. The NE Attorney General is arguing before the state court of appeals that: the NE marriage ban is irrelevant, and no one has any federal right to divorce. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 28 March 2014, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA 4th Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer, et al., a federal lawsuit challenging VA’s 2006 ban on same-gender marriage and the ban on out-of-state marriages, VA court clerks argued that marriage is solely for the purpose of procreation between mixed-gender spouses, and that same-gender civil marriage would lead to legalization of incest. • MEUSA Summary • News Source KENTUCKY • On 28 March 2014, in Timothy Love, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear (formerly Gregory Bourke & Michael De Leon, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear), a federal lawsuit challenging KY’s ban on recognizing same-gender couples married elsewhere, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals set the briefing schedule: KY principal brief (7 May 2014), plaintiffs’ principal brief appendix (9 June 2014), KY reply brief (26 June 2014). • MEUSA Summary • News Source TENNESSEE • On 28 Martch 2014, in Valeria Tanco, et al. v. TN Governor William Haslam, et al., a federal constitutional challenge to the TN law that bans recognition of same-gender civil marriage, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals set the briefing schedule: TN principal brief (7 May 2014), plaintiffs’ principal brief appendix (9 June 2014), TN reply brief (26 June 2014). • MEUSA Summary • News SourceLAWSUITS RESOLVED
STATE LEGISLATION PENDING
MISSOURI • On 27 March 2014, MO state Representative Mike Colona (D) introduced HJR-85, which would repeal the 2004 constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage and legalize it. • MEUSA Summary • News Source MISSISSIPPI • On 27 March 2014, the MS Senate sent SB-2681, MS Religious Freedom Restoration Act (which would legalize discrimination whenever the discriminator claims religious belief as the excuse) to conference with the House, because the bill dies if a final version is not filed by 31 March 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE LEGISLATION ENACTED
STATE BALLOT MEASURES
Send questions and comments to: [email protected].
Policy and Legal Update - March 17-24, 2014
Policy & Legal Updates
March 17 – 23, 2014NATIONAL MAP
NATIONAL POLLS
STATE POLLS
- PENNSYLVANIA • On 3 March 2014, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,405 registered PA voters regarding same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 57% support it, 37% oppose it, and 6% don’t know or don’t answer. • MEUSA Summary • News Source
NATIONAL LEGISLATION PENDING
- On 26 April 2013, U.S. Representative Aaron Schock (R-IL) introduced the Equitable Access to Care and Health Act (HR-1814), which would excuse a citizen from the federal law requiring the purchase of health insurance whenever that citizen claims a religious belief, and on 6 May 2013, U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) introduced the Senate version (S. 862). On 11 March 2014, the U.S. House of Representatives skipped Committee review, and passed HR-1814 on a voice-only vote. Lawmakers favoring it include 226 Representatives (145 Republican, 81 Democrat), and 32 Senators (16 Republican, 15 Democrat, 1 Independent). Based on history, the chance of enactment is 24%. • MEUSA Summary • News Source
NATIONAL LEGISLATION ENACTED
LAWSUITS PENDING
PENNSYLVANIA • 18 March 2014, in Cara Palladino & Isabelle Barker v. PA Governor Corbett et al.,a federal suit about marriage recognition, the court scheduled oral arguments for 28 May 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TEXAS • On 7 March 2014, in Cleopatra De Leon, et al., v. TX Governor Rick Perry et al.,a federal class action lawsuit for all TX couples challenging the 2003 law and the 2005 TX constitutional ban on marriage inside and outside TX, the preliminary injunction against the TX same-gender civil marriage bans while the district court case is proceeding was appealed by TX to the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, and the district court case proceedings were stayed pending the appeal ruling. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TEXAS • On 12 March 2014, in Shannon Zahrn, et al. v. TX Governor Rick Perry, et al., a federal class action suit seeking equal marriage rights for all TX couples, and challenging the TX statutory and constitutional bans on same-gender civil marriage, TX asked the court to stay proceedings in this case pending the outcome at the 5th Circuit of Cleopatra De Leon, et al., v. TX Governor Rick Perry et al. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TEXAS • On 12 March 2014, in Christopher McNosky, et al. v. TX Governor Rick Perry, et al., a federal class action suit seeking equal marriage rights for all TX couples, and challenging the TX statutory and constitutional bans on same-gender civil marriage, TX asked the court to stay proceedings in this case pending the outcome at the 5th Circuit of Cleopatra De Leon, et al., v. TX Governor Rick Perry et al. