USA – DOMA lawyer’s most homophobic arguments (Adam Serwer)

Former Solicitor General Paul Clement

Former Solicitor General Paul Clement (pictured), who was chosen by House Republicans to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act before the Supreme Court, had previously argued that people can change their sexual orientation, that marriage is only for couples that can produce children, that gay and lesbian couples could be worse parents than heterosexuals, and that barring same-sex marriage “encourage[s] heterosexual relationships.”

Click the header link to read the full article.

The Catholic activists behind the Supreme Court DOMA fight

by Jamie Manson  

Millions who watched the news Wednesday undoubtedly saw photos of Edie Windsor walking into the Supreme Court with her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, prepared to challenge the injustices that the Defense of Marriage Act have levied against gay and lesbian couples since it was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. What most people will not know, however, is the instrumental role that few members of the New York City chapter of DignityUSA played in this historic moment.

DignityUSA is an organization of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Catholics that was formally expelled by the Roman Catholic church in 1986 by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Among the NYC chapter’s many members is Brendan Fay, an Irish-born activist and filmmaker who lives in Queens with his husband, Tom Moulton. For years, Fay was known in the gay community for co-developing (with fellow activist Jesus Lebron) the Civil Marriage Trail, a project that helped gay and lesbian couples travel to Canada to get legally married. Canada had no residency requirement for marriage, and in 2008, New York state made the recognition of valid, out-of-state same-sex marriages mandatory. It was this project that first led Windsor to Fay.

Click the header link to read the full article (with photos).

Watch: Moving Stories of Same-Sex Binational Couples Fighting DOMA

By: SheWired Editors

LA-based queer filmmaker Brynn Gelbard founded the DeVote Campaign to help shine a light on the plight of same-sex binational couples whose relationships are not recognized on the federal level under DOMA. Brynn teamed with LGBT immigration attorney Lavi Soloway (founder of the DOMA Project) to travel throughout the country interviewing same-sex binational couples fighting DOMA for a series of short films entitled Love Stories: Binational Couples on the Front Lines Against DOMA.

Click the header link to watch the video.

DOMA: $10 Billion Waste Threatens Conservative Movement's Survival

by Ned Flaherty

doma, 10, billion, waste, threatens, conservative, movements, survival,

To regain relevancy and survive, conservatives — Republicans, libertarians, Tea Party members, independents — must clearly choose between returning to their true, core principles (e.g., fiscal responsibility, limited government) versus continuing to waste public funds on policies of social oppression. The best example of a restrictive policy that dooms the conservative movement is the 18-year-old DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). The law’s true goal was to boost conservatives’ election results, but the sponsors falsely claimed that its purpose was to save money. That was untrue. It saves nothing.  It consistently loses money. The savings that conservative authors promised never even started.

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear conservative arguments, conceived, drafted, and bought with taxpayer dollars, claiming that outlawing same-sex marriage saves government money because it bans couples from programs they already paid for.  But even after 18 years, conservatives can offer no evidence that supports this claim, because they know it’s false. That’s why they blocked the Congressional effort to require the General Accounting Office to itemize the costs and savings of repealing DOMA. Despite conservatives falsely claiming that they were saving money, and then blocking an audit that would prove whether their claim was true, the approximate losses from DOMA’s federal fiscal fiasco have been public knowledge for nine years.

In 2004, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that if state and federal governments honored same-sex marriage nationwide from 2005 through 2015, the net effect would benefit the federal budget’s bottom line — by nearly $10 billion. Even though expenses would increase for federal programs such as veterans, pensions, and Social Security, those costs would be more than offset by: (1) decreased costs for programs such as elderly/disabled benefits, Medicaid, and Medicare, and (2) increased tax revenue because people pay more taxes when they’re married than when they’re single. Furthermore, the U.S. Census Bureau confirmed that over the last decade, the number of same-sex couples grew in every single state, and grew nationally from 358,390 to 646,464 couples.  Had the Budget Office known nine years ago about that 80% increase, and also known that actual couples are 15% more than Census figures indicate, then the net $10 billion calculated in 2004 would have been estimated as far larger.

