So where do we now stand in the ongoing Sevcik v. Sandoval legal psychodrama? Here's the latest:
- The Ninth Circuit judges just reinstated their mandate to end Nevada's marriage ban.
- As we reported earlier, the usual (H8 filled) suspects dropped their petition to the US Supreme Court for a stay on the Ninth's ruling in favor of marriage equality. While the SCOTUS drama continues in Idaho, it's officially over here in Nevada.
- Now, all eyes turn to Las Vegas Federal District Judge James Mahan. Since the case is now in his court, it's up to him to issue an injunction barring any further enforcement of the Question 2 marriage ban.
- Once Judge Mahan issues this injunction that everyone in The Silver State is now eagerly awaiting, Clark County will begin issuing marriage licenses an hour later. Other Nevada county clerks will likely soon follow.
- But in the mean time, Lambda Legal's Tara Borelli is wondering why we're even waiting: “Finally, the confusion has ended and the Ninth Circuit’s decision is final and fully in effect. While the trial court will enter an order in the case finalizing relief, nothing prevents marriages from beginning immediately for same-sex couples in Nevada.” And technically, she's correct. Our hunch is that after yesterday's Supreme clusterf-ck, county clerks are exercising extreme caution (perhaps, too extreme).
- And finally, expect more legal movement in the coming days in Alaska, Arizona, & Montana. These are the remaining states covered by the Ninth Circuit that don't yet have marriage equality (other than Idaho, which is appealing Tuesday's ruling).
So here's where we stand now. As soon as we find an announcement stating when marriages will begin in Nevada, we'll post an update.
Showing posts with label Sevcik v. Sandoval. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sevcik v. Sandoval. Show all posts
Thursday, October 9, 2014
What's Next?
Apparently, we're not done checking up on our original homeland. And sadly, we have to discuss another heartbreaking Orange County story here.
In June, Zoraida Reyes was found dead in the parking lot of a Diary Queen in Anaheim. She was a fierce activist who advocated tirelessly for immigrant and trans* civil rights. When she passed away, the local DREAMer and transgender communities were shocked by this horrifying loss.
But now, they're a little closer to justice. On Tuesday, Anaheim Police arrested Randy Lee Parkerson for suspicion of murder. Anaheim Police are not investigating the Zoraida Reyes case as a hate crime, even though local trans* activists suspect Reyes' transgender identity was a "huge factor" in her death.
Southern California LGBTQ community advocates are also asking questions in the death of Aniya Parker in the East Hollywood neighborhood of Los Angeles. LA Police initially described Parker's death as the result of a "robbery gone bad", but video surveillance shows the assailants shooting Parker after she ran away from them, then leaving her purse behind.
The untimely deaths of Zoraida Reyes and Aniya Parker in Southern California serve as sorrowful reminders of the dangers so many LGBTQ Americans still face in this nation. And they serve as reminders to LGBTQ civil rights activists that we still haven't reached the end of the long road to equality just yet.
Now, we're finally a bit closer here in Nevada. Just moments ago, Jon Ralston posted the document showing the usual H8 filled suspects withdrawing their respective petitions to the US Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit for an emergency stay in Sevcik v. Sandoval. They can still try requesting an en banc hearing in the Ninth or an appeal to the US Supreme Court. But as we've explained before, Perry v. Brown will ultimately be cited in their dismissal due to lack of standing.
So now, finally, after this very long wait, marriage equality is coming to Nevada. And already, we can hear folks asking, "What's next?" "What do those people want?" "Can't they leave all us 'normal people' alone now?"
As long as injustice persists, the beautiful struggle for equality continues. As the old saying goes, "No Justice, No Peace." Hate crimes are still happening, and perpetrators are still claiming "panic defense". People are still being fired, and perpetrators are still claiming "freedom". People still face wrongful discrimination on a number of matters daily, and perpetrators are still claiming "segreation laws".
While we've come a long way here in Nevada, there is still more progress needed here. And yes, there's still far more progress needed nationally. Today, we can't help but feel relieved that the Nevada case is finally coming to an end as marriage equality is fast on the move nationally. However, this doesn't mean the LGBTQ civil rights movement is now finished.
So what's next? Justice. And equality. For everyone. As long as people like Zoraida Reyes and Aniya Parker are losing their lives because of who they are, we should all know what's next for the LGBTQ civil rights movement.
In June, Zoraida Reyes was found dead in the parking lot of a Diary Queen in Anaheim. She was a fierce activist who advocated tirelessly for immigrant and trans* civil rights. When she passed away, the local DREAMer and transgender communities were shocked by this horrifying loss.
But now, they're a little closer to justice. On Tuesday, Anaheim Police arrested Randy Lee Parkerson for suspicion of murder. Anaheim Police are not investigating the Zoraida Reyes case as a hate crime, even though local trans* activists suspect Reyes' transgender identity was a "huge factor" in her death.
Southern California LGBTQ community advocates are also asking questions in the death of Aniya Parker in the East Hollywood neighborhood of Los Angeles. LA Police initially described Parker's death as the result of a "robbery gone bad", but video surveillance shows the assailants shooting Parker after she ran away from them, then leaving her purse behind.
The untimely deaths of Zoraida Reyes and Aniya Parker in Southern California serve as sorrowful reminders of the dangers so many LGBTQ Americans still face in this nation. And they serve as reminders to LGBTQ civil rights activists that we still haven't reached the end of the long road to equality just yet.
Now, we're finally a bit closer here in Nevada. Just moments ago, Jon Ralston posted the document showing the usual H8 filled suspects withdrawing their respective petitions to the US Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit for an emergency stay in Sevcik v. Sandoval. They can still try requesting an en banc hearing in the Ninth or an appeal to the US Supreme Court. But as we've explained before, Perry v. Brown will ultimately be cited in their dismissal due to lack of standing.
So now, finally, after this very long wait, marriage equality is coming to Nevada. And already, we can hear folks asking, "What's next?" "What do those people want?" "Can't they leave all us 'normal people' alone now?"
As long as injustice persists, the beautiful struggle for equality continues. As the old saying goes, "No Justice, No Peace." Hate crimes are still happening, and perpetrators are still claiming "panic defense". People are still being fired, and perpetrators are still claiming "freedom". People still face wrongful discrimination on a number of matters daily, and perpetrators are still claiming "segreation laws".
While we've come a long way here in Nevada, there is still more progress needed here. And yes, there's still far more progress needed nationally. Today, we can't help but feel relieved that the Nevada case is finally coming to an end as marriage equality is fast on the move nationally. However, this doesn't mean the LGBTQ civil rights movement is now finished.
So what's next? Justice. And equality. For everyone. As long as people like Zoraida Reyes and Aniya Parker are losing their lives because of who they are, we should all know what's next for the LGBTQ civil rights movement.
On Long Waits & Enduring Hope
(The past 48 hours have been frustrating as hell. We just can't candycoat the sh-tshow that the Sevcik case has become. For the time being, marriage equality remains on hold in Nevada due to yesterday's epic courtroom confusion. Stay tuned here for further marriage updates.
In the mean time, let's take another trip to the Nevada Progressive archives to calm our nerves. Here, this might help us feel better: a classic from August 2010 on dealing with delays and confronting the bigotry that threatens to hold us down.)
This week has been a doozy for me. I was up. I was down. I was right. I was wrong. I was elated with joy. I was horrified and filled with fear.
And in the end, I just have to keep on chugging and do what needs to be done to move forward and achieve the full equality we so badly need and fully deserve.
I still have painful memories from 2008.
I still remember the drive home with my dad on the day after the election. (We were actually here in Nevada to help Obama win.) As soon as I heard on the radio that Prop 8 passed in California, I broke into tears... And cried all the way home. For the next two weeks, I was deeply depressed.
Am I sub-human? Are gay couples just inferior to straight couples? How could this happen here? Is this all my fault? These were the questions swirling around my head.
This week, I finally felt some closure. Prop 8 was overturned in federal court... And while marriage equality is still on hold in California, it was nice to see a glimpse of that "liberty and justice for all" I've heard about in this country.
I know we've all been frustrated by what may seem sometimes like a stunning lack of progress on attaining even the most basic of human rights for LGBTQ Americans. I know I have been. But this week, my hope was renewed. For once, the politics of hate and fear and bigotry was trumped by the possibility of a better America, an America that isn't ashamed to treat all her citizens equally.
Yes, I was feeling so great on Wednesday...
Then reality slapped me in the face yet again.
You see, last year I moved to Nevada. Yes, my dears, Nevada. I live smack dab in the middle of Henderson, which feels like the heart of that mythical "Middle America" I heard about when I was safe in the confines of "Left Coast California".
And believe it or not, this crazy lady is actually running for US Senate here.
And if you think that's all, think again. Sharron Angle is supported by "Christian Reconstructionist" religious right extremists who want to impose THE DEATH PENALTY on "homosexual sodomites".
Frightening enough, right? Wait, it gets worse. Sharron Angle herself openly advocated the complete denial of even the most basic civil rights to LGBTQ Nevadans when she helped found the openly xenophobic Independent American Party of Nevada in the early 1990s. Yep, that's right. She thinks we SHOULD be discriminated against at work, when shopping, when on the bus, when applying for disability benefits, when searching for a place to live, whenever, wherever.
Oh, and Sharron Angle won't even take money from companies that treat their LGBTQ employees fairly and equally. Yep, she's that serious about her homophobia!
So how can someone like this even be taken seriously? How can someone like this earn votes in her run for the United States Senate? What happened here?
