DOCSLIB.ORG

Summerbriefs Summer 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Summerbriefs Summer 2007 GAY & LESBIAN ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS SummerBriefs Summer 2007 GLAD Staff Lee Swislow Keeping Schools Safe EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Bruce Bell INFOLINE COORDINATOR for LGBT Families Brianna Boggs DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANT RG GLAD IS WEIGHING IN ON A LEgal DISPUTE which has Mary Bonauto be CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT DIRECTOR HORN T roiled a Massachusetts school system over the past year. A Eva Boyce ISA CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER L Lexington, MA elementary school has become the focus of a Gary Buseck LeGAL DIRECTOR battle waged by two families – and their conservative backers PHOTO.COM/ K Eric Carreño TOC – against the notion of diversity in the school. OPERATIONS MANAGER S Alison Cashin David and Tonia Parker objected to the book rights under the U.S. Constitution to control HOTO:©I WRITER/ReSEARCHER P “Who’s in a Family,” brought home in a “diversity the upbringing of their children and to the free Jayson Cooley PUBLIC AFFAIRS ASSOCIATE book bag” by kindergartner Jacob Parker. Robert exercise of their religion. Carisa Cunningham and Robin Wirthlin objected to their first-grader, U.S. District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND EDUCATION Joey, having the book “King and King” read to disagreed. He dismissed the suit, stating that Nima Eshghi him in class. Both books include non-judgmental “under the Constitution public schools are STAFF ATTORNEY Michele Granda depictions of same-sex couples and their families. entitled to teach anything that is reasonably STAFF ATTORNEY The Parkers and the Wirthlins filed a lawsuit related to the goals of preparing students to Beth Grierson MANAGER OF DEVELOPMENT in federal court against Lexington school officials become engaged and productive citizens in our OPERATIONS and teachers claiming the school violated their democracy. Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. Amanda Hainsworth LITIGATION ASSISTANT constitutional rights by talking about different It is increasingly evident that our diversity Amanda Johnston Web AND PUBLICATIONS MANAGER types of families in the school. They assert that includes differences in sexual orientation.” Bennett Klein their religion considers homosexuality immoral, The decision went on to read “the AIDS LAW PROJECT DIRECTOR and that by including materials depicting constitutional right of parents to raise their Janet Lawn DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR same-sex families, the school violated their Keeping Schools Safe continued page 3 Jennifer Levi SeNIOR STAFF ATTORNEY Karen Loewy Equality Stands in Massachusetts: STAFF ATTORNEY Marie Longo Anti-Gay, Anti-Marriage Equality Amendment Defeated ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT WE WON! On June 14, Massachusetts stood decisively for fairness. Tamar Malloy LITIGATION ASSISTANT Three-quarters of legislators resoundingly rejected an anti-gay, Carol Marton anti-marriage equality ballot question with a vote of 45-151. BUSINESS MANAGER Sarah Morton The precious right to marry — which GLAD won in 2003 with LITIGATION ASSISTANT the successful Goodridge lawsuit — is now safe in Massachusetts. Margaret Pearl DATABASE AND GIFTS “We’re proud of our state, and we applaud the legislature,” COORDINATOR said Executive Director Lee Swislow. “Equality for gay and lesbian R Eileen Rodriguez ke LITIGATION ASSISTANT I citizens has enriched our state, made our communities stronger, Red . Robbie Samuels A and our families happier. This vote was the triumph of time, SPECIAL EVENTS MANAGER E LL Molly Shangraw E experience, and understanding over fear, lies, and prejudice.” DEVELOPMENT AND ICH M AdMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT GLAD Executive Director Lee Swislow and Janson Wu HOTO: STAFF ATTORNEY P Attorney Mary Bonauto outside the Massachusetts Statehouse after the June 14 Constitutional Convention. New Hampshire Adopts Civil Unions New Hampshire is set to become the fifth U.S. state to adopt civil unions or comprehensive domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian couples. Beginning January 1, 2008, New Hampshire will join Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, and California in allowing same-sex couples to enter into legal unions intending to provide all of the state-based protections and benefits of marriage. GLAD congratulates New Hampshire Freedom to Marry, gay and lesbian legislators and their allies, and the citizens of New Hampshire for taking this New Hampshire Legislator Ed stride toward full equality. Butler with his partner Les Schoof “This civil union law goes a long way toward addressing the painful legal void in which same-sex couples and their children currently live in New Hampshire,” said GLAD But this journey is not NC. Executive Director Lee Swislow. “But this journey is not over until we