Law Professor Nan Hunter on "First cracks in the DoMA wall"

02/10/09 hunter of justice blog: Georgetown University Law Professor Nan Hunter discusses recent administrative rulings by 9th Circuit Judges Reinhardt and Kozinsky on the Defense of Marriage Act. Further to my 02/07/09 post, she also provides links to both rulings. She concludes that "[t]hese rulings concern only the individual personnel matters [for court employees in the 9th Circuit), and do not constitute precedent. Inevitably, however, they will encourage other challenges to DoMA."

Ken Starr gives Prop 8 argument preview

02/10/09 Baptist Press: "NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Perhaps giving a preview of what he will argue before the California Supreme Court next month, Kenneth Starr said Feb. 10 that the constitutionality of Proposition 8 turns less on the issue of 'gay marriage' and more on the issue of whether the state's citizens have the power to overturn even controversial court rulings."

" 'What is being argued before the California Supreme Court is: Do the people have power under the California constitution to amend the constitution so as to overturn a specific decision of the California Supreme Court? It's a very important but nonetheless different issue than the underlying constitutional issue of the right to marry someone of the same sex,' said Starr, who has not been granting media interviews about the case."

Georgetown University Law Professor Nan Hunter identifies what she thinks "Starr got right - his apparent openness to the substitution of civil unions for marriage as the relevant civil legal status ... The key issue is that everyone who wants their couple relationship recognized should be part of the same legal category. Whether it is called 'marriage' or 'civil union' (or whatever) is completely inconsequential."

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PROP8LEGALCOMMENTARY HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS PROP8LEGALCOMMENTARY ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

Prop 8 Donor Web Site Shows Disclosure Law Is 2-Edged Sword

02/09/09 NY Times: At eightmaps.com, "visitors can see markers indicating a contributor’s name, approximate location, amount donated and, if the donor listed it, employer. That is often enough information for interested parties to find the rest — like an e-mail or home address."

“These are very small donations given by individuals, and now they are subject to harassment that ultimately makes them less able to engage in democratic decision making,” said Chris Jay Hoofnagle, senior fellow at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology at the University of California.

A federal judge has rejected a challenge to the California election law that allows this form of disclosure.

ADF-allied attorney James Hochberg responds to effort in Hawai'i to enact a civil union law for same-sex couples

02/06/09 Honolulu Advertiser: In this commentary, Honolulu lawyer James Hochberg faults the Family Equality Coalition for engaging public support of Hawaii House Bill 444, "A Bill For An Act Relating To Civil Unions":

"Wherever they are enacted, so-called 'civil unions' and 'domestic partnerships' have been nothing other than an alternative way of enacting 'marriage' for same-sex couples. If the Hawai'i Legislature chooses to drag within its walls the innocuous-looking Trojan horse of civil unions, it needs to understand the danger hidden inside of it: same-sex "marriage."

The Advertiser identifies Hochberg as "a Honolulu lawyer and an Alliance Defense Fund allied attorney. He previously served as one of seven commissioners on the Hawai'i Commission on Sexual Orientation and the Law. He wrote this commentary for The Advertiser."

Rulings on gay couples' benefits question Defense of Marriage Act

02/06/09 LA Times: "The 9th Circuit judges ruled in their capacity as dispute-resolution officials within the federal judiciary, whose employees are prohibited from suing in federal court." The rulings are limited to just the two employees who sought benefits for their spouses. "But legal analysts see the judges' orders as an indication that the Defense of Marriage Act is unlikely to stand up to the constitutionality test if it reaches a federal court. They also predict that the decisions will put pressure on the Obama administration to repeal the act as an unjust denial of rights to gay citizens." Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Irvine's law school, said that Justice Stephen Reinhardt's ruling is "very important ... in terms of the application of the Constitution to sexual-orientation discrimination, especially with regard to partners." New York Law School Professor Arthur Leonard analyzes the decisions here.


02/11/09: For links to both rulings, see this post by Georgetown University Law Professor Nan Hunt. Thanks also to Laura Grant for helping me identify links.

Therese Stewart and Shannon Minter to discuss Prop. 8 litigation in 2/17/09 BASF forum, " Legal Strategies in the Fight for Marriage Equality"

Announcement by Bar Association of San Francisco: "Is there a constitutional basis for using the initiative process to eviscerate the constitutional rights of minority groups? What is the legal status of Proposition 8? Stewart & Minter will provide an overview of the legal challenges to Prop 8 and provide a preview of the court battle ahead."

Liberty Counsel's Mat Staver on same-sex marriage

02/05/09 OneNewsNow (a service of the American Family News Network):

Mathew Staver is an attorney for Campaign for California Families, and founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel. Yes on 8 opposed CCF's attempt to intervene, although Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief on behalf of CCF.

When asked about a divorce filing by a same-sex spouse in Massachusetts, Staver alleged that same-sex relationships do not sustain long-term commitments:

"In fact, even in male-male relationships there is a general philosophy among same-sex relationships that they are open relationships -- which means that even if they live under the same roof, they have affairs frequently and often with many other partners throughout their lives ... What we see in Massachusetts is the future of same-sex marriage. They simply want same-sex marriage -- not to have long-lasting, committed relationships, as they often like to say to the media."

Staver offers an ad hominem that appears to be typical of how he views same-sex marriage. He said that gays and lesbians seek same-sex marriage to validate their "abnormal and aberrant lifestyle."