It's still saddening to see bigotry used as a "wedge issue" in political campaigns. It broke my heart with Prop 8 in California two years ago, and now it just infuriates me to see Sharron Angle flaunt in my face her hatred of me and my extended queer family.
It just goes to show how much progress we still need to make in this country. It's great to see federal judges like the Honorable Vaughn Walker rule in our favor and rightly decide that we are citizens deserving of equal rights... And then it's terrifying to see Senate candidates like Sharron Angle vow to oppose any and all remedies to wrongful discrimination. Of course, it's safe to say she doesn't agree with Judge Walker's Prop 8 ruling.
OK, I guess I should mention theelephant... No, make that donkey in the room.
Yes, Harry Reid is my Senator. And yes, I know he's not perfect. But whenever I feel frustrated about why DOMA is still on the books or why ENDA hasn't been passed yet, I remember what's at stake here. I remember the batshit crazy tea-nut queen running against him, and I remember I have no choice but to make sure the tea-nut queen gets nowhere near the US Senate.
Sometimes, change isn't fast. Most often, change isn't easy. But in the end, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was right. Change happens. "The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice."
That's what gives me hope... Hope that Prop 8 will soon be another sad footnote in our history, one that we will have overcome. It's what gives me hope that one day soon (oh, it should be soon!), Harry Reid and Barack Obama will be able to herd those cats often referred to as "US Senators" and deliver on basic freedom from discrimination in the workplace. It's what gives me hope that homophobic, transphobic extremists like Sharron Angle won't be able to win elections on pure, primal hate.
So I guess the hope is still alive. It's been a long walk to freedom and equality, but I guess we'll soon make it all the way up there.
In the mean time, let's take another trip to the Nevada Progressive archives to calm our nerves. Here, this might help us feel better: a classic from August 2010 on dealing with delays and confronting the bigotry that threatens to hold us down.)
This week has been a doozy for me. I was up. I was down. I was right. I was wrong. I was elated with joy. I was horrified and filled with fear.
And in the end, I just have to keep on chugging and do what needs to be done to move forward and achieve the full equality we so badly need and fully deserve.
I still have painful memories from 2008.
The yard signs that were stolen from my front yard. The homophobic insults coming from my own family. The belligerent Yes on H8 paid canvassers trying to bully my dad into taking away my civil rights. The "urine yellow" Yes on H8 signs being sprinkled all over my neighborhood by the anti-equality churches. These are my memories from the campaign.
The married couples wondering if their marriages were still "legally valid". The couples that waited too long and missed the chance to get a "limited edition marriage". The kids who were bullied in school before and after the election. These are still memories I have from the first days after Prop H8 passed.
Beating myself up constantly about why I didn't do more to stop this oncoming tragedy. This is the guilt I still have over my failure to do enough to stop Prop H8 from passing.
I still remember the drive home with my dad on the day after the election. (We were actually here in Nevada to help Obama win.) As soon as I heard on the radio that Prop 8 passed in California, I broke into tears... And cried all the way home. For the next two weeks, I was deeply depressed.
Am I sub-human? Are gay couples just inferior to straight couples? How could this happen here? Is this all my fault? These were the questions swirling around my head.
This week, I finally felt some closure. Prop 8 was overturned in federal court... And while marriage equality is still on hold in California, it was nice to see a glimpse of that "liberty and justice for all" I've heard about in this country.
I know we've all been frustrated by what may seem sometimes like a stunning lack of progress on attaining even the most basic of human rights for LGBTQ Americans. I know I have been. But this week, my hope was renewed. For once, the politics of hate and fear and bigotry was trumped by the possibility of a better America, an America that isn't ashamed to treat all her citizens equally.
Yes, I was feeling so great on Wednesday...
Then reality slapped me in the face yet again.
You see, last year I moved to Nevada. Yes, my dears, Nevada. I live smack dab in the middle of Henderson, which feels like the heart of that mythical "Middle America" I heard about when I was safe in the confines of "Left Coast California".
And believe it or not, this crazy lady is actually running for US Senate here.
Among her positions, outlined in answers to 36 yes-or-no questions, [Sharron] Angle would oppose making sexual orientation a protected minority in civil rights laws. In a section on school prayer, she affirms that students and teachers should be able to talk openly about religion in schools, including the right to "publicly acknowledge the Creator." [...]
In the questionnaire, submitted to the Washington-based Government is not God political committee, Angle said she would vote in Congress to prohibit abortion "in all cases," and considers a fetus a person under the Constitution.
The Washington-based group's website says it supports candidates who oppose abortion rights and "stand firmly against the unbiblical welfare state that is destroying the spiritual and economic greatness of our nation."
And if you think that's all, think again. Sharron Angle is supported by "Christian Reconstructionist" religious right extremists who want to impose THE DEATH PENALTY on "homosexual sodomites".
An organization calling itself Vision to America sent out a recent fundraising appeal sponsored by U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) on behalf of Nevada Republican senatorial candidate Sharron Angle. "I have put together a plan to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Nevada Senate race — along with several others like it — to achieve conservative victory. This plan includes running statewide television and radio ads, sending direct mail to targeted voters, and operating phone banks — all geared toward defeating Harry Reid in November."
What is American Vision, and why do they love Sharron Angle? American Vision has a goal: "The goal is to return America to its Biblical foundations “from Genesis to Revelation” (a postmillennial reading of Revelation, which holds that the Second Coming will occur after an era of Christian dominance). American Vision is a non-profit, tax exempt, educational organization. Like many of these groups, DeMar also has a companion organization that can raise money and promote candidates for elected office: Vision to America." [link ...]
The Bible is clear on moral issues that are culture-killers: homosexuality, homosexual marriage, and abortion," says DeMar, who is closely allied with D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries, where he frequently speaks.
While DeMar insists that homosexuals wouldn't be rounded up and systematically executed under a "reconstructed" government, he does believe that the occasional execution of "sodomites" would serve society well, because "the law that requires the death penalty for homosexual acts effectively drives the perversion of homosexuality underground, back into the closet."
Another "long-term goal," he writes elsewhere, should be "the execution of abortionists and parents who hire them." [...]
In 1993, American Vision helped county commissioners in Cobb County, Ga., pass an anti-gay resolution so strongly worded that it sparked a national controversy. Cobb County Commissioner Gordon Wysong spoke at American Vision's annual fundraising banquet the following year, saying of gay people, "We should blame them for every social failure in America." [link]
Frightening enough, right? Wait, it gets worse. Sharron Angle herself openly advocated the complete denial of even the most basic civil rights to LGBTQ Nevadans when she helped found the openly xenophobic Independent American Party of Nevada in the early 1990s. Yep, that's right. She thinks we SHOULD be discriminated against at work, when shopping, when on the bus, when applying for disability benefits, when searching for a place to live, whenever, wherever.
Oh, and Sharron Angle won't even take money from companies that treat their LGBTQ employees fairly and equally. Yep, she's that serious about her homophobia!
So how can someone like this even be taken seriously? How can someone like this earn votes in her run for the United States Senate? What happened here?
It's still saddening to see bigotry used as a "wedge issue" in political campaigns. It broke my heart with Prop 8 in California two years ago, and now it just infuriates me to see Sharron Angle flaunt in my face her hatred of me and my extended queer family.
It just goes to show how much progress we still need to make in this country. It's great to see federal judges like the Honorable Vaughn Walker rule in our favor and rightly decide that we are citizens deserving of equal rights... And then it's terrifying to see Senate candidates like Sharron Angle vow to oppose any and all remedies to wrongful discrimination. Of course, it's safe to say she doesn't agree with Judge Walker's Prop 8 ruling.
OK, I guess I should mention the
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not making excuses. And I'm not saying it's wrong for GetEQUAL or any other LGBTQ advocacy group to demand full equality. As a gay person myself, I'm 110% there with you! I'm just saying that Harry Reid is NOT the enemy, but rather a friend who I know wants to do the right thing. Sometimes we need to give him the extra push and "make him do it", as both he and Nancy Pelosi said on Saturday at Netroots Nation. But in the end, it's important to keep building these relationships, holding leaders like Reid and Pelosi accountable when necessary, but also remembering that these are our friends and we don't have to fight against them.
Yes, Harry Reid is my Senator. And yes, I know he's not perfect. But whenever I feel frustrated about why DOMA is still on the books or why ENDA hasn't been passed yet, I remember what's at stake here. I remember the batshit crazy tea-nut queen running against him, and I remember I have no choice but to make sure the tea-nut queen gets nowhere near the US Senate.
Sometimes, change isn't fast. Most often, change isn't easy. But in the end, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was right. Change happens. "The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice."
That's what gives me hope... Hope that Prop 8 will soon be another sad footnote in our history, one that we will have overcome. It's what gives me hope that one day soon (oh, it should be soon!), Harry Reid and Barack Obama will be able to herd those cats often referred to as "US Senators" and deliver on basic freedom from discrimination in the workplace. It's what gives me hope that homophobic, transphobic extremists like Sharron Angle won't be able to win elections on pure, primal hate.
So I guess the hope is still alive. It's been a long walk to freedom and equality, but I guess we'll soon make it all the way up there.
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Hurry Up... & Wait.
We started the morning thinking it was about to happen. That was after we spent much of yesterday thinking we had to wait a little longer. But then, we were thrown another delay. And suddenly, we had to wait again.
But now, the wait may finally be coming to an end. Just hours after US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued a temporary stay on yesterday's Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling bringing marriage equality to Nevada and Idaho, Justice Kennedy recalled his own stay.