have equality, until I over until we have we have the same protections and choices as other New Hampshire citizens, until we have equality, until we have marriage.” the same protections HOTOGRAPHICS, P Moving forward, GLAD will provide education to New Hampshire’s gay and lesbian E and choices as other citizens about their new rights under this law, including workshops for couples considering New Hampshire citizens, a civil union, and a new publication - New Hampshire Civil Unions - available in print and AINFRAM M until we have marriage. online at www.glad.org. ‘‘ PHOTO: Kay Longcope: Remembering a Pioneer GLAD is grateful to be the recipient of a says Bonauto. “She constructed stories so that generous bequest from Kay Longcope, journalist, the facts spoke for themselves, and thus told a pioneer, and long-time’’ GLAD supporter. Kay powerful story of discrimination.” passed away in March at the age of 69, after a As a reporter, Longcope educated the public year-long battle with pancreatic cancer. and her profession about LGBT people at a time “Kay admired GLAD,” says Barbara when few reporters covered gay and lesbian Wohlgemuth, Kay’s partner of 17 years. “She issues, and even fewer publicly identified as gay. supported GLAD throughout the years for its As the first openly gay reporter at The Boston great work.” Globe—she began working at the paper in Kay’s bequest continues her support of 1970—Longcope weathered harassment in the the groundbreaking legal and legislative work newsroom. But throughout her 22-year tenure at she often covered as a reporter at The Boston the paper she built a career covering minority Globe. Mary Bonauto, GLAD’s Civil Rights communities and civil rights, and earned a Project Director, remembers Kay’s coverage of reputation for fairness. When Representative some of the first cases GLAD filed under the Barney Frank came out in 1987, he wanted his “Kay covered Massachusetts non-discrimination law. first interview to be with Longcope. our issues at “Kay covered our issues at challenging times, Longcope moved back to her native Texas challenging when the anti-gay foster care policy was in in the early 1990s to be with Wohlgemuth and place and few public officials were our friends,” times…She their two sons. There the couple started the constructed Texas Triangle, a weekly newspaper covering stories so that GLAD’s Legacy Society LGBT issues throughout the state. They wanted the facts spoke recognizes those who have or intend the paper to focus on news rather than on arts for themselves, to make a bequest or planned gift to and entertainment, and decided not to publish and thus told a GLAD. Please contact Brianna Boggs sex-related ads, a revenue source for many LGBT powerful story of at 617-426-1350 x 48 or papers. discrimination.” Throughout her life, Kay supported a number [email protected] if you would of non-profit organizations, including GLAD. She like information on planned gifts - MARY BONAUTO continues that generous support through her and bequests. estate. 2 equal justice under law Keeping Schools Safe continued from 1 children does not include the right to restrict what a public school From the Executive Director may teach their children and that teachings which contradict a Lee Swislow parent’s religious beliefs do not violate their First Amendment right to exercise their religion.” Judge Wolf also noted in his decision On May 14th, GLAD senior staff that if parents wish to have further control over what their children attorney Ben Klein argued for are taught, they have the option of sending their children to a marriage equality in front of the private school or schooling them at home. Connecticut Supreme Court. During The Parkers and Wirthlins have appealed Judge Wolf’s decision the lengthy (3 hours in total!!) to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Having joined an argument, there were two particularly amicus brief in the trial court, GLAD will file an independent amicus striking moments. brief in the appellate court in support of the defendants, which When the state argued that include the Lexington Public Schools and the Town of Lexington. there was no sexual orientation discrimination, since a GLAD’s brief will focus on students’ right to learn about the society lesbian could marry a man and a gay man could marry a in which they live, a right that in this case includes learning woman, just like heterosexual people, one of the justices that lesbian and gay families exist. “The most recent census data interrupted. “Well, that’s not really realistic, is it?” he demonstrates that lesbian and gay families live in virtually every said. And, later, when the state argued that because U.S. county,” says GLAD staff attorney Nima Eshghi. “Students of civil unions, there was no longer any legal harm to learning about different kinds of families have a right to learn same-sex couples by their exclusion from marriage, that a family can have two moms or two dads and still be a loving the attorney was again interrupted. “What about the family.” children?” asked the justice. “What do they say when Lesbian and gay parents in Lexington have praised the town and asked about their parents?” the schools for standing up to the lawsuit.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bonauto, Mary (B