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TEXAS • On 18 February 2014, In the Matter of the Marriage of A.L.F.L. and K.L.L., Allison Leona Flood Lesh and Kristi Lyn Lesh filed for divorce and child custody. A hearing is scheduled for 20 March 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TENNESSEE • On 18 March 2014, in Valeria Tanco, et al. v. TN Governor William Haslam, et al., a constitutional challenge to the TN law that bans recognition of same-gender civil marriages, the TN attorney general: (1) asked for a stay of the injunction requiring TN to recognize the civil marriages of 3 same-gender couples, and (2) notified the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that TN is appealing the order requiring recognition of marriages made elsewhere. On 20 March 2014, the court denied the state’s request. • MEUSA Summary • News Source KENTUCKY • On 20 March 2014, in Timothy Love, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear (formerly Gregory Bourke & Michael De Leon, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear), a federal lawsuit challenging KY’s ban on recognizing same-gender couples married elsewhere, the court stayed enforcement of its final order (requiring KY to recognize marriages performed elsewhere) pending the outcome from the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Briefing on the intervening couples’ claims is slated to finish by 28 May 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN • On 20 March 2014, in Virginia Wolf & Carol Schumacher, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al., a federal lawsuit for 4 couples challenging the 2006 WI ban on same-gender civil marriage or civil union, and WI’s unique ban on marrying elsewhere, for which each spouse faces up to $10,000 in fines and 9 months in prison as soon as they return to WI, WI DoJ claimed that existing mixed-gender marriage rights don’t include same-gender marriage rights, and asked that the case be dismissed. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARKANSAS • The case of Kendall Wright, et al. v. AR Governor Michael Beebe, et al., in which 21 same-gender couples challenge the 2004 AR constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage, the state law banning same-gender civil marriage, the federal law allowing states to ignore same-gender marriages from other states, and recognition of parental rights, birth certificate names, insurance, and other benefits, is scheduled for oral argument on 17 April 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 20 March 2014, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA 4th Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer, et al., a federal lawsuit challenging VA’s 2006 ban on same-gender marriage, and out-of-state marriage recognition, the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals confirmed the hearing of oral arguments on 13 May 2014 from attorneys for the original plaintiffs, assisted by attorneys from Lambda Legal and ACLU (in Joanne Harris, et al. vs. VA State Registrar Janet Rainey, et al., a certified class action case). • MEUSA Summary • News Source MICHIGAN • On 21 March 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al.,a challenge to the state’s 2004 ban on same-gender marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, and joint adoption, the court: (1) overturned the law and constitutional amendment that banned same-gender civil marriage in MI, (2) said that MI testimony calling same-gender parents inferior was "entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration," and (3) said that no available science contradicts the consensus that same-gender and mixed-gender couples are equally good at parenting. • MEUSA Summary • News Source MICHIGAN • On 22 March 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al.,a challenge to the state’s 2004 ban on same-gender marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, and joint adoption, officials in at least 5 counties married over 300 county-resident, same-gender couples until 5:00 p.m., when the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay, effective through Tuesday, 26 March 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source HAWAI'I • On 19 March 2014, in Natasha Jackson, et al., v. Governor Neil Abercrombie, et al., a marriage rights case, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals requested an opening brief by 25 April 2014, an answering brief by 27 May 2014, and an optional reply brief 14 days after delivery of the answering brief. Lawamkers legalized same-gender civil marriage in 2013, but the court still wants to ensure an orderly disposition of the appeal for future reference. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceLAWSUITS RESOLVED
STATE LEGISLATION PENDING
GEORGIA • On 3 March 2014, SB-377, which would allow religious belief to excuse violating federal health care laws, died in the GA legislature for 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source SOUTH DAKOTA • By 14 March 2014, SB-128 (which would legalize religion-based discrimination against LGBT people in 4 settings: (1) employment; (2) public accommodation; (3) commercial services; and (4) state courts) died in the 2014 SD legislature, after a 5-to-2 vote by the SD Senate Judiciary Committee defeated it. • MEUSA Summary • News Source CALIFORNIA • On 14 March 2014, CA initiative #13-0014 (which would exempt a citizen from any law that conflicts with that citizen’s religious bible-based beliefs, and would modify the CA constitution to protect religious expression even when it violates peace and safety) failed to collect 807,615 valid signatures for the November 2014 ballot. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE LEGISLATION ENACTED
STATE BALLOT MEASURES
Send questions and comments to: [email protected].