So what now? In Justice Kennedy's revised order, a temporary stay has been issued for Idaho. There, Governor Butch Otter (R) & Attorney General Lawrence Wasden (R) are requesting an en banc (or full court) hearing in the Ninth. The temporary stay will last until Thursday, when both sides have a deadline to respond to Otter's request for an en banc hearing and an extended stay of the Ninth's panel ruling.
The full Ninth Circuit is also asking for responses from both sides in Nevada by 5:00 PM Thursday, as the usual (H8 filled) suspects have requested a stay for Nevada. However, neither Governor Brian Sandoval (R) nor Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) is appealing the case. And considering the precedent the Supreme Court set in Perry v. Brown (the California Prop 8 case), it doesn't seem likely the Court will even grant the usual suspects standing to further appeal Sevcik v. Sandoval.
So what now? Officially, Nevada is about to receive legal marriage equality. But technically, Washoe County, Clark County, and other county clerks are turning away couples seeking licenses until Nevada federal district Judge James Mahan and/or the full Ninth Circuit clarifies next legal steps.
Today has felt like an infuriating game of "hurry up & wait". We can only imagine how the couples seeking marriage licenses must feel right now. Stay tuned here at Nevada Progressive as we continue attempting to wrap our heads around the legal ping-pong game this Sevcik case is rapidly devolving into.
But now, the wait may finally be coming to an end. Just hours after US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued a temporary stay on yesterday's Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling bringing marriage equality to Nevada and Idaho, Justice Kennedy recalled his own stay.
So what now? In Justice Kennedy's revised order, a temporary stay has been issued for Idaho. There, Governor Butch Otter (R) & Attorney General Lawrence Wasden (R) are requesting an en banc (or full court) hearing in the Ninth. The temporary stay will last until Thursday, when both sides have a deadline to respond to Otter's request for an en banc hearing and an extended stay of the Ninth's panel ruling.
The full Ninth Circuit is also asking for responses from both sides in Nevada by 5:00 PM Thursday, as the usual (H8 filled) suspects have requested a stay for Nevada. However, neither Governor Brian Sandoval (R) nor Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) is appealing the case. And considering the precedent the Supreme Court set in Perry v. Brown (the California Prop 8 case), it doesn't seem likely the Court will even grant the usual suspects standing to further appeal Sevcik v. Sandoval.
So what now? Officially, Nevada is about to receive legal marriage equality. But technically, Washoe County, Clark County, and other county clerks are turning away couples seeking licenses until Nevada federal district Judge James Mahan and/or the full Ninth Circuit clarifies next legal steps.
Today has felt like an infuriating game of "hurry up & wait". We can only imagine how the couples seeking marriage licenses must feel right now. Stay tuned here at Nevada Progressive as we continue attempting to wrap our heads around the legal ping-pong game this Sevcik case is rapidly devolving into.
Dammit, Justice (Kennedy) Delayed Again.
Of course, it can't be easy. It can't be simple. It must be confusing.
When we woke up this morning, marriage equality was set to become the law of the land here in Nevada today. Because the State of Nevada already promised not to appeal the case, the legal fight was supposed to end today.
But then, this happened. And mass confusion on Twitter soon followed. Some legal experts seem to think US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's temporary stay in Idaho also applies to Nevada because both cases were consolidated by the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, but SCOTUSBlog's Lyle Denniston is reporting Justice Kennedy's stay only applies to Idaho (as that state is appealing The Ninth's ruling).
For now, it looks like Nevada officials are once again erring on the side of caution. Moments ago, the Clark County Clerk's Office recanted its proclamation from last night and will not issue marriage licenses today. And since the Washoe County Clerk's Office had already stated its plans to wait this out, that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
So what happened? Short answer: Idaho. Longer answer: Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) is appealing the ruling, and the state's lawyers requested a temporary stay from Justice Kennedy. So Kennedy granted the stay.
But because Idaho and Nevada cases are consolidated, we must wait even longer to find out where we actually stand. Will the Supremes "decouple" the cases? Will they decide to take up both cases? Or will both cases be subsequently dismissed (like all the other ones were on Monday)?
Stay tuned. This isn't over yet.
When we woke up this morning, marriage equality was set to become the law of the land here in Nevada today. Because the State of Nevada already promised not to appeal the case, the legal fight was supposed to end today.
But then, this happened. And mass confusion on Twitter soon followed. Some legal experts seem to think US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's temporary stay in Idaho also applies to Nevada because both cases were consolidated by the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, but SCOTUSBlog's Lyle Denniston is reporting Justice Kennedy's stay only applies to Idaho (as that state is appealing The Ninth's ruling).
For now, it looks like Nevada officials are once again erring on the side of caution. Moments ago, the Clark County Clerk's Office recanted its proclamation from last night and will not issue marriage licenses today. And since the Washoe County Clerk's Office had already stated its plans to wait this out, that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
So what happened? Short answer: Idaho. Longer answer: Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) is appealing the ruling, and the state's lawyers requested a temporary stay from Justice Kennedy. So Kennedy granted the stay.
But because Idaho and Nevada cases are consolidated, we must wait even longer to find out where we actually stand. Will the Supremes "decouple" the cases? Will they decide to take up both cases? Or will both cases be subsequently dismissed (like all the other ones were on Monday)?
Stay tuned. This isn't over yet.
What We Have... & What We Will No Longer Be Denied
(So we're still waiting for the federal district court to issue an injunction barring any further enforcement of the Question 2 marriage ban. Once that happens, marriage equality will finally be a reality here in Nevada. However that day may come sooner than originally thought, as Ninth Circuit Judge Steven Reinhardt ordered a prompt issuance demanding the lower court issue that injunction ASAP. And Clark County will begin issuing marriage licenses at 2:00 PM today!
Here at Nevada Progressive, we've been waiting just over 5 years for this joyous occasion. To celebrate, we took to our archives and pulled out this gem from 2009. Oh, yes. That's right. We're going all the way back to the beginning of SB 283, and of this blog.
This not only explains what we've had for the past 5 years, but also why a few brave people decided to sue for full equality. And now, we're here. Hallelujah, the wait is finally over!)
Probably one of the biggest Nevada stories of 2009 was SB 283 becoming law. Sure, it's not marriage... But it's something so new for Nevada. For once, we've become somewhat of a leader on LGBTQ equality. On May 31, 2009, "Luv-Guv" Gibbons' veto was overrode and Nevada became the first Mountain West state to recognize LGBTQ relationships and offer "marriage-like rights".
OK, so those "marriage-like rights" still don't ensure health care benefits for everyone and they still do nothing at the federal level. That's the problem, but hopefully one day this will change and these "marriage-like rights" will actually become full civil marriage equality. But in the mean time, let's reflect on SB 283 with this piece I wrote here back in August.
.... As we've been talking about for some time, SB 283 will officially become law on October 1. This will bring about some major changes in the law, mostly helping us. However, there are some things that we need to remember. Secretary of State Ross Miller hasn't yet updated the Nevada SoS site to include a domestic partnership page (as California's SoS does).
First off, David Parks wasn't joking when he said that this is NOT marriage. While SB 283 provides for domestic partnerships (DPs) that are supposed to treat "domestic partnered" couples just like married spouses, let's remember that this theory doesn't always work out in practice. So while we celebrate the first major advance in civil rights in Nevada in decades, let's keep working toward the final goal of true civil marriage equality. Probably the most significant reminder of the challenges LGBT families face in this state is the section of SB 283 considering workplace health care benefits. Simply put, employers are NOT required under Nevada law to provide health care benefits to domestic partners of employees as they do to other employees' married spouses.
Fortunately it is at least optional, so you'll continue to receive DP benefits at work if your employer already provides them. And if your employer doesn't yet provide DP benefits, you can still try to convince them to do so. Just don't expect the State of Nevada to make them do so... At least until we can improve the DP law.
Nonetheless, SB 283 will change Nevada law for the better for our families. One major example of this will be in family law. Specifically, child custody laws will be improved to make it easier for gay & lesbian couples looking to have children to do so. And considering the current headaches LGBT families with children have, this is quite a welcome development. And in many other matters, our families will receive more legal protections. Hospital visitation (should the partner become ill) will be easier. Community property laws will apply to domestic partners. State tax benefits currently afforded to married spouses will also be extended to domestic partners.
But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.
I hope this helps answer some of the questions you may have about SB 283 and its imminent implementation. I'll keep the Stonewall site updated with any new information from the Secretary of State, as well as new legal opinions on what will and will not be covered by SB 283.
Here at Nevada Progressive, we've been waiting just over 5 years for this joyous occasion. To celebrate, we took to our archives and pulled out this gem from 2009. Oh, yes. That's right. We're going all the way back to the beginning of SB 283, and of this blog.
This not only explains what we've had for the past 5 years, but also why a few brave people decided to sue for full equality. And now, we're here. Hallelujah, the wait is finally over!)
Probably one of the biggest Nevada stories of 2009 was SB 283 becoming law. Sure, it's not marriage... But it's something so new for Nevada. For once, we've become somewhat of a leader on LGBTQ equality. On May 31, 2009, "Luv-Guv" Gibbons' veto was overrode and Nevada became the first Mountain West state to recognize LGBTQ relationships and offer "marriage-like rights".
OK, so those "marriage-like rights" still don't ensure health care benefits for everyone and they still do nothing at the federal level. That's the problem, but hopefully one day this will change and these "marriage-like rights" will actually become full civil marriage equality. But in the mean time, let's reflect on SB 283 with this piece I wrote here back in August.
