Civil & Human Rights

Nevada ends its defense of state’s same-sex marriage ban

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A couple of weeks ago I explained that Nevada's defense of same-sex marriage ban crumbles in Sevcik v. Sandoval.

State officials in Nevada, concluding that they can no longer successfully defend the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, have formally switched position to argue that the ban is unconstitutional. Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog reports, Nevada ends defense of marriage ban:

Equal[State officials] did so on Monday, in a plea to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to allow them to withdraw their written legal brief defending the ban.

That request came at about the same time that the same-sex couples challenging the Nevada ban asked the Ninth Circuit Court to set an early date for a hearing as the case continues in that court.  The state’s withdrawal leaves only the original proponents of Nevada’s voter-approved ban to carry on a defense.

The Nevada case in the Ninth Circuit is one of the furthest along among cases unfolding in federal appeals courts in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision last June in U.S. v. Windsor striking down a part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that denied federal marital benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married.  Although the Court’s ruling did not settle whether states could constitutionally ban gay and lesbian marriages, a lengthening string of lower court rulings has interpreted the decision at least to seriously  imperil the validity of such bans, if not to doom them outright.

Nevada officials cited that recent trend on Monday, telling the Ninth Circuit that the Windsor decision “signifies that discrimination against same-sex couples is unconstitutional,” and thus the arguments that the state had made previously in support of their state’s ban “cannot withstand legal scrutiny.”

Update on Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship voter registration form case

by

Posted by azBlueMeanie:

Arizona Attorney General Tom "banned for life by the SEC" Horne and Secretary of State Ken "Birther" Bennett are in U.S. District Court in Kansas, Kris W. Kobach et al. v. United States Election Assistance Commission (13-4095-EFM-DJW) suing the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and threatening to impose a two-tier system for voting in Arizona and Kansas based upon whether you registered to vote with the Arizona voter registration form or the federal motor-voter form (NVRA).

Dion Lefler of the Wichita Eagle reports on the latest breaking news in this case, Judge questions feds’ role in Kansas, Arizona voting laws:

A judge strongly questioned Tuesday whether a federal commission has the authority to prevent Kansas and Arizona from demanding proof-of-citizenship documents from people trying to register to vote using federal forms.

Judge Eric Melgren repeatedly pressed Department of Justice lawyer Bradley Heard to explain how a Supreme Court decision last year on Arizona's proof-of-citizenship law allows the federal Election Assistance Commission to reject requests from Arizona and Kansas to add state-law requirements to the instructions for filling out the voting form.

"The single pivotal question in this case is who gets to decide … what's necessary" to establish citizenship for voting, Melgren said.

Heard said that decision lies with the EAC under the federal National Voter Registration Act, also known as the motor-voter law. He said the law empowers the commission to decide what questions and proofs are necessary to include in the federal registration form.

While the law doesn't explicitly state the EAC can overrule states on proof of citizenship, Heard said the legislative history shows that requiring document proof was considered and rejected by Congress.

"I've read the legislative history, and I'm not very impressed by it," Melgren responded.

Justice Department policy: equal protection to married same-sex couples

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In a speech Saturday night at the Human Rights Campaign’s Greater New York Gala at the Waldorf Astoria in New York, Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. announced a new Justice Department policy. Justice Dept. to give married gay couples equal protection (modified and updated):

EqualThe Justice Department on Monday instructed all of its employees across the country, for the first time, to give lawful same-sex marriages sweeping equal protection under the law in every program it administers, from courthouse proceedings to prison visits to the compensation of surviving spouses of public safety officers.

In a new Policy Memo (.pdf), the department spells out the rights of same-sex couples, including the right to decline to give testimony that might incriminate their spouses, even if their marriages are not recognized in the state where the couple lives.

Uphill Battle: Rep. Victoria Steele Introduces Bill to Extend ERA Ratification Deadline

by

PDA econ equalityEquality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
– Equal Rights Amendment

by Pamela Powers Hannley

There is an ideological perfect storm brewing in the Arizona Legislature. A memorandum supporting extension of the ratification deadline for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been assigned to a committee where five out of seven members have pledged to protect and fight for the rights of fetuses over the rights of women.

Not content with winning the right to vote in 1920, women’s rights advocates proposed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) 91 years ago. The ERA was introduced during every Congressional session between 1923 and 1972 and finally passed nearly 70 years after it was originally proposed. In the 1970s, there was a ground war at the state level to get 38 state legislatures to ratify the ERA in order for it to become a Constitutional Amendment. The ERA fell 3 states short of ratification; Arizona is one of a handful of states that never ratified the ERA.

HCM2006 Sponsors

Fast forward to 2013, the ground war for women’s equality has resumed at the state level with ERA ratification proposals six states– Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Virginia, and now … Arizona.; Nevada and North Carolina plan to hear it in 2014. LD9 Rep. Victoria Steele has introduced HCM2006, a memorandum from the State of Arizona asking the federal government to extend the deadline for ratification of the ERA, and HCR2016, a fill to ratify the ERA.

In addition to Steele, the ERA memorandum has 18 co-sponsors– including two Republican women, Kelly Townsend (LD14) and Karen Fann (LD1). Below is the complete list. Although Southern Arizona is well-represented on this list with Steele, Wheeler, Gabaldon, Saldate, and Pencrazi, where are the rest of the Democrats and the “moderate” Repulbican? (Should I name names, or can you figure out who’s missing here? If you live in LD9, LD10, LD2, or LD3, you might want to ask your representatives and senators why their names are missing from this list.)

Catholic Poll: The flock is not following their shepherds

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Remember this from back in November: Pope Francis Orders Survey Of Catholics On Hot-Button Social Issues:

PopeU.S. bishops are among those the pope is asking to find out from their parishioners how they feel about abortion, same-sex marriage, divorce and birth control.

* * *

The decision is dividing some parishioners, some of whom fear the poll could be the first step in the church changing its stance on hot-button issues.

The results are trickling in and as they would say on the Family Feud, "survey says": Global Poll Finds Most Catholics Actually Support Birth Control And Abortion Rights:

A new global poll surveying the world’s Catholics finds that most of them don’t agree with the Church’s strict positions on issues of reproductive health. Specifically, most Catholics around the world actually support birth control and abortion rights — two “family values” issues that the Catholic hierarchy opposes.