I never thought marrying Maggie would set us on the path to be one of the faces for Marriage Equality outside of our circles. Sure, we experienced fear & a sense of disappointment that people were attacking us personally & OUR family after Prop 8 was passed a few days after we married 1 Nov 2008. We had some anxiety as we awaited the decision from the CA State Supreme Court to continue to recognize our marriage & the marriage of the other 18,000 same sex couples who married during the 142 days it was legal. We had discussions, debates & arguments with some family members & members of our communities as we wanted to make sure ALL Californians had the same rights & responsibilities of marriage. But we otherwise continued to live our lives, love each other, & be active in communities we loved. We were just like any other newlywed couple.

I received a phone call from my doctor a few months after our nuptials. Some abnormal lesions were discovered in my brain during an MRI. After more tests, more evaluations, 2 spinal taps, dozens of neurological visits & a trip to the ER 11 hrs before a good friend's wedding, we had confirmation. This was MS. It was determined to be caused by my military service. MS robs people of movement, & can affect any part daily life, from speech to vision, balance to memory, loss of motor function to loss of independence. It affects the brain & Central Nervous System. There is no cure.

There is only medication to slow down the disease's progression. And I was scared, because having this disease brought up what I saw my Mom go through as she fought MS for 20yrs. It also reminded me of how my stepfather took care of Mom when she started going downhill, & how my Mom took care of him in life & after she died at 51 because they were married. My Pop is still benefiting from my Mom's pension, Social Security benefits, & health insurance because they were married to each other.

Like my Mom, I wanted to make sure I had my end of life matters in order so Maggie would be provided for when something happened to me. That sounds sobering for most 38 yr olds, but I had to do this a few times when I was in the Army from the time I was 19 until I was 30. As a disabled veteran, I knew that my wife would be eligible for benefits I earned because of my military service. I wanted Maggie buried with me in a Veteran's Cemetery when the time came. But I found out that if something happened to me, my wife wouldn't be recognized as such by the country I fought to defend. While I was alive, & even in death, the Defense of Marriage Act would deny her the VA benefits any heterosexual spouse of a veteran receives. My wife couldn't be buried with me at any Veterans Cemetery, even here in California, because they took federal monies to help with the Cemetery. They had to follow federal law.

I was angry. Really, we couldn't be buried together?! It's not like the neighbors are going to walk out, or people who come to pay their respects to their loved ones are going to boycott-everyone's DEAD! Why should this even matter? Maggie was going to be taking care of me as this disease progressed, & making sure she had the same benefits as any other spouse was the least I could do for her. I had to fight for her because she is the best thing that's happened to me. And she deserves everything I can give her.

It was time to funnel my anger to make a change. With the initial help from another Army Veteran named Wendi, I asked the VA to recognize my wife as my dependent. It was the fastest denial letter I had ever received or heard of. Two weeks after I sent my request, it was denied. A month after that, I appealed that decision. It was denied again, & the VA asked who would be representing me as my legal counsel if I wanted to continue this fight. I took this as a challenge, & got a civil rights powerhouse stand up for our family.

With the help of Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) & WilmerHale, we filed a federal lawsuit against section 3 of DOMA & Title 38 of the VA so my wife would be treated as any other married spouse of a disabled veteran would on 1 February 2012. We were taken aback when we actually saw our lawsuit, "Cooper-Harris vs USA". We shared our story with the news, media, social networks why marriage mattered, why it made no sense to treat our marriage differently than any other marriage because we are 2 women. And our family & friends rallied around us, sharing our story & why they supported our fight. If we had to be the face of this inequity to get the conversation started & get things changed, so be it.

Our lawsuit ended about a month after the SCOTUS decision on Edie Windsor's case [July 2013]. The US District Court ruled that the VA had to treat my wife as my dependent since section 3 of DOMA was ruled unconstitutional 29 August 2013. Attorney General Eric Holder cited our case along with the SCOTUS decision on Windsor as reason they would not continue to uphold Title 38's definition of spouse for veterans in same sex marriage in a letter to Congress in September 2013. The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) of the House of Representatives cited our case as dropping their defending DOMA in federal court. And we finally got the letter from the VA February 2014, 2yrs after we started this fight, that officially recognizes Maggie as my wife.