.... As we've been talking about for some time, SB 283 will officially become law on October 1. This will bring about some major changes in the law, mostly helping us. However, there are some things that we need to remember. Secretary of State Ross Miller hasn't yet updated the Nevada SoS site to include a domestic partnership page (as California's SoS does).
First off, David Parks wasn't joking when he said that this is NOT marriage. While SB 283 provides for domestic partnerships (DPs) that are supposed to treat "domestic partnered" couples just like married spouses, let's remember that this theory doesn't always work out in practice. So while we celebrate the first major advance in civil rights in Nevada in decades, let's keep working toward the final goal of true civil marriage equality. Probably the most significant reminder of the challenges LGBT families face in this state is the section of SB 283 considering workplace health care benefits. Simply put, employers are NOT required under Nevada law to provide health care benefits to domestic partners of employees as they do to other employees' married spouses.
Fortunately it is at least optional, so you'll continue to receive DP benefits at work if your employer already provides them. And if your employer doesn't yet provide DP benefits, you can still try to convince them to do so. Just don't expect the State of Nevada to make them do so... At least until we can improve the DP law.
Nonetheless, SB 283 will change Nevada law for the better for our families. One major example of this will be in family law. Specifically, child custody laws will be improved to make it easier for gay & lesbian couples looking to have children to do so. And considering the current headaches LGBT families with children have, this is quite a welcome development. And in many other matters, our families will receive more legal protections. Hospital visitation (should the partner become ill) will be easier. Community property laws will apply to domestic partners. State tax benefits currently afforded to married spouses will also be extended to domestic partners.
But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.
I hope this helps answer some of the questions you may have about SB 283 and its imminent implementation. I'll keep the Stonewall site updated with any new information from the Secretary of State, as well as new legal opinions on what will and will not be covered by SB 283.
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Marriage Equality... Is Finally Coming to Nevada!
Boom goes the dynamite. Just like this, it's over.
Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote the majority opinion. Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould agreed, so the panel was unanimous in rendering this decision. The full Ninth Circuit opinion is now up. And like that, marriage equality is coming to Nevada! Oh, and it's coming to Idaho, too!
Actually, this is no suprise. Back in September, the Ninth Circuit judges were highly skeptical of the H8ers' whines and screams. H8ers are going to hate... But the Ninth Circuit panel wanted none of it.
Now keep in mind that this decision will not be appealed by the State of Nevada. And since the US Supreme Court just turned down seven cases appealing lower court pro-marriage rulings, it's probably a good idea for our world famous wedding chapels to prepare for the onslaught of wedding requests that's about to begin any day now.
Moments ago, Reps. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) & Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) tweeted their congratulations. We're still awaiting word from Cresent Hardy (R-"Segregation Laws"), Adam Laxalt (R-"Political Issues"), & Barbara Cegavske (R-License to Discriminate). And we have a feeling we'll see far more reactions from elected officials across the state as the news sets in.
We hold that the Idaho and Nevada laws at issue violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because they deny lesbians and gays who wish to marry persons of the same sex a right they afford to individuals who wish to marry persons of the opposite sex, and do not satisfy the heightened scrutiny standard we adopted in SmithKline.
Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote the majority opinion. Judges Marsha Berzon and Ronald Gould agreed, so the panel was unanimous in rendering this decision. The full Ninth Circuit opinion is now up. And like that, marriage equality is coming to Nevada! Oh, and it's coming to Idaho, too!
Actually, this is no suprise. Back in September, the Ninth Circuit judges were highly skeptical of the H8ers' whines and screams. H8ers are going to hate... But the Ninth Circuit panel wanted none of it.
Now keep in mind that this decision will not be appealed by the State of Nevada. And since the US Supreme Court just turned down seven cases appealing lower court pro-marriage rulings, it's probably a good idea for our world famous wedding chapels to prepare for the onslaught of wedding requests that's about to begin any day now.
Moments ago, Reps. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) & Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) tweeted their congratulations. We're still awaiting word from Cresent Hardy (R-"Segregation Laws"), Adam Laxalt (R-"Political Issues"), & Barbara Cegavske (R-License to Discriminate). And we have a feeling we'll see far more reactions from elected officials across the state as the news sets in.
Monday, October 6, 2014
Justice... Just Fashionally Late
Finally, we must wait no more... At least when it comes to the US Supreme Court. The nation's highest court had several marriage equality cases awaiting action. And now, we know the Supreme Court has denied petitions (for appeal) in all those cases.
So what does this mean? In short, marriage equality is now the law of the land in at least 5 more states: Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Utah. By denying petitions of appeal, lower court rulings in favor of marriage will stand. This also means SCOTUS stays on those rulings expire today, and this is why marriages will likely begin today in Virginia and Wisconsin.
But wait, there's more. The Supreme Court essentially upheld these federal appellate court rulings de facto by dismissing the appeals. This will require lower federal courts within these appellate court circuits (4th, 7th, & 10th) to abide by these appellate court rulings. And this most likely opens the door to marriage bans being struck down quite soon in North Carolina, West Virginia, South Carolina (all 4th Circuit), Kansas, Wyoming, and Colorado (all 10th Circuit). (Maryland, Illinois, and New Mexico already have marriage equality.)
But wait, what about us? Well, that's the downside of today's ruling. Because the 9th Circuit hasn't yet issued a ruling on Sevcik v. Sandoval, we'll have to wait a little longer here in Nevada.
But then again, we may not have to wait that much longer. If the 9th overturns Nevada's marriage ban (as most legal observers expect), the Supreme Court may not decide to place a stay on that ruling should opponents appeal. After all, the Court just dismissed all these cases.
Nevada's LGBTQ families have been waiting 12 years for this. And sadly, they will have to wait just a little longer for justice to finally arrive. But now, we can feel more confident about justice arriving to The Silver State. Just pardon her for arriving fashionably late.
So what does this mean? In short, marriage equality is now the law of the land in at least 5 more states: Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Utah. By denying petitions of appeal, lower court rulings in favor of marriage will stand. This also means SCOTUS stays on those rulings expire today, and this is why marriages will likely begin today in Virginia and Wisconsin.
But wait, there's more. The Supreme Court essentially upheld these federal appellate court rulings de facto by dismissing the appeals. This will require lower federal courts within these appellate court circuits (4th, 7th, & 10th) to abide by these appellate court rulings. And this most likely opens the door to marriage bans being struck down quite soon in North Carolina, West Virginia, South Carolina (all 4th Circuit), Kansas, Wyoming, and Colorado (all 10th Circuit). (Maryland, Illinois, and New Mexico already have marriage equality.)
But wait, what about us? Well, that's the downside of today's ruling. Because the 9th Circuit hasn't yet issued a ruling on Sevcik v. Sandoval, we'll have to wait a little longer here in Nevada.
But then again, we may not have to wait that much longer. If the 9th overturns Nevada's marriage ban (as most legal observers expect), the Supreme Court may not decide to place a stay on that ruling should opponents appeal. After all, the Court just dismissed all these cases.
Nevada's LGBTQ families have been waiting 12 years for this. And sadly, they will have to wait just a little longer for justice to finally arrive. But now, we can feel more confident about justice arriving to The Silver State. Just pardon her for arriving fashionably late.
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Still Waiting
We've been waiting all week for this. And now, we have our answer. And yes, it involves another week of waiting.
Earlier today, the US Supreme Court announced a slew of cases it will be taking up next session. None of those cases are marriage equality cases.
However, the nation's highest court may announce next week more cases it will be taking up in the next session. Might Justices be waiting for decisions from the Ninth Circuit? (Probably, along with decisions from the Sixth Circuit on Tennessee's, Kentucky's, Ohio's, and Michigan's respective marriage bans.)
One of the cases now at the Supreme Court is Kitchen v. Herbert. This is the suit challenging Utah's marriage ban. If the Court decides to reject this appeal, lower court rulings in favor of marriage equality will stand... And marriages will resume in Utah.
Marriage equality will also come to Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma by the end of the year if the Supreme Court rejects appeals in all those cases. But wait, aren't we missing a state?
Hold on. We haven't been forgotten. Actually, Sevcik v. Sandoval is still in San Francisco at the moment. Even though most legal observers have a good idea as to how the Ninth Circuit will rule on Nevada's marriage ban, we still don't have an actual ruling yet. And since the usual suspects will likely appeal if the judges rule against upholding the 2000/2002 marriage ban, Nevada may be included on the Supreme Court's 2015 docket should the Justices decide to take up some or all of the marriage cases.
But for now, we're still waiting.
Earlier today, the US Supreme Court announced a slew of cases it will be taking up next session. None of those cases are marriage equality cases.
However, the nation's highest court may announce next week more cases it will be taking up in the next session. Might Justices be waiting for decisions from the Ninth Circuit? (Probably, along with decisions from the Sixth Circuit on Tennessee's, Kentucky's, Ohio's, and Michigan's respective marriage bans.)
One of the cases now at the Supreme Court is Kitchen v. Herbert. This is the suit challenging Utah's marriage ban. If the Court decides to reject this appeal, lower court rulings in favor of marriage equality will stand... And marriages will resume in Utah.
Marriage equality will also come to Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma by the end of the year if the Supreme Court rejects appeals in all those cases. But wait, aren't we missing a state?
Hold on. We haven't been forgotten. Actually, Sevcik v. Sandoval is still in San Francisco at the moment. Even though most legal observers have a good idea as to how the Ninth Circuit will rule on Nevada's marriage ban, we still don't have an actual ruling yet. And since the usual suspects will likely appeal if the judges rule against upholding the 2000/2002 marriage ban, Nevada may be included on the Supreme Court's 2015 docket should the Justices decide to take up some or all of the marriage cases.
