Posted by AzBlueMeanie: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a vote on the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) for Monday. Employment Nondiscrimination Act Set For Monday NightVote: Reid [filed] a procedural motion on Thursday evening to begin debate on the bill, setting up a Monday evening vote. The bill needs to get 60 votes to … Read more
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Illinois Lawmakers return to Springfield on Tuesday, November 5 for the final week of the annual fall "veto session." This past week there were dueling rallies in Springfield for those in favor of marriage equality for gays, and those who are opposed. Illinois Gay Marriage Bill's Fate Uncertain As Veto Session Begins.
SB 10, The Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, passed the Illinois Senate chamber on Valentine's Day earlier this year, but stalled in the Illinois House. There is a push for SB 10 to be called up for consideration in the Illinois House during this final week of the veto session.
With the Illinois General Assembly returning to Springfield next week, several mayors from cities and towns across Illinois signed onto a letter urging the Illinois House of Representatives to pass marriage equality during veto session. Illinois Mayors Join Together to Urge Legislators to Pass Freedom to Marry During Veto Session:
“As the chief executive officers or our respective communities, our
responsibility and guiding principal is to work with citizens and
businesses to encourage, create, strengthen, and sustain an environment
where everyone is provided an opportunity to succeed,” the letter reads.
“Each day, we see same sex couples and their families who suffer
because they are denied the full protections of law, protections that
strengthen families. These families cannot wait any longer for the
State of Illinois to respect their freedom to marry.”
* * *
The letter also comes at a time where every major newspaper
serving Illinois has endorsed the marriage equality bill, most recently
including the Daily Herald, the Rockford Register-Star, the Belleville
News-Democrat, the Springfield Journal-Register, the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch and the Quad City Times.
“Mayors for Marriage Equality is proud to lend their voice
to the growing chorus of citizens, faith based leaders, business
leaders, organized labor and others to provide same-sex couples with
equal access to status, benefits, protections, rights and
responsibilities of civil marriage,” the letter concludes. “We encourage
you to help add Illinois to the growing list of states that recognize
the freedom to marry, and unleash the economic promise and power of
inclusion and assimilation of all people by supporting the Religious
Freedom and Marriage Equality Fairness Act.”
Information about the legislation is available at www.illinoisunites.org, along with information about how citizens can make their voices heard.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Several "Red States" have had their national guard units refuse to process requests for same-sex partner benefits, despite the Department of Defense (DoD) having brought its rules and regulations into compliance in September with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Apparently these "Red State" Neo-Confederates have decided to engage in massive resistance to the Supreme Court's decision, much the way some of these same states did in response to the Supreme Court decision ending segregation in public schools in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. It took Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson nationalizing state guard units to enforce Supreme Court decisions for the desegregation of public schools. There is no reason to believe that President Obama will not faithfully execute the laws of the United States in the same manner if necessary.
Last night, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel gave a speech to the Anti-Defamation League in which he addressed this "Red State" refusal to comply with DoD rules and regulations regarding same-sex partner benefits. Secretary Hagel's address to the ADL (excerpt):
The balance between security and civil rights sends an important message to the world. At the Department of Defense, we work to preserve America’s individual liberties as well as defend our freedom.
When the Supreme Court issued its decision on the Defense of Marriage Act this summer, the Department of Defense immediately began working on providing the same benefits to all eligible spouses, regardless of sexual orientation. We did it because everyone who serves our country in uniform should receive the full benefits they earned, fairly and in accordance with the law. Everyone’s rights must be protected.
This means that all spouses of service members are entitled to DoD ID cards, and the benefits that come with them. But several states are refusing to issue these IDs to same-sex spouses at National Guard facilities. Not only does this violate the states’ obligations under federal law, their actions have created hardship and inequality by forcing couples to travel long distances to federal military bases to obtain the ID cards they’re entitled to.
This is wrong. It causes division among the ranks, and it furthers prejudice, which DoD has fought to extinguish.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The injunction issued by a Texas federal court earlier this week was overturned by a panel of the conservative activist Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday. Texas court reinstates abortion limits:
Texas abortion providers’ Monday victory was short-lived. The U.S. 5th
Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday reversed a federal district court
ruling that found part of the state’s new abortion regulations
unconstitutional, meaning the provisions of House Bill 2 could take
effect immediately if state officials choose to enforce them.
* * *
A three-judge panel in the 5th Circuit appellate court lifted a
permanent injunction placed on the abortion regulations by a lower
court, arguing in a written opinion that the state was likely to succeed
in its legal arguments.
The judges, Priscilla R. Owen, Jennifer Walker Elrod and Catharina
Haynes, wrote that “there is a substantial likelihood that the state
will prevail in its argument that Planned Parenthood failed to establish
an undue burden on women seeking abortions or that the
hospital-admitting-privileges requirement creates a substantial obstacle
in the path of a woman seeking an abortion.” Furthermore, they
wrote,”we also conclude that the state has made a strong showing of
likelihood of success on the merits, at least in part, as to its appeal
of the injunction pertaining to medication abortions.”
The appellate court’s decision overrules U.S. District Judge Lee
Yeakel’s ruling on Monday that a provision in HB 2 that requires
abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital
imposed an undue burden on women seeking the procedure. Additionally,
Yeakel ruled that it would be unconstitutional for the state to require
physicians to follow federal standards for drug-induced abortions if a
physician determined it would be safer for the woman to use a common
evidence-based protocol.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
"Corporations are people, my friend." – Willard "Mittens" Romney
Apparently the legal fiction of a corporate entity also enjoys rights far superior to the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to citizens by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is a brave new world of corporatocracy, my friends.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals today upheld a legal challenge to the provision of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) that mandates employer coverage of birth control,
arguing that it “trammels” the expression of religious freedom.
Wait, the legal fiction of a corporate entity has a "religion" (other than profits and shareholder dividends)? And it is free to impose its religious beliefs on its employees under some perverse notion of "religious liberty"?
This is the exact opposite meaning of religious liberty: it is a "get out of jail free card" for an employer to discriminate against its employees of other religious beliefs, or no religious beliefs, who do not share the corporate entity's "religious beliefs" — under the sanction of federal law, which would violate the "free exercise" clause of First Amendment religious liberty.
Steve Benen reports, Court rules against ACA contraception policy:
Birth-control opponents wonan especially significant round this morning.
The D.C. Circuit Court has upheld a legal challenge to the
provision of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that mandates employer
coverage of birth control, arguing that it “trammels” the expression of
religious freedom. While the legal process over the issue isn’t final,
the decision hands a huge political victory to conservative activists
that have long made this argument.
The ruling is online here (pdf).