FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

November 8, 2002

Glad Suit Seeking Civil Marriage Rights Backed by National Organizations

Glad Suit Seeking Civil Marriage for Gays and Lesbians Backed by Local and National Organizations

(Boston, MA) An unprecedented number of independent organizations from the Boston Bar Association to the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, the Greater Boston Civil Rights Coalition and a host of child welfare experts joined the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) today in filing its brief and 10 supporting briefs in the case before the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) seeking the right to marry for gays and lesbians in Massachusetts.

The suit, originally filed on behalf of 7 plaintiff couples in April, 2001, argues that the right to marry the person of one’s choice is protected under the state constitution. The brief filed today in the SJC further argues that the state cannot justify excluding same-sex couples from marriage and the hundreds of protections it provides.

“The strength of our case—that it’s fundamentally discriminatory to deny these couples and families the same protections as others—is clearly demonstrated in the depth and breadth of those organizations and individuals who are standing with us,” said Mary Bonauto, the lead GLAD attorney on the case. “Our plaintiffs are just like other couples and families throughout the state. Their concerns are universal—that they can provide stability and love as they raise their children, and that in times of need, they can protect one another.”

In the 10 friend of the court briefs filed in support of GLAD’s brief, totaling over 500 pages, the arguments and organizations include the following:

  * The Boston Bar Association and others submitted a brief to explain the enormous edifice of laws protecting married couples – including laws which honor their emotional commitment and support their economic interdependence –but which cannot be obtained absent marriage.
  * The Greater Boston Civil Rights Coalition, the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Black Women Attorneys, Massachusetts NOW and the Massachusetts Association of Hispanic Attorneys and many others argue that excluding gays from marriage is discriminatory in the same way it was when the state forbade interracial marriage and stripped women of their legal rights on their wedding day.
  * The authors of a leading family law treatise in Massachusetts, Professor Charles Kindregan, Jr. and Attorney Monroe Inker, use their brief to explain that marriage has always been legally valid in the state whether or not couples have wanted or reared children, thereby discrediting the procreation argument often used to exclude gays and lesbians from marriage.
  * The American Psychoanalytic Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and the pediatric chairs of several major hospitals argue that gay and lesbian parents are good parents, and the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage cannot be justified by child rearing concerns.
  * The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, the Unitarian Universalist Association as well as individual clergy from a variety of faiths, filed to remind the Court that only the legal institution of civil marriage is at issue in the case, not the rules of any faith, and that many clergy support the right of gays and lesbians to marry civilly.

The friend of the court briefs were written and filed by attorneys at many of the leading law firms throughout Massachusetts, including Hale & Dorr, Palmer & Dodge, Foley Hoag, Goodwin Procter, Hill & Barlow, Bingham McCutchen, Peabody & Arnold, and Choate, Hall & Stewart, Krokidas & Bluestein, and Kimball, Brusseau & Michon.

A state Superior Court judge ruled against the plaintiffs in May, 2002, prompting this appeal to the SJC. The case is expected to be heard by the SJC sometime this winter, and decided in the summer of 2003.

“This unprecedented level of support demonstrates that when people understand the depth of inequity faced by gay and lesbian couples and families today, they see the profound discrimination involved in marriage and want to change it,” said Gary Buseck, GLAD’s Executive Director. “We hope and expect the court to come to the same conclusion.”

Of the 7 couples, 4 are raising children. One lesbian couple, facing both health and retirement issues, has been in a committed, loving relationship for 30 years. One gay couple are parents of grown children and proud and doting grandparents.

The couples are Hillary and Julie Goodridge of Boston, together for 15 years and raising a 7-year-old daughter; Maureen Brodoff and Ellen Wade of Newton, together for 21 years, and parents of a 13-year-old daughter; Gloria Bailey and Linda Davies of Orleans, a couple for 31 years; Richard Linnell and Gary Chalmers of Northbridge, together for 14 years and parents of a 10-year-old daughter; Heidi Norton and Gina Smith of Northampton, together for 12 years, and parents of sons ages 6 and 2; Robert Compton and David Wilson of Boston, together for 6 years, who are also parents and grandparents; and Michael Horgan and Ed Balmelli of Boston who have been together for 8 years.

All briefs as well as other material, including profiles of the plaintiffs, are available on GLAD’s website, http://www.glad.org

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) is New England’s leading legal rights organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status, and gender identity and expression.