06/06/09 The Oklahoman (source: Gay Marriage Watch):
A federal court on Friday dismissed a portion of a lawsuit filed by two Oklahoma lesbian couples who had challenged state and federal restrictions on same-sex marriages.
Monday, June 8, 2009
New York Senate now unlikely to approve marriage equality legislation?
06/08/09 CBS News (source: Gay Marriage Watch):
The latest news appears to increase the odds that the New York Senate will not approve the state's marriage equality legislation:
Call it a coup, call it a devious plan to change leadership, but at the end of the day Democrats are out of power in the New York State Senate and Republicans were [in power].
The change upends the agenda in Albany, where Democrats had assumed power in the Senate in January, with 32 seats, after more than 40 years in the minority.
06/08/09 New York Daily News (reporting on the situation just before today's "coup"):
Senate Dems, who took control of the chamber from Republicans last year, have a slim 32-30 majority. But they are as many as five votes short of passing the gay marriage bill. Majority Leader Malcolm Smith has said he won't bring the bill up for a vote until he's sure it will pass.
06/09/09 update
06/09/09 Marriage Equality New York:
ALBANY — Pedro Espada Jr., the new State Senate president, said in a radio interview on Tuesday morning that he personally wanted to bring same-sex marriage to a vote, news that will give some encouragement to gay activists who read defeat into Monday’s Republican Senate coup.
The latest news appears to increase the odds that the New York Senate will not approve the state's marriage equality legislation:
Call it a coup, call it a devious plan to change leadership, but at the end of the day Democrats are out of power in the New York State Senate and Republicans were [in power].
The change upends the agenda in Albany, where Democrats had assumed power in the Senate in January, with 32 seats, after more than 40 years in the minority.
06/08/09 New York Daily News (reporting on the situation just before today's "coup"):
Senate Dems, who took control of the chamber from Republicans last year, have a slim 32-30 majority. But they are as many as five votes short of passing the gay marriage bill. Majority Leader Malcolm Smith has said he won't bring the bill up for a vote until he's sure it will pass.
06/09/09 update
06/09/09 Marriage Equality New York:
ALBANY — Pedro Espada Jr., the new State Senate president, said in a radio interview on Tuesday morning that he personally wanted to bring same-sex marriage to a vote, news that will give some encouragement to gay activists who read defeat into Monday’s Republican Senate coup.
Same-Sex Couples In New York: The Right To Divorce
06/06/09 NY Times:
[L]ast October, in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Justice Rosalyn H. Richter granted C. C. and C. M. a divorce (using their initials in the documents), making it the first such dissolution of a same-sex marriage in New York of a couple who had married in the United States. The decision recognized that the marriage was valid in Massachusetts, where it was contracted. [CM vs. CC, NY County Supreme Court, 301842/2008] The divorce came on the heels of a decision in February 2008, by Acting Supreme Court Justice Laura E. Drager in Manhattan [Bennett v. Bennaceur, NY County Supreme Court, 301199/2008?], allowing the divorce proceedings in another same-sex case to move forward, requiring the recognition of a same-sex marriage that had taken place in Canada.
[L]ast October, in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Justice Rosalyn H. Richter granted C. C. and C. M. a divorce (using their initials in the documents), making it the first such dissolution of a same-sex marriage in New York of a couple who had married in the United States. The decision recognized that the marriage was valid in Massachusetts, where it was contracted. [CM vs. CC, NY County Supreme Court, 301842/2008] The divorce came on the heels of a decision in February 2008, by Acting Supreme Court Justice Laura E. Drager in Manhattan [Bennett v. Bennaceur, NY County Supreme Court, 301199/2008?], allowing the divorce proceedings in another same-sex case to move forward, requiring the recognition of a same-sex marriage that had taken place in Canada.
Friday, June 5, 2009
The Recorder Forum, "Same-Sex Marriage: What’s Next?"
06/05/09 The Recorder:
Now that the California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8, the landscape has changed once again when it comes to same-sex legal issues. In the wake of the court's ruling, The Recorder has assembled an expert panel to discuss its impact on lawyers who advise clients on same-sex issues.
Now that the California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8, the landscape has changed once again when it comes to same-sex legal issues. In the wake of the court's ruling, The Recorder has assembled an expert panel to discuss its impact on lawyers who advise clients on same-sex issues.
