Courts & Law

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Less than 0.5 percent of the U.S. population serves in its armed forces. Americans and Their Military, Drifting Apart – NYTimes.com (Karl Eikenberry, Army Lt. General, retired).

President Obama stated on the ending of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy:

Today, the discriminatory law known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is
finally and formally repealed.  As of today, patriotic Americans in
uniform will no longer have to lie about who they are in order to serve
the country they love.  As of today, our armed forces will no longer
lose the extraordinary skills and combat experience of so many gay and
lesbian service members. And today, as Commander in Chief, I want those
who were discharged under this law to know that your country deeply
values your service.

It took the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married to end Defense Department regulations that discriminated against gay and
lesbian service members. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel had the Armed Forces review their rules and regulations and bring them into compliance with the Supreme Court ruling by September of this year.

But several Southern states with anti-gay benefits state laws have chosen to defy the Department of Defense orders with respect to their National Guard units asserting the tired old Neo-Confederate "states' rights" defense. These states continue to discriminate against patriotic Americans — the few who volunteer to proudly serve in their country's Armed Forces to defend your feeedoms — simply because they are legally wed gay and lesbian service members. These states clearly do not respect nor value their proud military service.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

News Release from Hawaii House of Representatives November 8, 2013
Hawai`i Free Press:

The state House of Representatives voted late Friday to pass SB1 HD1, relating to equal rights, on third reading.

The measure was approved by a vote of 30 to 19, with two members excused.

The House draft
includes amendments, modeled after similar language in Connecticut law,
significantly broadening exemptions for religious organizations and
clergy performing solemnization.

Religious
organizations and affiliated nonprofits would be exempted from having to
furnish goods, services, or its facilities or grounds for the
solemnization or the celebration of solemnizations if it is in violation
of its religious beliefs or faith.

It also
specifies that clergy and religious officers are not required to
solemnize if it is against their religious beliefs or faith.

The measure also
grants immunity from administrative, civil and legal liability to
religious organizations and officials for the failure or refusal to
provide services, goods, or facilities as described.

The issue was
discussed in House committee hearings spanning five days and nearly 57
hours of public testimony. There were 5,184 registered testifiers, with
over 1,000 people testifying, and nearly 24,400 written testimonies
submitted.

As far as House
members could recall, the public hearing on SB1 was the longest hearing
on a single bill in the modern history of the Hawaii House of
Representatives.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Now that the election is over, it is time to catch up on matters not receiving media attention this week, like this federal court trial in Wisconsin challenging that state's voter I.D. requirement. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported earlier this week, Federal trial challenging Wisconsin's voter ID law underway:

Minorities and senior citizens testified Monday about costly and
time-consuming difficulties they faced in getting photo identification
as they pressed their case to permanently invalidate Wisconsin's voter
ID law.

The federal trial that kicked off Monday involves two cases and is
expected to last two weeks. A Dane County judge in a different case has
already blocked the law, but opponents of voter ID are pursuing the
federal litigation in an attempt to ensure the requirement never goes
back into effect.

* * *

The trial began with a string of people describing the problems they
had in trying to secure IDs for themselves or family members. Some of
them have yet to be successful.

"I cannot express the amount of time, energy and frustration it
required" to get a license for her mother, Debra Crawford testified.

Crawford's mother, Bettye Jones, was the lead plaintiff in one of the cases before the court Monday. Jones died in October 2012.

Jones was born in Tennessee and lived much of her life in Cleveland,
Ohio. She moved to Brookfield in 2011 to be closer to family after her
husband died.

She had to make multiple trips to a Wisconsin Division of Motor
Vehicles office before she could get a driver's license last year
because she did not have a birth certificate. Getting the license cost
her more than $100 and took about 40 hours over several months, Crawford
testified.

Crawford and others who testified Monday were questioned only briefly
during cross examination by attorneys for the state. But in opening
statements, Kawski stressed state officials have made exceptions in
unique circumstances to accommodate voters who had difficulty acquiring
IDs.