Policy and Legal Update - March 10-16, 2014
Policy & Legal Updates
March 10 – 16, 2014NATIONAL MAP
NATIONAL POLLS
STATE POLLS
NATIONAL LEGISLATION PENDING
NATIONAL LEGISLATION ENACTED
LAWSUITS PENDING
VIRGINIA • On 10 March 2014, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA 4th Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer, et al., a federal lawsuit challenging VA’s 2006 ban on same-gender marriage, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed plaintiffs for Joanne Harris, et al. v. VA State Registrar Janet Rainey, et al.to join the appeal, with an expedited hearing date of May 12-15. Briefs are due from defendants by 28 March 2014, from plaintiffs by 11 April, and the defendants’ reply is due by 30 April. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ALABAMA • On 12 March 2014, in Shrie Michelle Richmond & Kirsten Allysse Richmond v. Madison County Circuit Clerk, a judge denied a divorce for two women who married in IA in 2012, and their attorney said they will appeal. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN • On 11 March 2014, in Virginia Wolf & Carol Schumacher, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al., a federal lawsuit for 4 couples challenging the 2006 WI ban on same-gender civil marriage or civil union, and WI's unique ban on marrying elsewhere, for which each spouse faces up to $10,000 in fines and 9 months in prison as soon as they return to WI, plaintiffs withdrew their request to suspend enforcement of the same-gender civil marriage ban while their lawsuit is pending, in exchange for (1) a quick ruling and (2) an agreement that two of the plaintiff couples will not be prosecuted for marrying in another state. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARIZONA • On 13 March 2014, in Nelda Majors & Karen Bailey, et al. v. AZ Attorney General Tom Horne, et al., Lambda Legal filed a federal lawsuit for 7 couples, and the surviving spouses of 2 additional same-gender couples, challenging the AZ 1996 and 1999 laws and the AZ 2006 constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage. • MEUSA Summary • News Source FLORIDA • On 12 March 2014, in Sloan Grimsley & Joyce Albu, et al., v. FL Governor Rick Scott, et al., ACLU filed a federal lawsuit for 8 same-gender couples and SAVE, challenging the FL ban on recognizing marriage licenses from elsewhere. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TENNESSEE • On 14 March 2014, in Valeria Tanco, et al. v. TN Governor William Haslam, et al., a constitutional challenge to the TN law that bans recognition of same-gender civil marriage, a judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring TN to recognize the marriage licenses obtained by the (now) 3 plaintiff couples from other states, so long as their lawsuit remains in progress. The judge noted that “all signs indicate that, in the eyes of the United States Constitution ... that proscriptions against same-sex marriage will soon become a footnote in the annals of American history.” • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN • On 14 March 2014, in Virginia Wolf & Carol Schumacher, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al., a federal lawsuit for 4 couples challenging the 2006 WI ban on same-gender civil marriage or civil union, and WI’s unique ban on marrying elsewhere, for which each spouse faces up to $10,000 in fines and 9 months in prison as soon as they return to WI, WI Department of Justice asked that the case be put on hold until the WI Supreme Court decides whether the WI domestic partner registry violates the WI ban on same-gender civil marriage in Julaine Appling, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al. • MEUSA Summary • News Source INDIANA • On 14 March 2014, in Midori Fujii, et al. v. IN Governor Michael Pence, ACLU of IN filed a federal suit for 13 plaintiffs (5 gay couples, 1 widow, and 2 children) challenging the IN ban on same-gender civil marriage in IN and elsewhere, funeral arrangements, and inheritance taxes. • MEUSA Summary • News Source INDIANA • On 14 March 2014, in Pamela Lee & Candace Batten-Lee, et al. v. IN Governor Michael Pence, et al., a federal suit was filed seeking marriage rights and benefits for public workers. • MEUSA Summary • News Source INDIANA • On 10 March 2014, in Rae Baskin & Esther Fuller, et al. v. Bogan, et al., Lambda Legal filed a federal suit for 3 couples challenging the IN same-gender civil marriage ban, and especially end-of-life health care. • MEUSA Summary • News Source INDIANA • On 14 March 2014, in Bowling, Bowling & Bruner v. IN Governor Michael Pence, 2 lesbian women filed a federal lawsuit to have their IA marriage recognized by IN, and an additional plaintiff sued because her IA marriage was never recognized by IN. • MEUSA Summary • News Source OHIO • On 26 February 2014, in Jim Obergefell & John Arthur v. OH Public Health Director Theodore Wymyslo, a federal marriage recognition lawsuit, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denied the plaintiffs’ motion for an expedited briefing schedule, and instead set a deadline of 30 May for all 3 briefs from both parties. • MEUSA Summary • News Source KENTUCKY • On 14 March 2014, in Timothy Love, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear (formerly Gregory Bourke & Michael De Leon, et al. v. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear), a federal lawsuit challenging KY’s ban on recognizing same-gender couples married elsewhere, KY Governor Steve Beshear asked the court to delay the 20 March 2014 effective date when KY must start recognizing same-gender civil marriages from other states. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceLAWSUITS RESOLVED
STATE LEGISLATION PENDING
STATE LEGISLATION ENACTED
STATE BALLOT MEASURES
- Legalized Discrimination • On 14 March 2014, the OR attorney general titled ballot initiative IP-52, “Religious Belief Exceptions to the Anti-Discrimination Laws...” IP-52 is sponsored by two anti-LGBT organizations (Friends of Religious Freedom, Oregon Family Council). • MEUSA Summary • News Source
Send questions and comments to: [email protected].
Policy and Legal Update - February 3-9, 2014
Policy & Legal Updates
February 3 – 9, 2014NATIONAL MAP
NATIONAL POLLS
NATIONAL LEGISLATION
LAWSUITS
MICHIGAN • On 6 February 2014, in April DeBoer & Jayne Rowse v. MI Governor Rick Snyder, et al., a suit challenging the MI laws that deny adoption to certified foster parents when they are not married, the plaintiffs sought to ban the testimony of sociology professor Mark Regnerus because his flawed methods, rejection by peers, lack of qualifications, unreliability, irrelevance don’t meet the minimum requirements for federal evidence. Trial is scheduled for 25 February 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 6 February 2014, in Jonell Evans, et al. v. State of Utah, a case seeking immediate recognition of all marriages between same-gender couples who were married from 20 December 2013 through 6 January 2014, the plaintiffs asked for an expedited hearing. • MEUSA Summary • News Source LOUISIANA • On 27 January 2014, in Jonathan Robicheaux and Derek Pinton, et al. v. LA Attorney General James Caldwell, a federal case challenging the LA constitutional amendment and state law banning same-gender civil marriage, and banning LA recognition of same-gender couples married elsewhere, Judge Martin Feldman denied a request to un-consolidate this case (#2013-cv-05090) from another case (#2014-cv-00097). • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARKANSAS • On 31 January 2014, in Rita & Pam Jernigan et al. v. Crane et al., a federal lawsuit seeking same-gender civil marriages, AR asked a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit challening the 2004 AR constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN • On 3 February 2014, in Virginia Wolf & Carol Schumacher, et al., v. WI Governor Scott Walker, et al., ACLU filed a federal lawsuit for 4 couples challenging the 2006 WI ban on same-gender civil marriage or civil union, and WI's unique ban on marrying elsewhere, for which each spouse faces up to $10,000 in fines and 9 months in prison as soon as they return to WI. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE LEGISLATION & POLLS
ARIZONA • On 5 February 2014, the Camp Verde, AZ council voted against recognizing civil unions for same-gender couples. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 29 January 2014, UT state Representative Merrill Nelson proposed a law so that citizens can donate funds via their UT tax return for legalizing discrimination against same-gender couples. • MEUSA Summary • News Source KANSAS • On 6 February 2014, HB-2453, which would legalize discrimination by individuals, businesses, and government against same-gender couples whenever the excuse is religious beliefs, passed from committee to the full House for a vote. • MEUSA Summary • News Source INDIANA • IN Republicans criminalized the performance of any religious ceremony that religiously marries two people of the same gender, starting 1 July 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 27 January 2014, state Rep. Jacob Anderegg (R) introduced 2 bills (HB-231, HJR-1) that would prevent clergy from being forced to solemnize marriages against their beliefs. