DC: Supreme Court Refuses to Block Gay Marriage Law: Licenses Start Today

In an order issued late Tuesday evening by Chief Justice John Roberts, the US Supreme Court refused to block a gay marriage ordinance passed by the District of Columbia's City Council. In a short opinion, Roberts wrote "Without addressing the merits of petitioners' underlying claim, however, I conclude that a stay is not warranted. First, as "a matter of judicial policy" - if not "judicial power" - "it has been the practice of the Court to defer to the decisions of the courts of the District of Columbia on matters of exclusively local concern."

"Second, the Act at issue was adopted by the Council and placed before Congress for the 30-day period of review required by the D. C. Charter," Roberts continued. "A joint resolution of disapproval by Congress would prevent the Act from going into effect, but Congress has chosen not to act."

A Congressional veto could have overruled the Council, but attempts by conservatives were blocked in the House. Conservative groups then went to the Courts, but failed.

Full Story from Chicago Pride
Click here for gay marriage resources in Washington, DC.
To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

DC: Supreme Court to Hear WA State Petitions Case on April 28th

The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled an April 28 hearing on whether Washington state officials can release the names of signers of a ballot measure that sought to repeal a gay rights law. The court agreed to hear the case in January after Protect Marriage Washington appealed a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that ordered the release of nearly 138,000 signatures that put Referendum 71 on last fall's ballot.

Referendum 71 asked voters to accept – or reject – a domestic partnership law approved by lawmakers that gives gay couples all the rights of marriage. Voters opted to keep the law.

Opponents say releasing the names would put signers at risk of harassment, reprisals and boycotts of their businesses, amounting to an unconstitutional infringement of free speech rights.

Full Story from On Top Magazine
Click here for gay marriage resources.
To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Prop 8 Trial Update - Gay Marriage Increases Health & Revenue

Experts speaking before a trial on California's gay marriage ban have said that lifting it would make people healthier and generate more money for the state's economy. The federal trial is examining whether Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California, is constitutional. Yesterday, San Francisco's chief economist Edmund Egan said that the city could see its economy boosted by millions if gay couples were allowed to marry. According to AFP, he argued that if more gay people married, they would increase school district revenues, real estate, payroll and sales taxes and would be more likely to be insured. Full Story from Pink News

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Prop 8 Day Two Update

Most of the morning was taken up with the cross-examinatin and re-direct of Nancy Cott, a Harvard professor of history who is an expert witness for the plaintiffs. Next up was George Chauncey, a history professor from Yale University who specializes in LGBT history in the United States. He’s the author of a number of books, including Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality (Basic, 2004). Now, I’m pretty well-versed in this subject, but Chauncey’s testimony was still intriguing (at least as reported on Twitter, Prop. 8 Trial Tracker, and Firedog Lake). Chauncey gave a whirlwind tour through centuries of oppression: sodomy laws that were only applied to gay people, or that continued to be applied to gay people long after they stopped being enforced for heterosexuals; the McCarthy hearings, which focused as much on gays as on Communists; military discharges that left people unemployable; marginalization in low-paying jobs. Full Story from Kel's Hot Flash: http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/hotflash/blogs/post?oid=1353022

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Prop 8 Campaign Patterned After Anita Bryant Crusade, Historian Says

Attorneys challenging the California ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage painted the “Yes on 8” campaign as a modern day copycat of Anita Bryant’s late 1970s campaign to “Save the Children.” Through testimony by gay history scholar George Chauncey of Yale University, the plaintiffs’ legal team discussed, in U.S. district court, the creation of unsubstantiated stereotyping of gay men as child molesters by police and news media around the country between the 1930s and 1950s. And it was these stereotypes that former beauty pageant contestant and orange juice pitchwoman Anita Bryant exploited to turn public sentiment against anti-discrimination laws gays had been successful in passing in the 1970s. “The initial polling data showed there was actually a margin of support for anti-bias ordinances,” said Chauncey. So Bryant and her campaign, he said, “decided to focus on the consequences of allowing such laws –the effects on children.” Full Story from 365Gay: http://www.365gay.com/news/day-2-is-prop-8-like-the-anita-bryant-crusade/