    Bonauto, Mary (b. 1961) by Claude J. Summers Mary L. Bonauto at the Encyclopedia Copyright © 2015, glbtq, Inc. 2010 Spirit of Justice dinner. Entry Copyright © 2012 glbtq, Inc. Reprinted from http://www.glbtq.com A leading American lawyer, Mary Bonauto has served as the civil rights project director at Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) for more than two decades. In that capacity, she has won major rulings that have brought the promise of equal rights nearer to reality in the lives of glbtq citizens. She is widely regarded as among the country's best litigators in the cause of marriage equality. Bonauto was born on June 8, 1961 into a Roman Catholic family of modest means in Newburgh, New York. The only daughter of a pharmacist and a teacher, she grew up with three brothers. When Bonauto was growing up and attending public schools, Newburgh was a depressed factory town riven by racial and class divisions. A good athlete who played tennis, basketball, softball, and volleyball, she had the opportunity to mingle with a wide variety of individuals. This interaction led her to distrust stereotypes of all kinds. Bonauto received her undergraduate education at Hamilton College, where she majored in history and comparative literature. There she also came to terms with her lesbianism, though she did not come out to her parents until she entered law school at Northeastern University in 1984. Bonauto's acceptance of her homosexuality caused her to abandon the Roman Catholic Church, though she says she is still guided by the Catholic values that helped form her commitment to social justice.
    [Show full text]
  • GLAD and Equality Maine Testimony
    TESTIMONY OF MARY L. BONAUTO for GLBTQ LEGAL ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS & EQUALITY MAINE LD 1512 – OUGHT TO PASS COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS May 4, 2021 Senator Rafferty, Representative Brennan, and Honorable Members of the Committee on Education and Cultural Affairs: Good Morning. My name is Mary Bonauto, and I am an attorney at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD). GLAD is a legal rights organization that works throughout New England and nationally to create a just society free of discrimination based on gender identity and expression, HIV status, and sexual orientation. Joining us in this testimony is EqualityMaine. GLAD and EqualityMaine are supportive of the overall concept and goals of LD 1512, An Act To Create the Office of the Education Ombudsman and To Establish a Commission To Study the Creation of a Reporting and Response System To Assist Public Schools in Addressing Incidents of Bias, Discrimination and Harassment. We are supportive of a study commission as set forth in section 2 of the bill, and are supportive of the concept of an ombudsperson in section 1 of the bill. As to section 1, we have a number of comments. • We agree with dedicated resources to address the duties identified in the proposed §973 and on a state-wide level, but are curious as to whether the Department of Education can or already does this role, and whether it can continue to do so across administrations. • To the extent this new Ombudsperson would help to harmonize differing local policies into statewide polices, we support that clarity and believe it would assist communities across the state in building positive, respectful, learning environments for students and teachers and staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Mary L. Bonauto for GLAD LD 320 Ought to Pass An
    Testimony of Mary L. Bonauto for GLAD LD 320 Ought To Pass An Act To Provide the Right to Counsel for Juveniles and Improve Due Process for Juveniles Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary February 24, 2021 Senator Carney, Representative Harnett and distinguished members of the Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary, Good Morning. My name is Mary Bonauto. I am an attorney at the Maine office of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, which works primarily in New England and for equal justice under law without regard to sexual orientation, gender identity or HIV status. I am happy bill. LGBTQ children and families so they can live their lives and contribute to their communities with the same legal protections and responsibilities as others, and without harassment and discrimination because of their overlapping BIPOC and other identities. On a weekend in November 2016, I was notified that a young transgender individual had committed suicide while in detention at Long Creek. I was stunned, and because we had also just received disturbing letters from two gay individuals committed there, I asked a volunteer at the facility to please connect me with young people there. With what I saw, there was no option to look away. 1 Most of the young people I met at Long Creek were members of the LGBTQ community. Researchers and experts identify LGBTQ young people, particularly when they are girls and/or BIPOC, as also overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. The reasons include rejection from their own families, disproportionate physical and sexual abuse,