But for now, we're still waiting.
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
How It All Started
(Today, we're sifting through the Nevada Progressive archives, all the way back to April 2012. Yes, we've been monitoring the Sevcik v. Sandoval law suit since its infancy. And now, we await both a decision from the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals and a possible intervention from the US Supreme Court. So today, let's go all the way back to the beginning of this groundbreaking civil rights law suit.)
Last night, the lead plaintiffs in the case that's destined to shake up Nevada's marriage law went to Ralston to make their case.
(Start at 9:00.)
Yet while we see a new round of media buzz on this issue, let's not forget that there's an actual case to be tried in court. As we touched on yesterday, how the federal courts taking up this case interpret the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment will be key. And while there are similarities to the Prop 8 case in California, there's one key difference that Prop 8 Trial Tracker noted yesterday.
So the Sevcik case here in Nevada will come down to whether domestic partnership actually provides "equal protection under the law", and if we can ever have true equal protection as long as the Question 2 marriage ban remains on the books. Unlike AFER's argument for a broad, nationwide fundamental right to marry that's being made in the Perry case in California, Lambda Legal is making a narrower argument based on the inequality present in Nevada family law and how that can not make federal Constitutional muster. It looks like Lambda Legal is confident that even if some federal judges are hesitant to use one stroke to knock down all the state marriage bans at once, they have to closely examine situations like ours and realize that we're experiencing clear and illegal discrimination.
So where will we go from here? For now, this will be in courtroom of Senior Judge Roger Hunt. And regardless of how Hunt decides, this will likely head next to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Interestingly enough, The Ninth is the same court that issued a narrow ruling in the Perry case back in February, a narrow ruling centered on the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. And funny enough, the Sevcik case will be argued on the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Coincidence?
And like the California case, don't expect any immediate resolution. This may very well end up on the Supreme Court docket, but perhaps not for another 3-5 years. So buckle up and get ready for a long and bumpy and fascinating and trailblazing ride.
Last night, the lead plaintiffs in the case that's destined to shake up Nevada's marriage law went to Ralston to make their case.
(Start at 9:00.)
Yet while we see a new round of media buzz on this issue, let's not forget that there's an actual case to be tried in court. As we touched on yesterday, how the federal courts taking up this case interpret the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment will be key. And while there are similarities to the Prop 8 case in California, there's one key difference that Prop 8 Trial Tracker noted yesterday.
Lamdba Legal’s suit is no doubt in part inspired by the success of the American Foundation for Equal Rights in the Prop 8 case, Perry v. Brown, which led to historic rulings in favor of marriage equality in California both at the district and appellate court levels. Nevada, like California, falls under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, so lawyers in the Sevcik case could cite the Prop 8 ruling in the Ninth Circuit as precedent. Additionally, any appeal of the eventual Sevcik ruling would end up at the Ninth Circuit just like Perry did.
Despite these similarities, the legal arguments that Lamdba Legal are pursuing in Sevcik are not quite the same as AFER’s arguments in Perry. The central complaint in the new Nevada case is an equal protection claim that domestic parternships violate the civil rights of gay and lesbian couples. In the Prop 8 case, AFER made the same equal protection claim but also argued for a fundamental right to marriage under the U.S. Constitution. Tara Borelli, a staff attorney with Lamdba, explained to MetroWeekly that the group “certainly believe[s] that the fundamental right to marry includes same-sex couples, but this court doesn’t need to answer that question to rule for the plaintiffs here. We’re convinced that our equal protection claim is so clearly correct that we want to keep the focus on that claim.”
Lambda Legal’s strategy makes the Sevcik case a more conservative one than the Prop 8 case in Perry, and would appear to be a response at least in part to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in the Prop 8 case, which declined to address the fundamental right question and instead focused more specifically on the circumstances unique to California’s situation.
In explaining Lambda’s complaint, Borelli said, “One of the reasons that we’re suing in the state of Nevada is that this is a particular equal protection problem that this case examines. It’s the kind of problem created where a state excludes same-sex couples from marriage deems them fit for all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage through a lesser, second-class status — in this case, domestic partnership. That shows just how irrational that state’s decision is to shut same-sex couples out of marriage.”
So the Sevcik case here in Nevada will come down to whether domestic partnership actually provides "equal protection under the law", and if we can ever have true equal protection as long as the Question 2 marriage ban remains on the books. Unlike AFER's argument for a broad, nationwide fundamental right to marry that's being made in the Perry case in California, Lambda Legal is making a narrower argument based on the inequality present in Nevada family law and how that can not make federal Constitutional muster. It looks like Lambda Legal is confident that even if some federal judges are hesitant to use one stroke to knock down all the state marriage bans at once, they have to closely examine situations like ours and realize that we're experiencing clear and illegal discrimination.
So where will we go from here? For now, this will be in courtroom of Senior Judge Roger Hunt. And regardless of how Hunt decides, this will likely head next to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Interestingly enough, The Ninth is the same court that issued a narrow ruling in the Perry case back in February, a narrow ruling centered on the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. And funny enough, the Sevcik case will be argued on the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Coincidence?
And like the California case, don't expect any immediate resolution. This may very well end up on the Supreme Court docket, but perhaps not for another 3-5 years. So buckle up and get ready for a long and bumpy and fascinating and trailblazing ride.
Monday, September 15, 2014
The Waiting Game
Last week, the State of Nevada had no one present. No one even bothered to show up for court in San Francisco. Instead, the judges of the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals instead had to endure this bucket full of crazy last week.
We will likely receive a ruling from the Ninth on Sevcik v. Sandoval fairly soon. And so far, marriage equality seem to be liking their odds.
Yet now, other states may have leapfrogged ahead of Nevada on the way to the US Supreme Court. However, Nevada may yet slip onto The Supremes' docket if the Ninth issues a ruling on Sevcik this week.
As we've discussed before, the US Supreme Court set this chain of lower court marriage rulings with its US v. Windsor. Will the SCOTUS Justices who ruled so passionately in favor of LGBTQ civil rights reverse course so suddenly? We seriously doubt it, but we can't take anything for granted there.
Now here's where it becomes even more interesting. The State of Nevada dropped its legal defense of marriage discrimination in February. That's why no one from the State of Nevada even bothered to show up in San Francisco last Monday to argue for the Question 2 marriage ban. And that's why US Supreme Court Justices will have to determine standing (a la Prop 8 California) should the usual suspects decide to appeal the Ninth's ruling.
This is why we're now playing the waiting game. If the Ninth Circuit rules in favor of equality, Nevada may become State #18 for marriage equality by next month. Or we may not, should SCOTUS decide to place that ruling on hold. Perhaps our case may be one of the marriage cases that will set a national precedent next year. Or perhaps not, should SCOTUS decide not to take up Sevcik at all.
Whatever happens, this month promises to be an exciting one for civil rigts activists here in The Silver State. We're just waiting to see what comes next.
We will likely receive a ruling from the Ninth on Sevcik v. Sandoval fairly soon. And so far, marriage equality seem to be liking their odds.
Yet now, other states may have leapfrogged ahead of Nevada on the way to the US Supreme Court. However, Nevada may yet slip onto The Supremes' docket if the Ninth issues a ruling on Sevcik this week.
As we've discussed before, the US Supreme Court set this chain of lower court marriage rulings with its US v. Windsor. Will the SCOTUS Justices who ruled so passionately in favor of LGBTQ civil rights reverse course so suddenly? We seriously doubt it, but we can't take anything for granted there.
Now here's where it becomes even more interesting. The State of Nevada dropped its legal defense of marriage discrimination in February. That's why no one from the State of Nevada even bothered to show up in San Francisco last Monday to argue for the Question 2 marriage ban. And that's why US Supreme Court Justices will have to determine standing (a la Prop 8 California) should the usual suspects decide to appeal the Ninth's ruling.
This is why we're now playing the waiting game. If the Ninth Circuit rules in favor of equality, Nevada may become State #18 for marriage equality by next month. Or we may not, should SCOTUS decide to place that ruling on hold. Perhaps our case may be one of the marriage cases that will set a national precedent next year. Or perhaps not, should SCOTUS decide not to take up Sevcik at all.
Whatever happens, this month promises to be an exciting one for civil rigts activists here in The Silver State. We're just waiting to see what comes next.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Matter of Time
What happens when one walks into a law suit and can't find the defendant? In San Francisco yesterday, no one appeared at the dais where an attorney for Governor Brian Sandoval (R) was expected. But then again, many of us already expected this to happen.
Yet how many court watchers were expecting this? Perhaps they needed to pay closer attention to what Monte Stewart had to say about Brown v. Board of Education.
Yesterday, Sevcik v. Sandoval received its day in court at the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. But since the State of Nevada decided to drop its legal defense of the Question 2 marriage ban. That's why Monte Stewart and these crispy critters were left to defend their sacred cow of discrimination.
Judging from the three judges on yesterday's panel and their reactions to oral arguments, supporters of equality have plenty of reasons to feel optimistic. And perhaps this is why opponents have turned up the bombast as they continue their last ditch attempt at saving their prized "political issue" of "segregation laws".
Over the past five years, we've witnessed remarkable progress on LGBTQ civil rights. And deep down, we always knew this was coming. It was just a matter of time.
And now, the time finally seems to be coming. Think about that. And keep in mind the empty spot in that San Francisco federal courthouse where Governor Sandoval's lawyer was supposed to defend the Question 2 marriage ban. This is simply a matter of time.