I know we still have a ways to go. Other veterans in same sex marriages living in non marriage equality states are in limbo as the Dept of Justice & VA work out how to provide benefits, since the VA is still going by where the couple resides instead of where the marriage took place for VA benefits. We still have 30+ US States that deny marriage to same sex couples.

Our story is one of many. And the more that our stories are heard, the more our families will benefit. It's about the love we share, the love I have for my fellow veterans, & the love I have for this country. Because we all are part of this larger family, & we are here to help one another.

---

Maggie and Tracey Cooper-Harris reside in Southern, California, where they have both served as active and effective advocates for marriage equality.  We acknowledge and thank Tracey for her service to our country.

 

By MEUSA Military/Veteran Community Liaison Ty Redhouse Our nation’s LGBT veterans and service members have witnessed much progress in the past year. From the magnificent shift to a post-DADT world to the downfall of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), attention has focused on our men and women presently serving in the Armed Forces. What many in the media overlook are those who have served and who are LGBT. Following the mainstream press, one could easily conclude there are not many of us out there. If this is the assumption, it is incorrect. In fact, there are more than one million LGBT veterans in the United States and that number keeps growing. It is those individuals who fall through the cracks when the push for equality is highlighted, particularly in the scope of marriage equality. This historic Veterans Day marks the first time we do not have “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), both of which severely hindered the progress of American society. In 2011, we saw DADT pass out of the ranks of the military with little to no homage to the fearful predictions of the conservative pundits. There was no mass exodus and our nation’s military continued on in its mission. The only difference; a more open environment and more integrity because we no longer had to hide ourselves to keep our jobs. Since my honorable discharge from the USAF in 2006, I have come to understand and appreciate the meaning of Veterans Day. With each year that has passed, I have developed an enhanced comprehension of just what we, those who choose to give our lives over to defend the country, put on the line so our families and friends can rest easier. As a gay veteran, I have seen dramatic changes in the short time DADT has been off the books. My active duty brethren and sistren can now serve openly and proudly. For some that were reinstated, they thrive and serve ever more proudly than before. I felt their happiness but was left wondering what there was for the veterans, the many who either left or were drummed from the ranks under DADT or before. To date, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been less than clear regarding their application of post-DOMA federal law. This ambiguity leaves us wondering about a system that has long left us out of the loop. Recently, I went to a medical appointment with my partner at the local VA medical facility. We held hands and did what any other veteran and loved one would do. I was a silent bundle of nerves. As we walked the halls, that weird DADT-era fear came creeping back in. This fear made me realize that there is still a lot of work to be done. If that fear still resided in me after all that has happened in favor of our LGBT community, it must be so for the many who are not yet comfortable coming out to their VA providers. The presence of LGBT-friendly resources for LGBT veterans is more vital than before, especially since DADT and DOMA have been rescinded. As Marriage Equality USA’s (MEUSA) Military/Veteran Community Liaison, it has been one of my duties to ensure there is access to those resources. Here are a few:

• American Military Partners Association (AMPA): The nation’s premier resource and support network for LGBT military partners, spouses and their families. Founded by the partners of active duty servicemembers, AMPA has grown to nearly 4,000 members with thousands more supporters and is proud to be leading the effort to connect, support, honor, and serve our modern military families.
• American Veterans for Equal Rights (AVER): A non-profit, non-partisan, chapter-based Veterans Service Organization of active, reserve, and veteran service members dedicated to full and equal rights and equitable treatment for all present and former members of the U.S. Armed Forces, especially the LGBT current and prior military personnel who have been historically disenfranchised by armed forces policy and discriminatory laws governing military service and benefits.
• OutServe/SLDN: A non-partisan association of actively serving LGBT military personnel offering legal services and acting as a watchdog and policy organization dedicated to bringing about full LGBT equality to America's military and ending all forms of discrimination and harassment of military personnel on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
• Service members, Partners, Allies for Respect and Tolerance for All (SPARTA): The mission of this organization is to advocate for and support our actively serving LGBT military members and veterans and their families while working to ensure the military provides equal opportunity for all service members regardless of race, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation and gender identity.