Beyond the federal red ink lost each year, DOMA — and measures like it — are increasingly threatening the very existence of the conservative movement. There are only a few remaining pockets of conservatives who still oppose same-sex marriage, and each of those groups is shrinking. Potential and former conservatives say that the stifling positions against social issues are what stop them from joining up, make them leave, and keep them from returning. In this environment, laws like DOMA all will eventually be: (a) repealed because they are wasteful, (b) overturned because such discrimination is unconstitutional, or (c) never passed in the first place.  In November, Minnesotans voted down a ban on same-sex marriage, Iowans voted to retain a Supreme Court justice who ruled in favor of marriage equality, Mainers created a new law for it right at the ballot box, and Marylanders and Washingtonians chose to keep existing laws for marriage equality. Now lawmakers in 12 more states are poised to do likewise.  That will bring the total to 22 states, covering 45% of the nation’s people.

Meanwhile, flying in the face of progress and working to keep DOMA intact are the same people who authored it: older conservatives. Of the 279 Republicans in Congress today, 99% are blocking its repeal. Their party platform is committed to writing DOMA’s discriminatory language directly into the U.S. Constitution. Sixteen conservative attorneys general just filed a legal brief defending DOMA, in which they argue that banning same-sex couples from marriage encourages more mixed-gender couples to marry, and more of them to procreate, and to breed more often.  They also argue that families with children by prior marriage, fertilization, surrogacy, foster care, and/or adoption are inferior, and deserve fewer legal rights. Ten conservative U.S. senators just filed a legal brief defending DOMA, in which they argue that denying federal benefits to same-sex couples saves government money because that denial discourages them from marrying.

Twelve conservative attorneys general just filed a legal brief defending California’s same-sex marriage ban, in which they argue that same-sex marriages cause “disintegration” of mixed-gender marriages. For all four of these claims, the conservatives behind DOMA offered not one shred of proof, even to the U.S. Supreme Court. Ten states have been marrying same-sex couples for up to ten years, but conservatives couldn’t find even one mixed-gender couple who avoided a wedding, curtailed their breeding, or disintegrated. So far, none of the conservative arguments made for defending DOMA have survived courtroom scrutiny. Every argument attempted to date — scientific, historical, cultural, legal — has failed. The new ones being test driven this month at the U.S. Supreme Court are some of the weakest ever offered.

What potential conservatives are seeing and hearing now is just too discordant for them to tolerate.  If the old guard doesn’t stop supporting DOMA-like measures, and doesn’t stop claiming to save money when they know they’re really wasting it, then the conservative movement will never recover all of the sympathy, influence, and control that it needs to survive. The last batches of young, educated voters are about to jump ship for good, and no one’s stopping them.

Look: NY Magazine Cover Story On ‘Divorce Equality — When Gay Marriage Ends’

by DAVID BADASH Post image for Look: NY Magazine Cover Story On Divorce Equality When Gay Marriage Ends

New York Magazine’s cover story this week is on “Divorce Equality — When Gay Marriage Ends.” In a piece titled, “From ‘I Do’ to ‘I’m Done,’” Jesse Green writes:

With newfound rights, newfound fears. The peculiar mechanics—and heartbreak—of gay divorce.

“From ‘I do’ to ‘I’m done’ is a well-­traveled road—for straight couples,” Green notes. “When their legal marriages are over, they pretty much know they will need a legal divorce. But for gay couples, the promise of marriage is still so new and incomplete that the idea of matrimonial courts, equitable settlements, and all the rest barely registers. How do you process the undoing of a bond that until a moment ago in history you were not allowed to form?”

He adds:

It’s not a subject that marriage-equality groups tend to trumpet on their websites, but gay couples are at the start of a divorce boom. One reason is obvious: More couples are eligible. According to a report by UCLA’s Williams Institute, nearly 50,000 of the approximately 640,000 gay couples in the U.S. in 2011 were married. (Another 100,000 were in other kinds of legal relationships, such as domestic partnerships.) The marriage rate, in states that allowed it, was quickly rising toward that of heterosexual couples: In Massachusetts as of that year, 68 percent of gay couples were married, compared with 91 percent of heterosexual couples. Another reason for the coming boom is that while first-wave gay marriages have proved more durable than straight ones (according to the Williams Institute, about one percent of gay marriages were dissolving each year, compared with 2 percent for different-sex couples), that’s not expected to last. Most lawyers I spoke to assume that the gap will soon vanish, once the backlog of long-term and presumably more stable gay couples have married, leaving the field to the young and impulsive.

