Same-Sex Marriage Update

[Mitmo01]

Wow thats fantastic news and its about damn time

[blackboot]

It is Official - "Time to Kick up into HIGH Gear!"

"Aloha all,

Well Gov. Lingle placed HB 444 on the POTENTIAL veto list today.

Yes we did expect this, so it was not a total shock all this does is it gives us another 14 days to reach Gov. Lingle and ask her to sign HB 444 into law. So to that end.... things YOU can do to help Civil Unions become law in Hawaii:

Write a Letter to the Editor of a Hawaiian daily or weekly paper(s) why you want HB 444 to be signed into law. Remember the shorter the better - here are where to send in your letters---

Star-Advertiser - letters@staradvertiser.com
Garden Isle News - http://thegardenisland.com/shared-co...mplate=letters
Maui News - letters@mauinews.com
Hawaii Tribune Herald - letters@hawaiitribune-herald.com
West Hawaii Today - http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/contact_us/letters/
Honolulu Weekly - editorial@honoluluweekly.com "

Get people to call Gov Lingle at (808) 586-0034, 586-0222 or 0221 and ask her to sign HB 444 into law.

Sign the petition on Facebook--- http://apps.facebook.com/causes/peti...=0e2b1bf4#sign

[SuperFemme]

Proposition 8 supporters argue 18,000 same-sex marriages should not be recognized: report

The fate of California's Proposition 8, as well as 18,000 same-sex marriages, will soon be determined.

Closing arguments in the long-running trial aimed at defeating the controversial gay marriage ban will be heard today, and reports suggest supporters of Prop 8 not only want to keep the ban, but virtually erase thousands of gay marriages.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, attorney Andrew Pugno isn't looking to "nullify" the 18,000 marriages. His clients, however, just don't want them recognized by government agencies, courts and businesses.
The trial, which challenges the constitutionality of Proposition 8, began in January. The lawsuit was filed by two couples -- two lesbians and two gay men.

The closing arguments are expected to go all day, and cameras are not being allowed in the courtroom.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz0re4oZWVJ

[Soon]

Hawaiian activists are asking for your help in a snail mail campaign to convince

Gov. Linda Lingle not to veto the state's pending civil unions bill. Lingle has deluged with letters from our enemies, so let's send her some positive messages of our own.

Two suggested lines for your letter: "We are from _____ and we would sure love to have our civil union in Hawaii," and "We recently got a civil union in _____ but would much rather have had it in Hawaii."

Letters should be mailed to:
The Honorable Linda Lingle
Governor, State of Hawaii
Executive Chambers
State Capitol
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

You'll need to send your message this week for it to arrive on time.

[Soon]

[MsTinkerbelly]

Boutrous sends letter about yesterday’s SCOTUS ruling
By Julia Rosen

Ted Boutrous sent a letter today to Judge Walker about the relevance of the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. It turns out that I was hasty yesterday to say that there was little of relevance between Perry v. Schwarzenegger and the recent decision. Karen Ocam has the letter on LGBT POV.

June 29, 2010

The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker

Chief Judge of the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

450 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, California 94102

Re: Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. C-09-2292 VRW

Dear Chief Judge Walker:

I write on behalf of Plaintiffs to bring to the Court’s attention yesterday’s decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, No. 08-1371 (U.S. June 28, 2010) (attached hereto as Exhibit A).

In Christian Legal Society, the Supreme Court definitively held that sexual orientation is not merely behavioral, but rather, that gay and lesbian individuals are an identifiable class. Writing for the Court, Justice Ginsburg explained: “Our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context.” Slip op. at 23 (citing Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 575 (2003); id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment); Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263, 270 (1993)). This confirms that a majority of the Court now adheres to Justice O’Connor’s view in Lawrence, where she concluded that “the conduct targeted by [the Texas anti-sodomy] law is conduct that is closely correlated with being homosexual” and that, “[u]nder such circumstances, [the] law is targeted at more than conduct” and “is instead directed toward gay persons as a class,” id. at 583 (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment) (emphasis added). See also Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (treating gay and lesbian individuals as a class for equal protection purposes). The Court’s holding arose in response to Christian Legal Society’s argument that it was not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, but rather because gay and lesbian individuals refused to acknowledge that their conduct was morally wrong. The Court rejected that argument, holding that there is no distinction between gay and lesbian individuals and their conduct.

In his closing argument, counsel for Proponents claimed that High Tech Gays v. Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office, 895 F.2d 563 (9th Cir. 1990), and its dubious statement that “homosexuality is not an immutable characteristic; it is behavioral,” id. at 573, forecloses heightened scrutiny in this case. But as this Court explicitly recognized at the hearing on Proponents’ motion for summary judgment, High Tech Gays, which relied on the now-overruled Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), rested on a moth-eaten foundation.

To the extent that anything is left of High Tech Gays after Lawrence, Christian Legal Society has abrogated it entirely.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.

Counsel for Plaintiffs

TJB/eam Attachment

Boutrous is arguing that this case further buttressed several fundamental arguments they are making, that sexual orientation is immutable and that the LGBTs are a class that can be protected.

It will be interesting to see what if anything the defendants send to Judge Walker about Christian Legal Society v. Martinez

[chefhmboyrd]

my brother and his lover are getting married in Iowa today