Civil & Human Rights

Lamda Legal files second lawsuit challenging Arizona’s same-sex marriage ban

by

AzEqualEarlier this year in January, four same-sex couples filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Arizona, represented by attorney Shawn Aiken.  Their complaint argues that the federal courts must declare unconstitutional Arizona’s definition of marriage based on the Supreme Court ruling last year in the United States vs. Windsor case that deemed unconstitutional the denial of federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. Suit filed to allow same-sex marriages in Arizona. “We’re saying, ‘Look, follow that rationale and make the same declaration as to the law in Arizona,’ ” Aiken said. “It’s that simple.”

Lamda Legal, the legal organization which has successfully litigated same-sex marriage cases across the country, has filed a second lawsuit in Arizona challenging Arizona’s same-sex marriage constitutional ban. With all due respect  to Mr. Aiken, this is the real McCoy. Lambda Legal files federal lawsuit challenging Arizona’s same-sex marriage ban:

Lambda Legal announced Thursday it has filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Arizona on behalf of seven same-sex couples and the surviving spouses of two additional same-sex couples challenging the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

In the lawsuit, Lambda Legal, joined by pro bono co-counsel from Perkins Coie LLP, argues that the Arizona constitutional amendment and state statutes barring same-sex couples from marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Read more

Conservative women sure get away with being bossy

by

Sheryl Sandberg has sparked a healthy debate with the campaign she started aimed at getting people to stop using the word “bossy’ to describe girls. While it may not seem like a big deal at first, when you think about it and look at the evidence, it’s clear that “bossy” is applied to assertive girls far more often than similarly outgoing boys and is really a euphemism for something else. As Amanda Marcotte puts it:

Read more

GOP war on voting: rejecting your constitutional right to legislate by citizens initiative and referendum

by

Last week, Tea-Publicans in the Arizona House voted along party lines to refer HCR 2018 (.pdf) to the ballot in November which, if approved by the voters, would add a “sunset” provision to any citizens initiative or referendum which “authorizes or requires the expenditure of state money,” referring the matter back to the voters in another referendum every eight (8) years.

The Senate version of the bill, SCR 1003 (.pdf), is on the Committee of the Whole (COW) calendar today in the Senate.

Read more

Court of Appeals to hear same-sex marriage cases in April

by

The federal district court cases from Nevada, Utah, and Oklahoma have all been “fast tracked” for oral argument in the Court of Appeals in early April. The case from Virginia  is “fast tracked” for oral argument in May.

6a00d8341bf80c53ef01901df0a0f0970b-piThe 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has set oral arguments in Nevada’s same-sex marriage case, Sevcik v. Sandoval,  for April 9 in San Francisco.

[UPDATE: Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog reports “The Ninth Circuit has now cancelled the April 9 hearing date for the Nevada case. It will be rescheduled.”]

On Feb. 10, Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto announced that she and Gov. Brian Sandoval would no longer be defending Nevada’s amendment banning same-sex couples from marrying on appeal in the 9th Circuit, based on the fact that they did not believe their appeal would succeed if the amendment had to withstand heightened scrutiny standard  following the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott.

The Coalition for the Protection of Marriage is the remaining party defending Nevada’s definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. There is an issue as to whether this organization even has standing, similar to the appeal of California’s Prop. 8 in Hollingsworth v. Perry.

Read more

Sen. Gail Griffin does not like ‘Mexican’

by

State Senator Gail Griffin (R-Heber) from LD 14 is a major piece of work.

Earlier this year she floated the idea of stealing a big chunk of Pima County and handing it over to Santa Cruz County because some local teabaggers wanted to secede from Pima County. Also, Pima County objects to the proposed Rosemont Mine, which Griffin denied was a motivating factor, but no serious person believes her denial.

This week Griffin’s bills to thumb her nose at the federal “guvmint” and to challenge the protected endangered species status of Mexican gray wolves are coming up for a vote in the House. As Craig McDermott posted earlier today:

LOBOMEXICANO– SB1211, allowing the AZ Department of Agriculture and “livestock operators” to kill Mexican wolves, under certain circumstances, and imposing reporting requirements on the reintroduction of Mexican wolves into the wild in AZ (House Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources, Monday, 2 p.m., HHR4)

– SB1212, appropriating $250K to the AZ Attorney General’s office to pay for litigation against the reintroduction of Mexican wolves into Arizona (House Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources)

– SCR1006, a resolution using many words to state that the legislature doesn’t like Mexican wolves.  What a surprise (House Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources)

Read more