And:

For gay couples, though, the Byzantine chaos of current law can yield grotesque results. The problems arise from two main sources: differences among the states in their laws concerning gay relationships, and differences between the states and the federal government, thanks to the Defense of Marriage Act, in their treatment of taxes, pensions, inheritance, and other transfers that may figure in settlements. You needn’t be a “marriage tourist”—one of the many couples who trekked from jurisdiction to jurisdiction to wed repeatedly as marriage became legal in each—to get caught in the flypaper.

For years we’ve argued for the rights and responsibilities that marriage brings. Sadly, divorce can be one of them.

Obama Administration to Supreme Court: Kill DOMA

A lawyer for the administration says an important part of the 1996 law is simply not constitutional.

BY NEAL BROVERMAN

image

Edie Windsor, plaintiff in the DOMA case being heard by the Supreme Court

In a brief filed Friday, a lawyer with the Obama administration called for the Supreme Court to strike down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the high court that laws concerning gay people, an “unpopular group,” should face heightened scrutiny and that DOMA’s Section 3 — which keeps the federal government from recognizing same-sex couples legally married in states — is unconstitutional.

“Section 3 of DOMA violates the fundamental constitutional guarantee of equal protection,” wrote Verrilli. “The law denies to tens of thousands of same-sex couples who are legally married under state law an array of important federal benefits that are available to legally married opposite-sex couples. Because this discrimination cannot be justified as substantially furthering any important governmental interest, Section 3 is unconstitutional.”

The Obama administration has not filed a friend of the court brief on California’s Proposition 8 case, which the Supreme Court is also deciding, and which could bring marriage equality back to the Golden State, and possibly the entire nation. They have until February 28 to do that.

Read more here.

LGBT Military Advocate Charlie Morgan Succumbs to Cancer

Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan died Sunday, after a long battle with cancer.

BY SUNNIVIE BRYDUM

image

Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, a lesbian member of the national guard who came out on national TV the day “don’t ask, don’t tell” was repealed, succumbed to cancer earlier today, according to a statement from OutServe-Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. Morgan is survived by her wife, Karen, and the couple’s five-year-old daughter, Casey Elena. Morgan was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2008, and underwent a double mastectomy and chemotherapy, after which she was declared cancer-free, and served another tour of duty in Kuwait. But in September 2012, Morgan learned the cancer had returned — metastatic and incurable.

Morgan came out on MSNBC on September 20, 2011, and became a nationally recognized voice against the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which denied her wife, Karen, and their daughter, Casey Elena, from receiving military, Social Security, and pension benefits readily offered to the opposite-sex spouses of straight soldiers. OutServe-SLDN reports that the Morgans are plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of DOMA and other statues which prohibit same-sex partners from receiving equal military benefits.

“Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, a courageous fighter for our country, for her family, and for the equality of all who wear the uniform of our nation, passed away early this morning,” said OutServe-SLDN Executive Director Allyson Robinson in a statement. “On behalf of her wife Karen and daughter Casey Elena, we thank all those who have supported Charlie so fervently since she proudly came out on national television on the day ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was repealed, and who have stayed by her side through her brave fight with cancer. She made an indelible mark on everyone she met with her integrity, her positive outlook, and her unflinching commitment to righting the wrongs visited upon gay and lesbian military families. The fight for full LGBT equality in this country is forever changed because Charlie Morgan took up the cause.”

OutServe-SLDN reports that funeral arrangements are pending, and highlights a memorial page called “Remembering Charlie Morgan,” where supporters, friends, and family can leave messages and remembrances of the courageous veteran.