Yet how many court watchers were expecting this? Perhaps they needed to pay closer attention to what Monte Stewart had to say about Brown v. Board of Education.
Yesterday, Sevcik v. Sandoval received its day in court at the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. But since the State of Nevada decided to drop its legal defense of the Question 2 marriage ban. That's why Monte Stewart and these crispy critters were left to defend their sacred cow of discrimination.
Judging from the three judges on yesterday's panel and their reactions to oral arguments, supporters of equality have plenty of reasons to feel optimistic. And perhaps this is why opponents have turned up the bombast as they continue their last ditch attempt at saving their prized "political issue" of "segregation laws".
Over the past five years, we've witnessed remarkable progress on LGBTQ civil rights. And deep down, we always knew this was coming. It was just a matter of time.
And now, the time finally seems to be coming. Think about that. And keep in mind the empty spot in that San Francisco federal courthouse where Governor Sandoval's lawyer was supposed to defend the Question 2 marriage ban. This is simply a matter of time.
Monday, September 8, 2014
The Most Poignant PRIDE Yet
This was a bittersweet weekend for us. We had the opportunity to reconnect with old friends, meet some new friends, amd remember someone who's made such a huge mark in our lives.
On the eve of Sevcik v. Sandoval's day in court (at the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals) and just after a remarkable series of advances for transgender civil rights, Las Vegas PRIDE weekend came and went. It was a time for celebration of recent progress, as well as a time of reflection on the challenges that still lie ahead.
Friday night's parade offered quite the exciting line-up. Communities of faith, Cleve Jones & Culinary 226, a host of local businesses, and even a few Las Vegas Metro Police officers (!!!) participated in the parade. Also riding in the parade were State Senators David Parks (D-Paradise), Pat Spearman (D-North Las Vegas), Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas), & Justin Jones (D-Enterprise), along with Assembly Member James Healey (D-Enterprise), Lieutenant Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D), NV-03 Congressional candidate Erin Bilbray (D), and State Senate candidate Teresa Lowry (D).
Along 4th Street in Downtown Las Vegas, all these people marched in solidarity with Southern Nevada's LGBTQ community and our continuing struggle for full civil rights. They came to show their respect for our community and ask for our support. Doesn't it feel nice to receive this kind of respect?
Then came the Saturday festival. And yes, there were festivities all throughout Clark County Government Center's amphitheater. There were also some elected officials coming back to meet voters. And there were volunteers registering voters. There were families coming in to soak in the sun, along with young LGBTQ Nevadans coming in for a safe place to express themselves.
The whole weekend was a thing of beauty. When I first moved here to Southern Nevada five years ago, one of the first activities I did was Las Vegas PRIDE. So I always experience a rush of emotions around this time of the year every year. However, this PRIDE was the most poignant one for me yet.
I came to know Sandy Eddy quite well over the years. We both served on the Stonewall Southern Nevada board together. And during our time on the board, she became one of my "Vegas adopted mothers". She really meant that much to me, and to all the other people who came into her life.
Last Thursday, Sandy suffered a stroke and was rushed to the hospital. She didn't make it. Yet even at life's end, she kept giving of herself. Several of her organs are about to be donated to those in need. And during this time of mourning, she's brought back together those who had recently drifted apart.
Las Vegas PRIDE was one of the many community events Sandy made sure to do. That's why I ultimately felt compelled to go this past weekend. Even though I initially didn't even want to pull myself out of bed Friday morning, I knew Sandy would kick my ass if I didn't pull myself together and go. She always made sure to go where she was needed.
Sandy Eddy may no longer be with us physically, but I could feel her spirit with me at PRIDE. And I figured she would have been happy about everyone who turned out for the parade, all the activity at the Stonewall & PLAN booths at the festival, and all the other people at PRIDE who were there to serve the greater community.
This was a bittersweet weekend for so many of us. But with so much more to do, Sandy would want everyone to press forward. So we will. (Yet in the spirit of giving that Sandy embdodied all the way through to her very last moments, now's a great time to reach out & help her family during their time of grief.)
On the eve of Sevcik v. Sandoval's day in court (at the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals) and just after a remarkable series of advances for transgender civil rights, Las Vegas PRIDE weekend came and went. It was a time for celebration of recent progress, as well as a time of reflection on the challenges that still lie ahead.
Friday night's parade offered quite the exciting line-up. Communities of faith, Cleve Jones & Culinary 226, a host of local businesses, and even a few Las Vegas Metro Police officers (!!!) participated in the parade. Also riding in the parade were State Senators David Parks (D-Paradise), Pat Spearman (D-North Las Vegas), Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas), & Justin Jones (D-Enterprise), along with Assembly Member James Healey (D-Enterprise), Lieutenant Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D), NV-03 Congressional candidate Erin Bilbray (D), and State Senate candidate Teresa Lowry (D).
Along 4th Street in Downtown Las Vegas, all these people marched in solidarity with Southern Nevada's LGBTQ community and our continuing struggle for full civil rights. They came to show their respect for our community and ask for our support. Doesn't it feel nice to receive this kind of respect?
Then came the Saturday festival. And yes, there were festivities all throughout Clark County Government Center's amphitheater. There were also some elected officials coming back to meet voters. And there were volunteers registering voters. There were families coming in to soak in the sun, along with young LGBTQ Nevadans coming in for a safe place to express themselves.
The whole weekend was a thing of beauty. When I first moved here to Southern Nevada five years ago, one of the first activities I did was Las Vegas PRIDE. So I always experience a rush of emotions around this time of the year every year. However, this PRIDE was the most poignant one for me yet.
I came to know Sandy Eddy quite well over the years. We both served on the Stonewall Southern Nevada board together. And during our time on the board, she became one of my "Vegas adopted mothers". She really meant that much to me, and to all the other people who came into her life.
Last Thursday, Sandy suffered a stroke and was rushed to the hospital. She didn't make it. Yet even at life's end, she kept giving of herself. Several of her organs are about to be donated to those in need. And during this time of mourning, she's brought back together those who had recently drifted apart.
Las Vegas PRIDE was one of the many community events Sandy made sure to do. That's why I ultimately felt compelled to go this past weekend. Even though I initially didn't even want to pull myself out of bed Friday morning, I knew Sandy would kick my ass if I didn't pull myself together and go. She always made sure to go where she was needed.
Sandy Eddy may no longer be with us physically, but I could feel her spirit with me at PRIDE. And I figured she would have been happy about everyone who turned out for the parade, all the activity at the Stonewall & PLAN booths at the festival, and all the other people at PRIDE who were there to serve the greater community.
This was a bittersweet weekend for so many of us. But with so much more to do, Sandy would want everyone to press forward. So we will. (Yet in the spirit of giving that Sandy embdodied all the way through to her very last moments, now's a great time to reach out & help her family during their time of grief.)
Thursday, September 4, 2014
Last Hurrah of Hate
Yep, it finally happened. It was bound to happen. Perhaps there was no way of stopping this from happening.
For the first time since the US Supreme Court's landmark US v. Windsor decision, a federal judge ruled against marriage equality. Yesterday, US District Court Judge Martin Feldman upheld Louisiana's marriage ban. Oh, and he didn't stop there.
Judge Feldman also denigrated LGBTQ families. He pulled the "incest card". And to top it all off, he essentially declared that Louisiana LGBTQ families don't deserve equal treatment under the law because they made the wrong "lifestyle choice".
Hmmm... Where have we heard this before? Oh wait, might it be the case that's about to be heard by the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals next week?
Oh, yes. That's right. Sevcik v. Sandoval will be among the three marriage cases heard by the San Francisco federal appellate court next week. (The other two are Idaho and Hawaii.)
All too often, we've heard the "family values" argument against LGBTQ civil rights. And there's a reason why so few federal courts have given this argument any merit in recent years: It's crap. There's no real Constitutional case behind it, and there's no "moral case" there either.
So what do opponents of equality have? That's a good question. We know they have "political issues". We know they have "variations". We've constantly heard their nonsensical garblety-goop. And of course, we've seen their "segregation laws".
Unfortunately for opponents of equality, that's all they seem to have (along with their increasingly sparse courtroom victories). Yet while they keep trying to "rebrand" their opposition to civil rights, they can't "rebrand" the basic dollars & sense. There's a reason why so many business leaders want marriage equality. Not only is it simply the right thing to do, but it also opens the door to $52 million worth of more business for Nevada.
So what do they have left? Fear. No really, all they have left is xenophobia. And yesterday's ruling from Louisiana (along with the 2012 Nevada federal court ruling) is their last hurrah of hate.
For the first time since the US Supreme Court's landmark US v. Windsor decision, a federal judge ruled against marriage equality. Yesterday, US District Court Judge Martin Feldman upheld Louisiana's marriage ban. Oh, and he didn't stop there.
Judge Feldman also denigrated LGBTQ families. He pulled the "incest card". And to top it all off, he essentially declared that Louisiana LGBTQ families don't deserve equal treatment under the law because they made the wrong "lifestyle choice".
Hmmm... Where have we heard this before? Oh wait, might it be the case that's about to be heard by the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals next week?
Oh, yes. That's right. Sevcik v. Sandoval will be among the three marriage cases heard by the San Francisco federal appellate court next week. (The other two are Idaho and Hawaii.)
All too often, we've heard the "family values" argument against LGBTQ civil rights. And there's a reason why so few federal courts have given this argument any merit in recent years: It's crap. There's no real Constitutional case behind it, and there's no "moral case" there either.
So what do opponents of equality have? That's a good question. We know they have "political issues". We know they have "variations". We've constantly heard their nonsensical garblety-goop. And of course, we've seen their "segregation laws".