    [Show full text]
  • Deboer V. Snyder: a Case Study in Litigation and Social Reform
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Michigan School of Law Michigan Journal of Gender & Law Volume 22 Issue 1 2015 DeBoer v. Snyder: A Case Study In Litigation and Social Reform Wyatt Fore University of Michigan School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Wyatt Fore, DeBoer v. Snyder: A Case Study In Litigation and Social Reform, 22 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 169 (2015). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol22/iss1/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Gender & Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEBOER V. SNYDER: A CASE STUDY IN LITIGATION AND SOCIAL REFORM yatt ore* ABSTRACT On April 28, 2015, the Supreme Court will hear oral argu- ments for four cases from the Sixth Circuit addressing the constitu- tionality of state bans on same-sex marriage. This Note examines DeBoer v. Snyder, the Michigan marriage case, with the goal of providing litigators and scholars the proper context for our current historical moment in which (1) the legal status of LGBT people; and (2) the conventional wisdom about the role of impact litigation in social reform movements are rapidly evolving.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Strategies, Political Strategies and Their Intersection in The
    University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM UVM Honors College Senior Theses Undergraduate Theses 2014 “Dual Track Advocacy:” Legal Strategies, Political Strategies and Their nI tersection in the Marriage Equality Movement Alexander Wade Jones Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses Recommended Citation Jones, Alexander Wade, "“Dual Track Advocacy:” Legal Strategies, Political Strategies and Their nI tersection in the Marriage Equality Movement" (2014). UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 14. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses/14 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in UVM Honors College Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “Dual Track Advocacy:” Legal Strategies, Political Strategies and Their Intersection in the Marriage Equality Movement A thesis offered to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of a Bachelors of Arts with an Honors Endorsement By Alexander Wade Jones May 13, 2014 2 Table of Contents I. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….4 II. Definitions of Key Terms…..………………………………………………………………….6 A. Legal…………………………………………………………………………………...6 B. Political………………………………………………………………………………...7 C. LGB……………………………………………………………………………………8 III. Methods……………………………………………………………………………………...11 IV. Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………...12 A. Politics and Law in the Marriage Equality Movement………………………………12 B. Backlash……………………………………………………………………………...13 C. Legal Strategy………………………………………………………………………..20 D. Political Strategy……………………………………………………………………..22 V. A Short History of Marriage Equality Litigation…………………………………………….24 A. Overview……………………………………………………………………………..24 B. The First Cases (1970-1985)…..……………………………………………………..24 C. Victory and Defeat in the Shadow of Bowers (1986-2002)………………………….27 D. The Advent of Marriage Equality: the Lawrence and Goodridge Era (2003-2007)…35 E.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Get Married in Connecticut
    How to Get Married in Connecticut July 2015 Funding for this publication provided by Samuel C. Pang, M.D. www.GayIVF.com This document is intended to provide general information only and cannot provide guidance or legal advice as to one’s specific situation. Moreover, the law is constantly changing and this publication is based upon the information that is known to us as of this printing. For guidance on your particular situation, you must consult a lawyer. You should not act independently on this information. The provision of this information is not meant to create an attorney-client relationship. Check our website, www.glad.org, for more information. If you have questions about this publication, other legal issues or need lawyer referrals, contact GLAD Answers by live chat or email at www.GLADAnswers.org or by phone weekdays between 1:30 and 4:30pm at (800) 455-GLAD (4523). Contents INTRODUCTION 1 THE BASICS 3 SAME-SEX COUPLES WHO ARE ALREADY MARRIED OR HAVE A 9 CIVIL UNION OR DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP WHAT ARE SOME THINGS WE SHOULD CONSIDER BEFORE 12 ENTERING INTO A MARRIAGE? WHAT PROTECTIONS DO WE GAIN FROM A MARRIAGE IN 14 CONNECTICUT? RESPECT FOR YOUR CONNECTICUT MARRIAGE 16 HOW WILL A MARRIAGE OR AFFECT MY CHILDREN? 18 WILL I BE ABLE TO GET HEALTH INSURANCE FROM MY 20 EMPLOYER FOR MY CONNECTICUT SAME-SEX SPOUSE? CAN A MARRIED SAME-SEX COUPLE IN CONNECTICUT FILE A 22 JOINT TAX RETURN? HOW DO I GET OUT OF A MARRIAGE OR CIVIL UNION IN 23 CONNECTICUT? WHAT LEGAL PROTECTIONS CAN SAME-SEX COUPLES ACQUIRE 24 IN CONNECTICUT WITHOUT ENTERING INTO A MARRIAGE? Introduction On October 10, 2008, Connecticut’s Supreme Court ruled that the state can no longer bar gay and lesbian couples from marrying.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freedom to Marry for Same-Sex Couples: the Opening Appellate Brief of Plaintiffs Stan Baker Et Al