This Veterans Day, take a moment to thank a veteran for his or her service. Also, take a moment to think of the men and women who are abroad putting their lives at risk so we can rest easy at home. Now, take it further and think about the partners/husbands/wives of those LGBT Servicemembers out there who wait for their loved ones to return. Or the LGBT veteran who walks for the first time into the hospital hand in hand with his or her partner, a silent bundle of nerves waiting to be called out and shot down. Most importantly, thank a veteran. You could be the one person who makes his or her day.

[caption id="attachment_368" align="alignleft" width="112"] Boyce Hinman[/caption] Authored by Boyce Hinman, founder and director of the California Communities United Institute, and member of Marriage Equality USA. Hinman has been writing and posting a series, "Monday Morning Marriage Memo," as part of his  Anatomy for Justice blog. This article was first published there, and is republished here with the author’s permission. Hinman resides in and serves California, therefore the posts sometimes have a California slant. NOTE: Marriage Equality USA is not a legal firm or a tax/accounting firm. No action should be taken based solely on the content of our news blog or website. The spouses and children of veterans (or active service members in some circumstances) qualify for certain education and housing benefits. And, now that DOMA has been overturned, the same sex spouses of veterans qualify for those benefits. Note: I am not an attorney or a qualified tax expert. No action should be taken based solely on the content of these memos. However, I hope the memos will help you ask the right questions of people who are qualified in these issues. Under current law, veterans qualify for a number of benefits which relate to getting a college education or other training for work. Under certain circumstances, those benefits may be transferred to, and used by, their spouses and children. The benefits are as follows:

• College tuition and fee payments paid to the school on the student’s behalf.
• A monthly housing allowance.
• A books and supplies stipend of up to $1,000 per year.

The percentage of these benefits paid depends on how many months the veteran served on active duty in the military. Service members who served for at least 36 months qualify for 100% of the maximum benefits payable. Service members with at least 90 days, but less than 6 months, of active duty qualify for 40% of the maximum benefits available. The percentage of benefits available goes up in steps with increasing numbers of months served, but topping out at 100%. Veterans are eligible for 36 months worth of these benefits. They can use the benefits for up to 15 years after their last period of active duty of at least 90 consecutive days. They can use the benefits at colleges, universities, trade schools, and for on-the-job training, apprenticeships, and flight schools. The amount of the housing allowance varies with the ZIP code of the college and with whether the veteran is living at the college or taking courses over the internet or in some other way not actually attending classes in person. Whatever of these benefits have not been used up by the veterans can be transferred to, and used by, the spouses and children of the veterans. These benefits are administrated by the US Veteran’s Administration (VA). And whether or not that agency recognizes a same sex marriage depends on where the couple was married and where they live when the benefits are being requested. Basically, the VA recognizes a same sex marriages in almost all situations. The one exception is as follows: At the time of the marriage the couple lived in a state that does not recognize marriage (but they got married in a state that allows such marriages) and still live in a state that does not recognize same sex marriage at the time of application for veteran’s benefits. The rules determining when a spouse or child may use the veteran’s education and housing benefits are stricter than the rules saying when a veteran qualifies to use them. In order for the transfer of benefits to become possible, the military service member must have served 6 years in the military and must agree to serve an additional 4 years, or has already completed 10 years of service, or has not completed 10 years of service but is prevented from doing so as the result of Department of Defense policy or because of some law (but agrees to serve as long as he or she is allowed to). The transfer of benefits would also be allowed if the service member has retired from the military or is eligible to do so. Spouses are eligible to use the transferred benefits even while the service member is still on active duty. The spouse may use the benefit for up to 15 years from the last separation of the service member from active duty. The children must wait until the service member has completed the required 10 years of service and may use the benefit without the 15 year limit. However the child’s eligibility ends at age 26.