Unfortunately for opponents of equality, that's all they seem to have (along with their increasingly sparse courtroom victories). Yet while they keep trying to "rebrand" their opposition to civil rights, they can't "rebrand" the basic dollars & sense. There's a reason why so many business leaders want marriage equality. Not only is it simply the right thing to do, but it also opens the door to $52 million worth of more business for Nevada.
So what do they have left? Fear. No really, all they have left is xenophobia. And yesterday's ruling from Louisiana (along with the 2012 Nevada federal court ruling) is their last hurrah of hate.
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Some "Issues"
This morning, 3 very important judicial decisions dropped. So let's take a look at them.
In Denver, the 10th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling overturning Utah's ban on marriage equality. And in doing so, the 10th made a very critical announcement. In their ruling, the majority of 10th Circuit Justices made a major declaration that may end up further accelerating the arrival of nationwide marriage equality.
Every so often, we've examined the awfully strong Constitutional case for marriage equality. None other than 5 US Supreme Court Justices hinted at it in their Windsor ruling almost exactly a year ago. In fact, several federal district judges have cited Windsor in their rulings striking down state marriage bans...
Including the latest one in Indiana. Judge Richard L. Young didn't mince words when ruling in favor of couples seeking the freedom to marry. And while it's unclear how soon marriages will begin in Indiana, this ruling just adds to the favorable trend for equality in federal court.
And speaking of federal court, let's take a glance at some big news happening closer to home. In San Francisco, the full 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals rejected an en banc (or full court) review of an earlier decision requiring heightened scrutiny in all cases regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation. Remember that Sevcik v. Sandoval is now in the 9th as it awaits a November hearing. And even before this confirmation, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) & Governor Brian Sandoval (R) had already abandoned their legal defense of Nevada's marriage ban. So today's announcement further signals the arrival of marriage equality to Nevada is no longer a question of if, but when.
So today, we have 3 more federal court rulings in favor of LGBTQ equality. And all 3 suggest Question 2's stoppage of marriage equality in Nevada are numbered. Attorney General candidate Adam Laxalt (R) and his "TEA" tinged ideological soulmates may have "political issues" with this, but judges who actually interpret the US Constitution for a living only seem to have issues with those who want to deny millions of loving families their b civil rights.
In Denver, the 10th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling overturning Utah's ban on marriage equality. And in doing so, the 10th made a very critical announcement. In their ruling, the majority of 10th Circuit Justices made a major declaration that may end up further accelerating the arrival of nationwide marriage equality.
“Today’s ruling marks the first time a federal court of appeals has ruled that excluding same-sex couples from the freedom to marry is unconstitutional," said NCLR executive director Kate Kendell in a statement. "The court makes clear that the promise of equality embedded in our revered U.S. Constitution includes the lives and loves of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans. That recognition marks an indelible milestone in our nation’s journey to full inclusion — and one that will undoubtedly influence other courts in the months to come.”
Attorney Peggy Tomsic, who presented the arguments on behalf of the Utah couples — Derek Kitchen and Moudi Sbeity, Laurie Wood and Kody Partridge, and Karen Archer and Kate Call — noted the far-reaching consequences of a federal appeals court's involvement.
"The court’s ruling is a victory not only for the courageous couples who brought this case," Tomsic said in a statement, "but for our entire state and every state within the 10th Circuit.”
The 10th Circuit includes Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. In its opinion, the 10th Circuit noted that the Windsor case "left open the question presented to us now in full bloom: May a State of the Union constitutionally deny a citizen the benefit or protection of the laws of the State based solely upon the sex of the person that citizen chooses to marry?" Then it sided unequivocally against the ban. "Having heard and carefully considered the argument of the litigants, we conclude that, consistent with the United States Constitution, the State of Utah may not do so. We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right to marry, establish a family, raise children, and enjoy the full protection of a state’s marital laws. A state may not deny the issuance of a marriage license to two persons, or refuse to recognize their marriage, based solely upon the sex of the persons in the marriage union."
Every so often, we've examined the awfully strong Constitutional case for marriage equality. None other than 5 US Supreme Court Justices hinted at it in their Windsor ruling almost exactly a year ago. In fact, several federal district judges have cited Windsor in their rulings striking down state marriage bans...
Including the latest one in Indiana. Judge Richard L. Young didn't mince words when ruling in favor of couples seeking the freedom to marry. And while it's unclear how soon marriages will begin in Indiana, this ruling just adds to the favorable trend for equality in federal court.
And speaking of federal court, let's take a glance at some big news happening closer to home. In San Francisco, the full 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals rejected an en banc (or full court) review of an earlier decision requiring heightened scrutiny in all cases regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation. Remember that Sevcik v. Sandoval is now in the 9th as it awaits a November hearing. And even before this confirmation, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) & Governor Brian Sandoval (R) had already abandoned their legal defense of Nevada's marriage ban. So today's announcement further signals the arrival of marriage equality to Nevada is no longer a question of if, but when.
So today, we have 3 more federal court rulings in favor of LGBTQ equality. And all 3 suggest Question 2's stoppage of marriage equality in Nevada are numbered. Attorney General candidate Adam Laxalt (R) and his "TEA" tinged ideological soulmates may have "political issues" with this, but judges who actually interpret the US Constitution for a living only seem to have issues with those who want to deny millions of loving families their b civil rights.
Sunday, June 22, 2014
Ross Miller Has "Issues".
What an exciting weekend this has been. Back home in Vegasland, the Electric Daisy Carnival was rocking. However, that didn't mean sparks weren't flying up here in Reno. (Get it? Sparks!)
The Nevada State Democratic Party held its 2014 Convention in Reno this weekend. Democrats from across the state came here to "The Biggest Little City in the World" to meet each other, meet their candidates for this fall, and take care of party business.
One of Nevada Democrats' candidates for this fall is Ross Miller. He's our outgoing Secretary of State. And he's now running for Attorney General.
Oh, and Ross Miller isn't one to back down when he sees a wrong that must be made right. So when it was his turn to address the convention, he didn't hold back. In fact, he specifically addressed his issues with Adam Laxalt's "political issues".
Adam Laxalt may have "political issues" with marriage equality and LGBTQ civil rights in general, but Ross Miller certainly does not. Rather, he has issues with those who have "political issues" with human rights
We swear, sparks flew during that barn-burner of a speech. He's actually had to implement SB 283. He's actually had to fly with friends to California to take them to their wedding. And when the unthinkable happened, he had to help a friend cope with the unimaginable.
For G-O-TEA politicians like Adam Laxalt, LGBTQ civil rights may be "political issues" he prefers to blithely dismiss. But for Ross Miller, we are human beings who deserve the same respect & dignity that everyone else takes for granted. It looks to us like he takes his oath of office seriously. And it's looking like he values the US Constitution more than some mere "political issues".
Please take notes, Mr. Laxalt.
The Nevada State Democratic Party held its 2014 Convention in Reno this weekend. Democrats from across the state came here to "The Biggest Little City in the World" to meet each other, meet their candidates for this fall, and take care of party business.
One of Nevada Democrats' candidates for this fall is Ross Miller. He's our outgoing Secretary of State. And he's now running for Attorney General.
Oh, and Ross Miller isn't one to back down when he sees a wrong that must be made right. So when it was his turn to address the convention, he didn't hold back. In fact, he specifically addressed his issues with Adam Laxalt's "political issues".
Adam Laxalt may have "political issues" with marriage equality and LGBTQ civil rights in general, but Ross Miller certainly does not. Rather, he has issues with those who have "political issues" with human rights
We swear, sparks flew during that barn-burner of a speech. He's actually had to implement SB 283. He's actually had to fly with friends to California to take them to their wedding. And when the unthinkable happened, he had to help a friend cope with the unimaginable.
For G-O-TEA politicians like Adam Laxalt, LGBTQ civil rights may be "political issues" he prefers to blithely dismiss. But for Ross Miller, we are human beings who deserve the same respect & dignity that everyone else takes for granted. It looks to us like he takes his oath of office seriously. And it's looking like he values the US Constitution more than some mere "political issues".
Please take notes, Mr. Laxalt.
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
Losing Culture War
We told you this was coming. When the US Supreme Court issued its US v. Windsor ruling, we sensed this would only the beginning of more federal courts ruling in favor of marriage equality. And since then, we haven't been disappointed.
Just this month, we've had two more favorable rulings: Idaho and Oregon. Federal judges just knocked down two more state marriage bans. And now, it only seems to be a matter of time before Nevada is next.
Governor Brian Sandoval (R) is still trying to figure out how he really feels about it. Adam Laxalt is still promising to fight against it. Monte Neil Stewart is still trying to convince a judge that segregation should be legal. And Cresent Hardy is still explaining to anyone who will listen what he means by "segregation laws".
So how's that "Republican rebranding" coming along? Georgia? Florida? Texas? Michigan? Nevada?
We sensed this was coming. G-O-TEA politicians across the nation are still in denial. Marriage equality is increasingly becoming the law of the land across this great land. Yet even as court after court strikes down more marriage bans, G-O-TEA politicians try harder to "rebrand" it away.
When will they finally realize they can't? Love is makes a family. All families deserve to be valued. And marriage is meant for loving families.
We told you this was coming. Marriage equality is increasingly becoming reality across the nation. It just remains to be seen how much longer G-O-TEA politicians want to continue fighting their losing "Culture War" to stop equality.