WATCH: Advocate Editor Hoping for More LGBT Progress in Second Obama Term

Advocate editor in chief Matthew Breen and National Center for Transgender Equality executive director Mara Keisling discuss their hopes for the second term with MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

BY TRUDY RING

image

Breen and Keisling

Advocate editor in chief Matthew Breen and National Center for Transgender Equality executive director Mara Keisling appeared on Melissa Harris-Perry’s show on MSNBC Sunday, lauding the Obama administration’s progress on LGBT issues but emphasizing there is more to be done in the president’s second term.

“His statements on same-sex marriage, of course, have had global resonance,” said Breen. For the second term, he mentions wanting to see immigration reform to allow same-sex couples to stay together, and possibly an LGBT cabinet member. He and Keisling also discuss the need for broad antidiscrimination legislation and the intersection of LGBT issues with other matters, such as foreign policy and health care.

Click the header link above to watch the interview.

Prop 8 and DOMA at the Supreme Court: Broad or Narrow Rulings?

BY ARI EZRA WALDMAN

This is the third in a series of analyses about the Supreme Court’s decision to hear cases challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8. Today’s discussion: the Questions Presented.

Supreme_court_building

The Supreme Court has the luxury of not only deciding which cases to review but also the manner of the review. That is, when granting a writ of certiorari — when granting a hearing on a particular case — the Court specifies questions to be answered by the briefs and at oral argument. The Court usually chooses among the question formulations included in the various certiorari briefs from the two sides of the case. Lawyers call these the Questions Presented and they can make or break a case.

These questions generally include a reference to a particular part of the Constitution:

“Whether the Commerce Clause permits Congress … .” They also almost invariably start with the word “whether,” like the set up for a forensic debate competition. And, they try to focus counsel for both parties on the particular legal question that most interests the Court and will decide the conflict between the parties.

But, what may seem like a simple, legally arcane sentence can be fraught with politics, weighed down by prejudice, and purposely stacked in favor of one side or the other.

Click the header link above to read the full article.

ACTUP.ORG: USA – Five ways the Defense of Marriage Act hurts gay and lesbian military families

Bill Clinton signs DOMA

Today is the first anniversary of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the military policy that prohibited gay and lesbian service members from serving openly and honestly in the U.S. military. For years, service members in loving and committed same-sex relationships needed to hide their love and conceal the truth about their families to ensure that they would not be discharged from the service.

The repeal of the ban is an enormous step forward for the LGBT community and translates to broader visibility for gay and lesbian service members and their families. The one-year anniversary merits huge celebration and thanks to all of the organizations and individuals who helped push through repeal last September. But even though gay and lesbian service members can now serve openly, they continue to face discrimination from the federal government. Because of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal respect of lawful marriages between same-sex couples, gay and lesbian military couples do not receive the same federal protections that heterosexual couples receive.

Since May, Freedom to Marry and Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) have been working together on a national persuasion campaign calledFreedom to Serve, Freedom to Marry. Through a series of videos and other multimedia content, the campaign has illustrated the various ways that DOMA negatively impacts military families by highlighting the stories and struggles of gay and lesbian service members and their families. The Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs guarantees a long list of federal protections and responsibilities to married military couples: They can share health insurance and medical coverage, be issued military identification cards, live together on military bases, seek support from morale and welfare programs, and receive surviving spouse benefits. However, because DOMA denies federal recognition of their relationships, same-sex couples are not afforded these benefits and protections.

DOMA is at odds with the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and now, gay and lesbian service members and their families are caught in the middle. After dealing with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for 17 years, same-sex couples are continuing to face discrimination. Until DOMA is repealed, Americans will continue to be divided into two classes. To highlight some of the keys ways that DOMA hurts military families, Freedom to Marry and SLDN have created this infographic. Share the graphic on Facebook and show your friends that while there’s much to celebrate on today’s anniversary of the repeal of DADT, there’s also much work to be done.

Click the header link above to view the infographic.

DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense

House Republican leaders took over the legal defense of DOMA in the spring of 2011, when Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration would no longer defend it on the grounds that they found it unconstitutional. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders hired attorneys at the law firm Bancroft LLC to represent the House in court cases involving the federal ban on gay marriage — all with taxpayer dollars.