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 3 Febuary 2014, the Republican-led VA House of Representatives passed HB-706, a bill that would let any state lawmaker defend the VA ban on same-gender civil marriage in place of the governor and attorney general. The bill also needs approval of the VA Senate, then the VA governor. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WEST VIRGINIA • On 4 February 2014, the Morgantown, WV City Council unanimously approved a resolution supporting marriage equality in the WV legislature. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARIZONA • On 4 February 2014, an AZ House Government Committee passed HB-2153, which legalizes discrimination against LGBT people whenever the perpetrator claims religious beliefs as the excuse for the discrimination. SB-1062 also passed its respective committee in the AZ Senate. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TEXAS • On 4 February 2014, Bexar County, TX extended health benefits to county workers' same-gender spouses. • MEUSA Summary • News Source ARIZONA • On 5 February 2014, an AZ House committee approved a bill to legalize discrimination against LGBT people whenever religious belief is the excuse. • MEUSA Summary • News Source TENNESSEE • On 6 February 2014, TN state Senator Brian Kelsey (R) and Representative Bill Dunn (R) proposed SB-2566 and HB-2467, to legalize discrimination against same-gender couples in domestic partnerships, civil unions, and marriages, whenever the discrimination is excused by claims of religious belief. • MEUSA Summary • News Source KENTUCKY POLLS • On WKYT-TV, WHAS-TV, and 2 newspapers surveyed 1,082 registered voters on same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 55% oppose it, 35% support it, and 10% aren’t sure. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WISCONSIN POLLS • On 29 October 2013, Marquette University surveyed 800 WI registered voters on same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 53% support it, 24% support only civil union, 19% oppose all legal recognition of same-gender couples, with 4% unaccounted for. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE BALLOTS & POLLS
OHIO • On 9 February 2014, FreedomOhio announced it has gathered 650,000 petition signatures, hopes to reach 1,000,000 by summer, and will decide later whether the statewide vote occurs in 2014 or 2016. • MEUSA Summary • News Source Send questions and comments to: [email protected].Policy and Legal Update - January 27-February 2, 2014
Policy & Legal Updates
27 January – 2 February, 2014NATIONAL MAP
NATIONAL POLLS
NATIONAL LEGISLATION
LAWSUITS
VIRGINIA • On 31 January 2014, in Joanne Harris, et al. v. Staunton, VA Court Clerk, et al., a lawsuit for two couples seeking full marriage equality for all VA residents, including couples married elsewhere, the court granted class-action status, so the case now affects all same-gender couples. • MEUSA Summary • News Source NEVADA • On 27 January 2014, in Beverly Sevcik, et al., v. Governor Brian Sandoval, et al., a lawsuit seeking full marriage equality for 8 couples, the Carson City, NV Clerk-Record Alan Glover withdrew his Answering Brief in the appeal case, and no longer opposes the Plaintiffs. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 27 Januar y2014, in Joanne Harris, et al. v. Staunton, VA Court Clerk, et al., a federal class action lawsuit for two couples seeking full marriage equality for all VA residents, including couples married elsewhere, VA Attorney General Mark Herring notified the court that VA’s state laws banning same-gender civil marriage are unconstitutional, that VA is reversing its position in the case, that he will not defend them, and that he will argue that they are unconstitutional. • MEUSA Summary • News Source OKLAHOMA • On 28 January 2014, in Mary Bishop, et al. v. United States and Tulsa County Court Clerk, et al., a case challenging the state constitution for denying the right to marry the person of one’s own choice, and for refusing to recognize same-gender marriages performed in other states, the Tenth Cicuit U.S. Court of Appeals decided to review the OK and UT appeals (a) on a fast-track schedule, and (b) by the same panel of judges. The appeals will be briefed separately and argued separately. The OK appeal schedule is: cross-appeal 1st brief by 24 February, 2nd/supplemental briefs by 17 March, 3rd brief by 1 April, optional reply brief by 7 April, and oral arguments after 7 April. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 28 January 2014, in Kitchen, et al. v. Utah Governor Gary Herbert, et al., a federal lawsuit challenging UT’s constitutional amendment banning same-gender civil marriage, the Tenth Cicuit U.S. Court of Appeals decided to review both the UT and OK cases (a) on a fast-track schedule, and (b) by the same panel of judges. The UT and OK appeals will be briefed separately and argued separately. The UT appeal schedule is: last filings 4 March; oral arguments 10 April. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 28 January 2014, in Jonell Evans, et al. v. Utah, an ACLU suit to force UT to recognize about 1360 marriages performed from 20 December 2013 through 2 January 2014, the case was moved from state court to a federal court. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 28 January 2014, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA State Registrar Janet Rainey, et al., a federal lawsuit challenging VA’s 2006 ban on in-stateand out-of-state same-gender marriage, VA Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) told dozens of Republican lawmakers he would not appoint any special prosecutor to defend the VA same-gender civil marriage ban. • MEUSA Summary • News Source VIRGINIA • On 28 January 2014, in Joanne Harris, et al. v. Staunton, VA Court Clerk, et al.,a federal class action lawsuit for two couples seeking full marriage equality for all VA residents, including couples married elsewhere, VA Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) told dozens of Republican lawmakers he would not appoint any special prosecutor to defend the VA same-gender civil marriage ban. • MEUSA Summary • News Source HAWAII • On 29 January 2014, in McDermott v. Abercrombie, a state judge ruled that the HI Marriage Equality Act of 2013 violates neither the state nor the federal constitutions. • MEUSA Summary • News Source WEST VIRGINIA • On 28 January 2014, in Casie Jo McGee, et al. v. Cabell County Clerk Karen Cole, et al., a federal lawsuit for three couples challenging the state law that bans marriage equality, the judge denied WV’s motion to dismiss the suit, but dismissed the complaint about recognizing out-of-state marriage licenses, unless additional plaintiffs are added. • MEUSA Summary • News Source UTAH • On 30 January 2014, in Kate Doe & Beth Roe v. Utah, a lesbian couple sued UT for refusing to recognize their 2010 marriage in another state. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE LEGISLATION & POLLS
KANSAS • On 24 January 2014, KS state Representative Charles Macheers introduced a bill to legalize discrimination against same-gender couples whenever a person, group, or business claims that their discrimination is religiously based. The KS House Federal and State Affairs Committee scheduled a hearing for 28 January 2014. • MEUSA Summary • News Source SOUTH DAKOTA • On 21 January 2014, SD state Senator Ernie Otten proposed SB-67, which would legalize discrimination against same-gender couples whenever the perpetrator claims religions as the excuse. • MEUSA Summary • News Source SOUTH DAKOTA • On 21 January 2014, SD state Senator Ernie Otten proposed SB-66, which would prevent clergy and religions from being sued for not performing a same-gender civil weddings. • MEUSA Summary • News Source SOUTH DAKOTA • On 30 January 2014, SD SB-67 was withdrawn, and replaced by SB-128, which would legalize religion-based discrimination against LGBT people in 4 settings: (1) employment; (2) public accommodation; (3) commercial services; and (4) state courts. • MEUSA Summary • News Source IDAHO • On 28 January 2014, ID state Representative Lynn Luker proposed a bill to legalize discrimination by people in 28 licensed professions who use religion as their excuse for the discrimination. • MEUSA Summary • News Source NEBRASKA • On 28 January 2014, Sarpy County, NE commissioners extended health insurance benefits to spouses of county employees with same-gender spouses who got legally married in another state. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSTATE BALLOTS & POLLS
INDIANA • On 27 January 2014, by 57 to 40, the IN House approved HJR-3, a proposal to revise the IN constitution to ban same-gender civil marriage, after revising it to delete a ban on civil union, domestic partnership, and worker spouse benefits, but whether same-gender civil marriage goes before voters, and in what year, remains undecided. • MEUSA Summary • News Source PENNSYLVANIA • On 29 January 2014, Franklin & Marshall College surveyed 580 PA voters about same-gener civil marriage, and reported 56% in favor, 39% opposed, and 6% don't know. • MEUSA Summary • News SourceSend questions and comments to: [email protected].