Marriage Equality USA Projects Manager Ned Flaherty closely monitors marriage equality polls, ballots, laws, and lawsuits nationwide, and keeps the MEUSA website updated with changes in these areas on a near-daily basis. Every Monday we update you via our blog with policy and legal updates covering the preceding week. You may always find the most up-to-date information, including changes that have taken place between these weekly posts, on the Current Policy & Legal Status page on the MEUSA website.

Policy & Legal Updates

September 30 - October 6, 2013

---

NATIONAL MAP

---

NATIONAL POLLS

• On 27 September 2013, Public Religion Research Institute surveyed 1,563 Hispanic Americans from a representative sample of U.S. adults regarding same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 55% favor it, 43% do not, with 2% unaccounted for. Also, regarding candidate preferences, likely Hispanic voters prefer Democrats 58%, Republicans 28%, and others 12%, with 2% unaccounted for.  •  Survey Details
• On 4 October 2013, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,776 American adults on same-gender civil marriage, and reported that among registered voters, 57% support it, 36% do not, and 6% do not know or give no answer.  Among Roman Catholics (where no clergy support same-gender civil marriage at all), 60% of churchgoers support it, 31% don't, and 9% do not know or give no answer.  •  Survey Details

---

NATIONAL LEGISLATION

• On 30 September 2013, U.S. Representative Adam Smith (D- Washington) and Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan), the top Democrats on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, told the U.S. Department of Defense to ensure that military spouse benefits are issued to all armed forces personnel in same-gender civil marriages, including states which have denied some benefits applications, such as IN, LA, MS, OK, SC, and TX.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  Survey Details

---

LAWSUITS

MASSACHUSETTS  •  On 2 October 2013, in Shannon McLaughlin, et al. v. Chuck Hagel, et al., a Federal district court ruled in favor of 8 same-gender couples and awarded them equal pay/benefits for active/veteran military personnel, retroactively to 2011.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source PENNSYLVANIA  •  On 1 October 2013, in Pennsylvania Health Department v. Montgomery County Court Clerk Bruce Hanes, the county appealed to the PA Supreme Court a lower court ruling that halted the issuance of same-gender civil marriage licenses after 174 licenses were issued.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source PENNSYLVANIA  •  On 26 September 2013, in Cara Palladino & Isabelle Barker v. PA Governor Corbett et al., a couple filed a federal suit to force PA to recognize their 2005 MA marriage.  The Equality Forum suit raises two new federal constitutional questions:  whether states must respect laws from other states, and whether citizens can travel between states without losing rights.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source WEST VIRGINIA  •  On 1 October 2013, in Casie Jo McGee, et al. v. Cabell County Clerk Karen Cole, et al., Fairness WV and Lambda Legal filed a federal lawsuit for three couples challenging the state law that bans marriage equality.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source NEW JERSEY  •  On 30 September 2013, in Garden State Equality, et al. v. NJ Attorney General Paula Dow, et al., Lambertville, NJ mayor David DelVecchio committed to performing NJ’s first same-gender civil marriage as soon as the ruling goes into effect on 21 October 2013.  •  MEUSA Summary  • News Source NEW JERSEY  •  On 1 October 2013, in Garden State Equality, et al. v. NJ Attorney General Paula Dow, et al., NJ Acting Attorney General John Hoffman appealed directly to the NJ Supreme Court (bypassing the NJ appeals court), and asked for expedited review.  Hoffman also asked the Superior Court to delay implementation of its ruling until after the Supreme Court review, which Lambda Legal opposes.  • MEUSA Summary  •  News Source VIRGINIA  •  On 30 September 2013, in Joanne Harris, et al. v. Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell et al., the ACLU, ACLU Virginia, and Lambda Legal filed a federal class action lawsuit for two couples seeking full marriage equality for all VA residents, including couples married elsewhere.  On 30 September 2013, ACLU and Lambda Legal asked for a summary judgment.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source KENTUCKY  •  On 1 October 2013, in Gregory Bourke & Michael Deleon v. Kentucky, KY Attorney General Clay Barkley asked a federal court to dismiss the case, claiming that the plaintiffs have no standing to bring this lawsuit.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source TEXAS  •  On 9 September 2013, 16 TX state representatives told the TX Military Forces to:  (1) stop denying equal pay and benefits to all same-gender married military couples at all TX National Guard facilities, (2) stop denying membership in family readiness groups, and (3) stop denying participation in marriage enrichment retreats.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source TEXAS  •  On 13 September 2013, in Alicia Butler & Judith Chedville vs. Texas, Lambda Legal told the TX Military Forces that since 3 September 2013 it has been unlawful to deny equal federal pay and benefits to any same-gender married military couple, and the TX ban on same-gender civil marriage does not exempt TX from compliance.  Chedville is an Army nurse and Iraq war veteran, and a 1st Lieutenant in the Army National Guard.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source VIRGINIA  •  On 18 July 2013, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA State Registrar Janet Rainey, et al., a gay couple filed a federal lawsuit challenging VA’s 2006 ban on same-gender marriage, joined by a lesbian couple seeking to have their 2008 CA marriage recognized in VA.  On 30 September 2013, AFER (American Foundation for Equal Rights), the sole sponsor of the lawsuit which defeated CA Proposition 8, joined this lawsuit to win full federal marriage equality nationwide.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source VIRGINIA  •  On 3 October 2013, in Timothy Bostic, et al. vs. VA State Registrar Janet Rainey, et al., VA Attorney General (and candidate for governor) Ken Cucinelli filed a brief in federal court arguing that same-gender civil marriage should be banned because:  (1) some religious beliefs from the 1500s also ban it; (2) some dictionaries still describe marriage as only between mixed-gender couples; and (3) some mixed-gender couples procreate.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source NEW JERSEY  •  On 4 October 2013, in Garden State Equality, et al. v. NJ Attorney General Paula Dow, et al., plaintiffs told the court that NJ has failed to prove it risks any irreparable harm if it issues licenses, and has failed to prove that it is likely to win its appeal, and therefore asked the court to not delay the implementation of its ruling.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source