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Historians Testify on Marriage Equality in Prop 8 Trial

The trial of a legal challenge to Proposition 8 may decide whether same-sex couples get the chance to marry in California in the future, but on Tuesday it was all about history. Seeking to show that the state's voter-approved ban on gay marriage is rooted in discrimination, lawyers for same-sex couples offered up two Ivy League historians who testified throughout the day on how Prop. 8 is part of a long tradition of denying gay couples equal rights and exposing them to campaigns of ridicule. The historians, whose credibility as independent experts came under immediate attack from Prop. 8 lawyers, testified in the second day of the first federal court trial in the nation to test the legality of a state's ban on the right of same-sex couples to wed. The trial resumes this morning before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who is deciding a lawsuit filed on behalf of same-sex couples who argue that Prop. 8 violates federal equal protection rights. The question today is whether the trial will continue to unfold only before the spectators in the judge's courthouse here, or make it onto the Web via YouTube broadcast. Full Story from the Oakland Tribune: http://www.insidebayarea.com/dailyreview/localnews/ci_14176490

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

CA: Supreme Court Sides With Anti Gay Forces Again, Temporarily Blocks Video of Prop 8 Trial

The camera-shy justices of the U.S. Supreme Court ordered a halt Monday to the planned video coverage of the San Francisco trial of California's Proposition 8, apparently concerned witnesses opposed to gay marriage could face harassment if they were shown on YouTube. It was the second time in three months the high court had intervened on behalf of defenders of “traditional marriage.” In October, the court issued an emergency order to prevent Washington state officials from putting online the names of 138,000 citizens who signed ballot petitions seeking to overturn a law giving gays and lesbians equal benefits. While the justices did not explain their action Monday, the high court's order may also reflect a deep-seated reluctance to permit TV coverage of a trial in federal court. The televised trial of the O.J. Simpson murder case in Los Angeles is still cited among the justices when the topic of cameras in the court arises. The federal judiciary had a policy of barring broadcast coverage of all trial courts. But last month, the independent-minded U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals announced it would experiment with a “limited use” of cameras in its trial courts. For several years, the 9th Circuit has permitted TV coverage when it hears some high-profile appeals. Full Story from MyDesert.com: http://www.mydesert.com/article/20100112/NEWS01/1120308/1006/news01

Click here for gay marriage resources in California.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

US Supreme Court Puts Indefinite Hold on Release of Referendum 71 Signatures

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered Washington state not to release names and addresses of people who signed a petition to hold a referendum on a new law granting same-sex couples domestic partnership rights. The ban will be in place until the high court decides on whether to hear an appeal from conservatives who are pushing for the referendum. Conservative groups led by Protect Marriage Washington want to repeal a law, Senate Bill 5688, that grants more rights to state-registered domestic partners similar to those enjoyed by married couples. They have successfully petitioned for a referendum, called Referendum 71, on whether to approve or reject the legislation adopted this year. The group has said the law "will demolish the state's historical understanding and definition of marriage as that of uniting a man and a woman for life." Full Story from AHN: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7016755770

Planning to marry your partner? Click here for gay marriage resources in Washington State.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Gay Rights Opponents Ask US Supreme Court to Block Referendum 71 Signature Release

That's the latest last evening from Gary Randall, leader of the Faith & Freedom Network who also is a leader in the Protect Marriage Washington campaign. The gay rights opponents want the U.S. Supreme Court to step in after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday ordered the Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed to release the signatures and names of Referendum 71 signers. A Seattle man who supports the domestic-partnership rights of R-71 wants to publish the names on a website, whosigned.com. The R-71 campaign says it does not condone that action, and Reed’s office has said the same; but state elections officials contend the signatures petitions are public records and have been treated as such for several years. Full Story from The Olympian: http://www.theolympian.com/politicsblog/story/1005609.html

Planning to marry your partner? Click here for gay marriage resources in Washington State.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook - just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you'll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We're also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.