    Michigan Journal of Gender & Law Volume 6 Issue 1 1999 The Freedom to Marry for Same-Sex Couples: The Opening Appellate Brief of Plaintiffs Stan Baker Et Al. In Baker Et Al. V. State of Vermont Mary Bonauto Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders Susan M. Murray Langrock Sperry & Wool Beth Robinson Langrock Sperry & Wool Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Law and Gender Commons, and the Sexuality and the Law Commons Recommended Citation Mary Bonauto, Susan M. Murray & Beth Robinson, The Freedom to Marry for Same-Sex Couples: The Opening Appellate Brief of Plaintiffs Stan Baker Et Al. In Baker Et Al. V. State of Vermont, 6 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 1 (1999). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol6/iss1/1 This Brief is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Gender & Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FREEDOM TO MARRY FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES: THE REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS STAN BAKER ET AL. IN BAKER ET AL. V. STATE OF VERMONT t (-ary "Bonauto* Susan cM Jvfurra/** 'Beth Rebinson*** INTRODUCTION • 2 I. THIS Is A HEIGHTENED SCRUTINY CASE • 3 A, The Right to Marry Is Fundamentalto All Individuals • 4 B. The State's Gender ClassificationIs Impermissible atAll Levels • 8 1. The State, Not Divine Providence, Defines Civil Marriage • 8 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Unions Does Not End the Need for Domestic Partner Benefit Programs
    IN LOVE AND IN JEOPARDY: WHY LEGAL RECOGNITION OF SAME-SEX UNIONS DOES NOT END THE NEED FOR DOMESTIC PARTNER BENEFIT PROGRAMS Bindu Kolli* Imagine this: while sitting at your desk at work, you receive a frantic call from the emergency room of the local hospital informing you that your significant other has been in a terrible car accident. A drunk driver plowed through an intersection and crashed into your partner's vehicle. The voice on the phone informs you that your partner is being taken to the operating room and that you should get to the hospital as soon as possible. You grab your keys and head for the door. You rush to the local hospital, run to the nearest desk, and ask about the status of your significant other. After you are repeatedly asked for identification and given the run-around, you finally find a nurse who directs you to the room where your loved one is recovering. You enter the room and see the person with whom you have shared the last eighteen years of your life and with whom you are raising two beautiful children, lying on a hospital bed. Fast forward two months. Your significant other is on the way to a complete recovery from the many internal injuries sustained from the car accident-though it will be a long and painful process. The bills keep piling up. Medical costs for the hospital stay, surgery, prescription painkillers, and rehabilitative therapies are adding up to tens of thousands of dollars. Years ago, you had decided together that once you had children your significant other would be a stay-at-home parent and you would bear the responsibility of being the lone breadwinner.
    [Show full text]
  • Deboer V. Snyder: a Case Study in Litigation and Social Reform
    Michigan Journal of Gender & Law Volume 22 Issue 1 2015 DeBoer v. Snyder: A Case Study In Litigation and Social Reform Wyatt Fore University of Michigan School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Wyatt Fore, DeBoer v. Snyder: A Case Study In Litigation and Social Reform, 22 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 169 (2015). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol22/iss1/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Gender & Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEBOER V. SNYDER: A CASE STUDY IN LITIGATION AND SOCIAL REFORM yatt ore* ABSTRACT On April 28, 2015, the Supreme Court will hear oral argu- ments for four cases from the Sixth Circuit addressing the constitu- tionality of state bans on same-sex marriage. This Note examines DeBoer v. Snyder, the Michigan marriage case, with the goal of providing litigators and scholars the proper context for our current historical moment in which (1) the legal status of LGBT people; and (2) the conventional wisdom about the role of impact litigation in social reform movements are rapidly evolving. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION • 170 I. DEBOER V.