---

STATE LEGISLATION & POLLS

NEW MEXICO  •  On 1 October 2013, Anzalone Liszt Grove Research surveyed 502 registered NM voters regarding same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 51% support it (35% strongly; 16% somewhat), 42% oppose it (34% strongly, 8% somewhat) and 7% do not know or refused to answer.  Regarding a constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage, 54% oppose it (42% strongly, 12% somewhat), 38% support it (32% strongly, 6% somewhat), and 8% do not know or refused to answer.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source PENNSYLVANIA  •  On 3 October 2013, state Representative Brian Sims (D) introduced House Bill 1686, the Pennsylvania Marriage Equality Act, to legalize same-gender civil marriage.  The bill is supported by 32 lawmakers (31 Democrats, 1 Republican).  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source NEW JERSEY  •  On 2 October 2013, Assemblyman Chris Brown (R) reversed his 2012 vote, and now supports marriage equality.  To override the governor’s 2012 veto by mid-January 2014, only 10 more lawmakers are needed (3 Senators to reach 27 out of 40 and 7 Assemblymen to reach 54 out of 80).  • MEUSA Summary  •  News Source

---

STATE BALLOTS & POLLS

NEVADA  •  On 2 October 2013, Retail Association of Nevada surveyed 500 likely NV voters regarding repeal of the constitutional ban on same-gender civil marriage, and reported that 57% favor repeal, and 36% do not, with 7% unaccounted for.  •  MEUSA Summary  •  News Source   OREGON  •  On 4 October 2013, the Oregon Business Association, which represents over 300 businesses, endorsed the Freedom-to-Marry & Religious Protection Initiative, following the Portland Business Alliance.  Volunteers have collected over 90,000 signatures toward placing the issue on the November 2014 ballot.  • MEUSA Summary  •  News Source

---

Send questions and comments to:  [email protected].