On Jan. 4, Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Administration Committee, signed a revised contract with Bancroft LLC that increases the spending cap to $3 million to allow Bancroft attorneys to keep defending DOMA in various court cases. The revised contract also bears the signatures of Bancroft partner Paul Clement and Kerry Kircher, general counsel for the House of Representatives.

“It is further understood and agreed that, effective January 4, 2013, the aforementioned $2,750,000.00 cap may be raised from time to time up to, but not exceeding, $3,000,000.00, up on written notice of the General Counsel to the Contractor specifying that the General Counsel is legally liable,” the contract reads.

A Boehner spokesman referred questions about increased spending on DOMA to the House Administration Committee. A spokeswoman for the committee did not immediately return a request for comment.

The revised contract comes on the heels of House Republican leaders inserting language into the rules package for the 113th Congress that authorizes the House legal team to keep paying outside counsel to defend DOMA. The rules package also states that the House legal team continues to “speak for” all House members in its defense of DOMA — language that infuriated Democrats opposed to the matter. All but one Republican, Rep. Walter Jones (N.C.), voted to pass the rules package, effectively endorsing the DOMA language. But a Jones spokesman told The Huffington Post that Jones’ opposition wasn’t DOMA-related.

Click on the header link above to read the full article.

COLORLINES: Where Does Immigration Reform Begin for Same-Sex Couples?

image

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

When Republican Sen. John Kyle quipped in November that young undocumented immigrants should consider marrying U.S. citizens to get a green card, his comments were rightly assailed as insensitive and inaccurate. But for many bi-national couples, Kyle’s flourish carried an additional sting, because marriage is a path to legal residency that’s not accessible to all.

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996, enshrines marriage as straight and bars same-sex couples from a long list of federal benefits, including the right to petition for immigration status for a spouse. Now, advocates are fighting on multiple fronts so that same-sex couples can access immigration relief through their partners. But while the winds of change are behind them, the way to victory is not an easy one.

As immigration reform unfolds in the coming months, LGBT immigration advocates hope to include rights for same-sex couples in the sort of comprehensive bill the president and Democrats want. But more conservative members of the developing reform coalition argue to do so would be to add a poison pill. Meanwhile, all eyes are turning to the Supreme Court, which will rule on DOMA this year.

Click the header link above to read the full article.

Soldier fighting DOMA will participate in New Hampshire inaugural ceremony

Charlie Morgan will be part of inauguration festivities for Governor-Elect Maggie Hassan
BY JAMES WITHERS
Chief_Warrant_Officer_(CW2)_Charlie_Morgan.jpg

Last week (27 Dec.) New Hampshire Governor-Elect Maggie Hassan announced the details of her upcoming inaugural ceremony. Charlie Morgan, a chief warrant officer in the state’s National Guard, will open the ceremony by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Morgan, and her wife, are two of the plaintiffs involved in a lawsuit against the Defense of Marriage Act.

‘Charlie Morgan is a national treasure and a treasure to her home state of New Hampshire,’OutServe-SLDN executive director Allyson Robinsonsaid in a statement. ‘We could not be happier that Governor-elect Hassan has chosen to honor her work and her fight for equality in this way.’

OutServe-SLDN is a non-profit advocacy organization that works with LGBT military members, veterans and their families.

In 2008, Morgan was diagnosed with breast cancer. After undergoing a double mastectomy and rounds of therapy, she was cleared to serve. In 2010, Morgan did one year in Kuwait. However, when she returned it was discovered her cancer returned. It is now metastatic and incurable. The Concord Monitor reported Morgan’s doctors have given her months to live.

Because of DOMA, a federal law, Morgan’s spouse and four year old child will receive no survivor benefits. The statute, passed in 1996, prevents the US government from recognizing same-sex marriages even in states where such unions are legal (LGBT couples have been able to be married in New Hampshire since 2009). Couples also cannot file joint federal tax returns.

This past February Morgan took her case to the halls of Congress, specifically the office of Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner. She asked him to stop defending the law in the courts. The Republican leadership is leading the DOMA appeals to the Supreme Court.