    [Show full text]
  • Equality News Periodicals
    University of Southern Maine USM Digital Commons Equality News Periodicals Summer 2006 Equality News (Summer 2006) Matthew R. Dubois Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usm.maine.edu/equality_news Part of the American Politics Commons, American Studies Commons, and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Studies Commons Recommended Citation Dubois, Matthew R., "Equality News (Summer 2006)" (2006). Equality News. 8. https://digitalcommons.usm.maine.edu/equality_news/8 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Periodicals at USM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Equality News by an authorized administrator of USM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Advocacy for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Communities since 1984 PO Box 1951, Portland, ME 04104 • 207-761-3732 • fax 207-828-8620 • [email protected] • www.equalitymaine.org Journey for Full Equality Begins Now or the past 28 years, EqualityMaine invested heavily in securing non-discrimina­ tion protections for LGBT people. Maine voters finally delivered those protec­ Summer 2006 F tions at the ballot box on November 8, 2005. On November 9, EqualityMaine went back to work to begin investing heavily in full equality. With no LGBT legislation or referenda in 2006, we have had a unique opportunity to think critically about how to invest our time and resources over the next 3-5 years. We determined that a long-term effort to achieve full equal­ ity begins with a short-term plan of building a strong and solid foundation. Looking ahead, the conservative right will undoubtedly continue their attacks on the LGBT community.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript June 26, 2013 Attorney General Martha Coakley
    Transcript June 26, 2013 Attorney General Martha Coakley: Good afternoon everybody, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. With me, to my left, Executive Director of the ACLU Carol Rose, to my right is Maura Healey, who is our Bureau Chief here and the Chief Arguer before the Federal Court in the First Circuit, successfully I would note, and to her right is Gary Buseck of GLAD. Today is a day of celebration. We have waited a long time for today’s decision, and it is a victory, not just for fairness and equality, but most importantly, it is a victory for families across Massachusetts and this country. Effective today, all of the federal protections that are available to married couples in Massachusetts will be available to all married couples in Massachusetts and forever forward. We are pleased with this result and I am happy to be here today with GLAD, Mary Bonauto who is not with us today, but Gary and Mary who have worked so hard on this litigation successfully in this circuit. I’m proud to have stood with the same-sex couples in Massachusetts who had the determination and courage to be parties to this suit. We’re joined by one of those couples here today, Darrell and Tom Hopkins are with us, and we’re so delighted that they have joined in this battle and that we’ve been able to get this result that they will feel immediate positive effects starting today. So thank you to Darrell and Tom. I also want to recognize the terrific work done by the ACLU, as you know, in the case in New York, which was the case decided today.
    [Show full text]
  • Lawyering for Marriage Equality
    LAWYERING FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY Scott L. Cummings Douglas NeJaime Critics of litigation seeking to establish the right of same-sex couples to marry argue that it has produced a backlash undercutting the movement for marriage equality. In this account, movement lawyers emerge as agents of backlash: naively turning to the courts ahead of public opinion, ignoring more productive political alternatives, and ultimately hurting the very cause they purport to advance by securing a court victory that mobilizes opponents to repeal it. This Article challenges the backlash thesis through a close analysis of the Californiacase, which contradicts the portrait of movement lawyers as unsophisticatedrights crusaders and casts doubt on the causal claim that court decisions upholding same-sex couples' right to marry have harmed the movement. INTRO DUCTIO N ....................................................................................................................1236 I. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: THE BACKLASH DEBATE ............................................. 1242 II. CASE STUDY: THE CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE EQUALITY MOVEMENT ....................... 1247 A. The Lessons of Litigation Past: Before California ............................................. 1248 B. Litigation Avoidance: The Legislative Pursuit of Domestic Partnership ........ 1251 1. After Hawaii: The California No-Litigation Strategy .............................. 1251 2. Legislative Incrementalism and Countermobilization: From Domestic Partner Registry to Proposition 22 ...........................................
    [Show full text]