Just this month, we've had two more favorable rulings: Idaho and Oregon. Federal judges just knocked down two more state marriage bans. And now, it only seems to be a matter of time before Nevada is next.
Governor Brian Sandoval (R) is still trying to figure out how he really feels about it. Adam Laxalt is still promising to fight against it. Monte Neil Stewart is still trying to convince a judge that segregation should be legal. And Cresent Hardy is still explaining to anyone who will listen what he means by "segregation laws".
So how's that "Republican rebranding" coming along? Georgia? Florida? Texas? Michigan? Nevada?
We sensed this was coming. G-O-TEA politicians across the nation are still in denial. Marriage equality is increasingly becoming the law of the land across this great land. Yet even as court after court strikes down more marriage bans, G-O-TEA politicians try harder to "rebrand" it away.
When will they finally realize they can't? Love is makes a family. All families deserve to be valued. And marriage is meant for loving families.
We told you this was coming. Marriage equality is increasingly becoming reality across the nation. It just remains to be seen how much longer G-O-TEA politicians want to continue fighting their losing "Culture War" to stop equality.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
No Leg Left to Stand On
What a turnaround here. Last month, Governor Brian Sandoval (R) and Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) submitted a brief for the State of Nevada to the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals that raised eyebrows and dropped jaws. And it did so for all the wrong reasons.
Perhaps the backlash finally got to them, or perhaps they finally did realize they have no legal leg left to stand on in Sevcik v. Sandoval. Whatever the case, both elected officials announced late yesterday that they're dropping the legal defense of Question 2. And all of a sudden, no one is left to defend Nevada's marriage equality ban.
So what's next? Most likely, we're about to see a replay of what happened when Perry v. Brown (aka the California Prop 8 suit) reached the US Supreme Court. After the Governor & Attorney General of California declined to defend Prop 8 in court, the Yes on 8 campaign stepped up to do so. But once the case reached SCOTUS, the Justices ultimately issued a 5-4 ruling that determined the Yes on 8 campaign had no legal standing to represent the entire State of California.
Now that Governor Sandoval & Attorney General Cortez Masto have dropped the State of Nevada's official defense of Question 2, there's no one left with the legal heft to represent the State of Nevada. Even if "the usual suspects" try to step in for the State, they will likely run into the same trouble that the Yes on 8 campaign did thanks to the precedent set by the Supreme Court last year in Perry v. Brown.
In many ways, we're now approaching a rather anticlimactic end to what has been a difficult (and ultimately embarrassing) period of Nevada history. Not too long ago, Question 2 was considered to be "settled law" and marriage discrimination was "the norm". But when a few plucky Nevadans decided to sue for equality, everything began to change. And when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) announced the ultimate change of heart, even more monumental change followed.
But now, the end of marriage discrimination in Nevada is looking increasingly inevitable. And yesterday's announcement from Brian Sandoval & Catherine Cortez Masto only confirms this. Simply put, marriage discrimination has no leg left to stand on.
Perhaps the backlash finally got to them, or perhaps they finally did realize they have no legal leg left to stand on in Sevcik v. Sandoval. Whatever the case, both elected officials announced late yesterday that they're dropping the legal defense of Question 2. And all of a sudden, no one is left to defend Nevada's marriage equality ban.
So what's next? Most likely, we're about to see a replay of what happened when Perry v. Brown (aka the California Prop 8 suit) reached the US Supreme Court. After the Governor & Attorney General of California declined to defend Prop 8 in court, the Yes on 8 campaign stepped up to do so. But once the case reached SCOTUS, the Justices ultimately issued a 5-4 ruling that determined the Yes on 8 campaign had no legal standing to represent the entire State of California.
Now that Governor Sandoval & Attorney General Cortez Masto have dropped the State of Nevada's official defense of Question 2, there's no one left with the legal heft to represent the State of Nevada. Even if "the usual suspects" try to step in for the State, they will likely run into the same trouble that the Yes on 8 campaign did thanks to the precedent set by the Supreme Court last year in Perry v. Brown.
In many ways, we're now approaching a rather anticlimactic end to what has been a difficult (and ultimately embarrassing) period of Nevada history. Not too long ago, Question 2 was considered to be "settled law" and marriage discrimination was "the norm". But when a few plucky Nevadans decided to sue for equality, everything began to change. And when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) announced the ultimate change of heart, even more monumental change followed.
But now, the end of marriage discrimination in Nevada is looking increasingly inevitable. And yesterday's announcement from Brian Sandoval & Catherine Cortez Masto only confirms this. Simply put, marriage discrimination has no leg left to stand on.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Family Values
Every so often, we hear politicians crow about their "morality" and "family values". What do they actually mean? And what does it actually mean to millions of American families?
We couldn't help but brainstorm these questions while supposed "defenders of family values" across the nation fought for "family values" like banning second parent adoption, en shrinking workplace discrimination, driving transgender people to suicide, and denying loving couples the freedom to marry. Wait, these aren't "family values"? So why are G-O-TEA politicians falling over each other to fight for policies that espouse anything but "family values"?
Last month, we couldn't help but mock Governor Brian Sandoval's (R-Why?) decision to green-light a brief to the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals regarding Sevcik v. Sandoval. What isn't a laughing matter, however, is the disgusting content inside that brief. Not only does it oppose marriage equality as a guaranteed civil right, but it also compares LGBTQ families to criminals.
How can bigotry ever be considered a "family value"? What's so valuable about wrongful discrimination? And why should we ever value hate?
If we as a society truly care about "family values", then we should actually value families. It's really as simple as that.
We should never forget the ultimate family value: Love. Love is what ultimately matters when it comes to family values. And yes, at the end of the day, love is all we need.
So next time you hear some politician proclaim "family values", ask him or her if that actually means valuing families. After all, families aren't built on discrimination. They depend on love.
We couldn't help but brainstorm these questions while supposed "defenders of family values" across the nation fought for "family values" like banning second parent adoption, en shrinking workplace discrimination, driving transgender people to suicide, and denying loving couples the freedom to marry. Wait, these aren't "family values"? So why are G-O-TEA politicians falling over each other to fight for policies that espouse anything but "family values"?
Last month, we couldn't help but mock Governor Brian Sandoval's (R-Why?) decision to green-light a brief to the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals regarding Sevcik v. Sandoval. What isn't a laughing matter, however, is the disgusting content inside that brief. Not only does it oppose marriage equality as a guaranteed civil right, but it also compares LGBTQ families to criminals.
How can bigotry ever be considered a "family value"? What's so valuable about wrongful discrimination? And why should we ever value hate?
If we as a society truly care about "family values", then we should actually value families. It's really as simple as that.
We should never forget the ultimate family value: Love. Love is what ultimately matters when it comes to family values. And yes, at the end of the day, love is all we need.
So next time you hear some politician proclaim "family values", ask him or her if that actually means valuing families. After all, families aren't built on discrimination. They depend on love.
Monday, January 27, 2014
There's More to That FAIL
Last Wednesday, we couldn't help but chuckle a bit (actually, quite a lot) over the State of Nevada's absolutely batshit crazy eye-popping brief to the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in the latest round of Sevcik v. Sandoval. It went to great lengths to defend the state’s history of "promoting traditional marriage", even though our state's history has proven anything but that. Oh, and it also took outrageous and downright nonsensical detours into the territory of incest and bigotry.
And now, it's close to ending a political career. And surprisingly (actually, not really), it's not Governor Brian Sandoval's (R-Still Unaware That It's 2014). Perhaps because he was expected to dosomething this stupid, he hasn't received much blowback (other than from yours truly here).
Instead, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D-??!!) looks to be receiving quite the farewell party from Carson City. Why? Her office went along with Sandoval's request for this brief. And nearly everyone expected better from her.
Her office initially suggested she was just "following orders". Really? So "following orders" is more important than paying attention to what's actually in the US Constitution? Keep in mind that the first and foremost duty of Attorneys General is to protect & defend the Constitution.
So why didn't Catherine Cortez Masto remember her own oath of office? Why did our Attorney General just go along with the Governor? And why is either one of them bothering to defend an indefensible denial of civil rights? Both are trained lawyers, and Sandoval previously served as Attorney General before being appointed as a federal judge.
While I don't always see eye to eye with Jon Ralston, he's totally correct on this case. Both the Governor and the Attorney General blew it when they decided to defend discrimination & inequality rather than remember their own oaths of office. And ironically enough, whatever political calculation they made to do this has only resulted in a major "EPIC FAIL" moment and one hell of a backfire.
And now, it's close to ending a political career. And surprisingly (actually, not really), it's not Governor Brian Sandoval's (R-Still Unaware That It's 2014). Perhaps because he was expected to do
Instead, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D-??!!) looks to be receiving quite the farewell party from Carson City. Why? Her office went along with Sandoval's request for this brief. And nearly everyone expected better from her.
Her office initially suggested she was just "following orders". Really? So "following orders" is more important than paying attention to what's actually in the US Constitution? Keep in mind that the first and foremost duty of Attorneys General is to protect & defend the Constitution.
So why didn't Catherine Cortez Masto remember her own oath of office? Why did our Attorney General just go along with the Governor? And why is either one of them bothering to defend an indefensible denial of civil rights? Both are trained lawyers, and Sandoval previously served as Attorney General before being appointed as a federal judge.
While I don't always see eye to eye with Jon Ralston, he's totally correct on this case. Both the Governor and the Attorney General blew it when they decided to defend discrimination & inequality rather than remember their own oaths of office. And ironically enough, whatever political calculation they made to do this has only resulted in a major "EPIC FAIL" moment and one hell of a backfire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)