Limited Domestic Partner Benefits and Protections In WI: Proposals Advance Despite Constitutional Ban on "Substantially Similar" Domestc Partnerships
06/05/09 Wisconsin Joint Finance Committee Blog:
The Committee approved two proposals. One of these would extend medical insurance and retirement benefits to domestic partners of state employees. The other would "allows some protections for domestic partners such as hospital visitation and end-of-life decisions." The Committee also issued a policy statement with a critical finding about the state constitution, which bans official recognition of same-sex relationships that are "substantially similar" to marriage:
The Legislature further finds that the legal status of domestic partnership, as established in this chapter, is not substantially similar to that of marriage. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as inconsistent with, or a violation of, article XIII, section 13, of the Wisconsin Constitution.
Over the long-term, this development in Wisconsin - placed in the context of recent court decisions and marriage equality laws - strikes me as important enough to weaken public support for the state's constitutional bans on marriage and more substantive domestic partnerships.
The Committee approved two proposals. One of these would extend medical insurance and retirement benefits to domestic partners of state employees. The other would "allows some protections for domestic partners such as hospital visitation and end-of-life decisions." The Committee also issued a policy statement with a critical finding about the state constitution, which bans official recognition of same-sex relationships that are "substantially similar" to marriage:
The Legislature further finds that the legal status of domestic partnership, as established in this chapter, is not substantially similar to that of marriage. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as inconsistent with, or a violation of, article XIII, section 13, of the Wisconsin Constitution.
Over the long-term, this development in Wisconsin - placed in the context of recent court decisions and marriage equality laws - strikes me as important enough to weaken public support for the state's constitutional bans on marriage and more substantive domestic partnerships.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Law professor John Culhane on New Hampshire, Marriage Equality, and Religious Exemptions
06/04/09 WordinEdgewise:
Widener University law professor John Culhane expects to post a more extensive discussion of the religious-liberty issue. Here he addresses
the very limited issue of allowing government workers to refuse to participate in this process. Here’s my bottom line: This is a very bad idea.
Widener University law professor John Culhane expects to post a more extensive discussion of the religious-liberty issue. Here he addresses
the very limited issue of allowing government workers to refuse to participate in this process. Here’s my bottom line: This is a very bad idea.
Pennsylvania Senate to consider conflicting same-sex marriage measures
06/03/09 Philadelphia Inquirer:
"Nothing in this title shall be construed to compel a religious sect to perform same-sex marriages."
This provision will likely be amended, if the legislation gains traction in the state Senate.
Senator Eichelberger's "Marriage Protection Amendment" has been introduced as S707; it will become available next week through the state legislature's website. Senator Eichelberg's staff told me that it is modeled after Arizona's "Marriage Protection Amendment." (Art. XXX, Sec. 1, added by Prop. 102)
05/27/09 press release by Senator Daylin Leach:
HARRISBURG, May 27, 2009 – Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Delaware/Montgomery, today announced plans to introduce a bill that would offer full and equal marriage rights to same-sex couples in Pennsylvania. Under the new legislation, Pennsylvania would also recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states.
While the bill would not require religious institutions to perform any marriage ceremonies or recognize any marriages that they do not wish to sanction, Leach said his legislation would dissolve all of the barriers to building families that gay and lesbian couples currently face, both at the state and federal level.
Hoping to capture the pro-gay-marriage momentum in other state legislatures, Sen. Daylin Leach (D., Montgomery) today introduced the state's first bill to legalize same-sex marriage.
Meanwhile, a colleague across the aisle, Sen. John Eichelberger (R., Blair), is preparing to introduce a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage, to prevent court decisions, such as the recent one in Iowa, allowing gay people the right to marry.
Senator Leach's bill is S935. It was just given a bill number today; the electronic version is not yet available through the state legislature's website. Here is the bill, which I received from the Senator's very helpful staff. The bill has a provision for religious liberty that already has ample legal protection. So it does not begin to cover the scope of religious-conscience exemption that same-sex marriage legislature should include, according to several legal scholars on religious liberty and the law. The provision reads:"Nothing in this title shall be construed to compel a religious sect to perform same-sex marriages."
This provision will likely be amended, if the legislation gains traction in the state Senate.
Senator Eichelberger's "Marriage Protection Amendment" has been introduced as S707; it will become available next week through the state legislature's website. Senator Eichelberg's staff told me that it is modeled after Arizona's "Marriage Protection Amendment." (Art. XXX, Sec. 1, added by Prop. 102)
05/27/09 press release by Senator Daylin Leach:
HARRISBURG, May 27, 2009 – Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Delaware/Montgomery, today announced plans to introduce a bill that would offer full and equal marriage rights to same-sex couples in Pennsylvania. Under the new legislation, Pennsylvania would also recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states.
While the bill would not require religious institutions to perform any marriage ceremonies or recognize any marriages that they do not wish to sanction, Leach said his legislation would dissolve all of the barriers to building families that gay and lesbian couples currently face, both at the state and federal level.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
