All Blog Posts
GLAD Goes to Washington
Yesterday I had the honor of accompanying Nancy Gill and Marcelle Letourneau, the lead plaintiffs in Gill v. OPM, GLAD’s First Circuit DOMA challenge, along with attorney Mary Bonauto, to Washington, D.C. The three were invited to speak at a press conference hosted by Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York, who re-introduced the Respect for Marriage Act, his bill to repeal DOMA. Rep. Nadler’s history of active support for advancing LGBT rights on Capitol Hill is as long as his congressional career, which began in the early 1990s.
“The Court, the Closet and the Press”
Does the political theater of Supreme Court confirmation hearings push justices to the right on issues involving a free press? Dahlia Lithwick, Supreme Court writer for Slate, made this argument yesterday at a panel discussion on “The Court, the Closet, and the Press” at Suffolk University Law School.
Reality Check: The Big Lie About Catholic Charities, Adoption and Marriage Equality
Last month’s marriage equality hearing in Rhode Island left me feeling a little like Congressman Joe “You Lie!” Wilson. Wilson, you’ll recall, shouted his infamous exclamation at President Obama after the president stated in a speech to Congress that his health care legislation would not provide free health coverage for illegal immigrants, despite what vocal opponents of the healthcare bill were saying. As I watched Austin Nimocks of the anti-gay Alliance Defense Fund testify without blinking that marriage equality in Massachusetts “forced” Catholic Charities of Boston out of the adoption business, it was all I could do not to let loose a “You Lie!” right there in the marbled halls of the Rhode Island State House.
Know Your Rights: What is ‘heightened scrutiny’ and why is it important?
Courts have found that laws that discriminate against certain groups of people are more likely to reflect prejudice against that group than they are good public policy. Rather than being assumed to be constitutional, such laws need to be justified with exceptionally good reasons. This is called “heightened scrutiny” and has, for example, been used in cases where a racial group is being discriminated against. GLAD has consistently argued in the courts that sexual orientation deserves “heightened scrutiny.” So it was an enormous breakthrough last week when the President and the Department of Justice (DOJ) agreed with GLAD on that point- and because of that also agreed that DOMA is unconstitutional.
Something On Which GLAD & NOM Agree! Courts Have a Role to Play in the Real World
On the heels of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) announcement last week that it would no longer defend DOMA against legal challenges by GLAD and other organizations, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) issued an action alert urging members to immediately call their congressional reps to demand they defend the odious law.
“It’s a constitutional outrage,” NOM President Brian Brown wrote in the alert. “Why do we even have courts if the President himself gets to decide which laws are constitutional?” (Emphasis added).
Know Your Rights: DOJ Decides DOMA Is Unconsitutional, But DOMA Continues To Be Enforced
Given the breaking news that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will no longer defend Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), I wanted to let you know what that really means to the two lawsuits GLAD currently has in the federal courts trying to overturn DOMA—Gill and Pedersen .
Know Your Rights: An Introduction to GLAD’s Legal InfoLine
Legal InfoLine Manager Bruce Bell begins a regular weekly blog post today.
Don’t let fear tactics undermine the Maine Human Rights Act’s vital protections
Ultimately it is the purpose of the Maine Human Rights Act to allow individuals the same opportunity to prove themselves in work and in public life, without barriers imposed by discrimination and prejudice.
Debriefing the briefs in Gill: Colorful cast of characters aligns with DOJ in support of DOMA
As in politics, court cases sometimes make strange bedfellows. The pairing of Bush v. Gore rivals Ted Olson and David Boies on the legal challenge to California’s Prop. 8 is an obvious example. Now, there’s Barack Obama and Gary G. Kreep. Who is Gary G. Kreep, you ask? For starters, he’s the amicus counsel for the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuals, otherwise known as NARTH. The organization is one of 17 entities that filed amicus briefs in support of the Obama Administration’s appeal in Gill v. OPM, one of our two lawsuits challenging Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Marriage Momentum in Rhode Island
The momentum for marriage equality was palpable at the Rhode Island State House yesterday! The sight inside warmed my heart, as I was greeted by a throng of mostly marriage equality supporters holding colorful pro-equality signs (“Vote for Love!” “Love Thy Constituent,” “Grandparents for Marriage Equality”) aloft in the Rotunda, beneath a massive banner emblazoned with the words Gov. Lincoln Chafee spoke at his inauguration last month: “When marriage equality is the law in Rhode Island we honor our forefathers who risked their lives and fortune in the pursuit of human equality.”