Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Gay News Roundup

By Julia Rosen

It’s a pretty slow news day with a bunch of smaller stories, so I figured it was time for a linkfest. Here for your reading and commenting pleasure:

A recent poll found that 63% of LGBTs oppose the AZ law show me your papers law, 45% strongly. Meanwhile 33% of Heterosexuals oppose the Arizona law, 22% strongly. (via Pam’s House Blend)

Speaking of the AZ law, the Phoenix Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce is asking that the LGBT groups end their boycott of the state and accused them of “grandstanding” on the issue. Yes, let’s just throw people under the bus so you can make more money.

Lt. Dan Choi and Captain James Pietrangelo have attempted to subpoena President Obama in their civil disobedience trial. However, the White House guards turned away the process server.

Aubrey Sarvis from SLDN is warning that the final vote on the defense bill that currently has a delayed DADT repeal included may not get voted on until December. That is of course when the Pentagon working group is done with their report. Who knows what will be in there and it could complicate efforts for final passage.

Elana Kagan was asked about marriage equality during her confirmation hearing. As would be expected, she really didn’t break any ground, refusing to talk about potential issues that could come in front of her as a judge on the Supreme Court. Video is up at Towleroad.

On a personal note, this will be my last post here as your faithful blogger, as it is my last day working for the Courage Campaign. Expect to see more of Robert Cruickshank’s writing around these parts. It’s been a pleasure writing here and getting to know the regular commentors. And I’ll be watching closely as this trial continues. Who knew real court cases could be as action packed as a John Grisham novel.

243183 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fgay-news-roundup%2FGay+News+Roundup2010-07-01+01%3A10%3A54couragecampaignhttp%3A%2F%2Fprop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D2431 June 30, 2010

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.

2426145 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F2010%2F06%2F29%2Fboutrous-sends-letter-about-yesterdays-scotus-ruling%2FBoutrous+sends+letter+about+yesterday%27s+SCOTUS+ruling2010-06-30+01%3A14%3A26couragecampaignhttp%3A%2F%2Fprop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D2426 June 29, 2010

Supreme Court rules for non-discrimination in public schools

By Julia Rosen

The best summary of this case I’ve seen was by Adam Bonin over at Daily Kos, who writes:

And today it’s My Religion Doesn’t Like The Gays versus Our Policies Say You Can’t Discriminate Against Gays, in the context of the a student religious group at the Hastings College of Law — a part of the California public educational system.

The schools won with a 5-4 ruling. The Supreme Court upheld the ability for public schools to deny recognition and funding to campus organizations who violate the school’s non-discrimination policies. In this case the University of California’s Hastings School of Law had in place a non-discrimination policy against LGBTs and the had a request for recognition/support from Christian Legal Society, whose by-laws include:

In view of the clear dictates of Scripture, unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle is inconsistent with an affirmation of the Statement of Faith, and consequently may be regarded by CLS as disqualifying such an individual
from CLS membership…. [including] all acts of sexual conduct outside of God’s design for marriage between one man and one woman, which acts include fornication, adultery, and homosexual conduct.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, whose husband recently passed away read the majority decision in court today. Kennedy and Stevens wrote concurring decisions. Alito wrote the dissent.

Adam adds this crucial reminder of the limitations of this ruling:

It’s important to recognize the limits of today’s decision. It’s not “all student groups must allow all students at all campuses.” It’s simply this: if a school wants to have an “all comers” policy, then it’s allowed to enforce it and override the discriminatory beliefs of a group seeking recognition — in other words, that the government is not required to fund discrimination. Different universities, however, can make their own decisions as to what works for them.

We can’t really see this as a test of how Perry v. Schwarzenegger would go, but it is heartening to once again see Justice Kennedy on the side of the good.

242490 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F2010%2F06%2F28%2Fsupreme-court-rules-for-non-discrimination-in-public-schools%2FSupreme+Court+rules+for+non-discrimination+in+public+schools2010-06-29+01%3A00%3A33couragecampaignhttp%3A%2F%2Fprop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D2424 June 28, 2010

CNN’s Soledad O’Brien talks DADT with soldiers both current and former

By Julia Rosen

This segment on CNN with Soledad O’Brien speaking with current gay soldiers in the closet, those who have been kicked out and SLDN’s Aubrey Sarvis is well worth a watch.

Transcript from Pam’s House Blend:

SOLEDAD O’BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You may not be able to see it, but this man is nervous. He has every reason to be. He is one of an estimated 60,000 members of the U.S. military serving in the closet.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wondering if this is the day that my secret is going to fly out. Is this the day.

O’BRIEN: You live like that? Everyday?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, whenever you get the e-mail to come to the office by your boss or somebody is on the phone, and who is on the phone? I don’t know. You never know, is this that phone call.

O’BRIEN: The phone call that will kick you out of the military?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

O’BRIEN: He is a 10-plus year veteran are army intelligence and currently serving overseas. He can’t reveal his identity because of the military policy “don’t ask, don’t tell,” but that is about to change.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R): The committee’s focus is today on the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

O’BRIEN: The service members’ legal defense network has been lobbying Congress to pass the Pentagon’s military spending bill. It has an amendment that would repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.” You think you have it?

AUBREY SARVIS, SERVICE MEMBERS’ LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK: This bill will be close. We won the voting committee. We are going to win the vote on the Senate floor. Senator McCain has threatened to filibuster, and so we may have to come up with 60 votes. If we have to we will.

O’BRIEN: But some say that the military is not ready for openly gay service members. For former air force Major Mike Almy, the upcoming vote comes late. How did you find out that you had been caught?

MIKE ALMY, FORMER AIR FORCE MAJOR: My commander called me into his office for a routine meeting which was not out of the order and the first thing he did was to read me the DOD policy on homosexuality, just like and I’m sure I turned ghost white, because I was completely flabbergasted and as if somebody had pulled the rug out from under me.

O’BRIEN: Five years ago, a co-worker found his e-mails to a man he was dating. Almy was booted from the air force.

ALMY: I’m pissed off. I really am. I want my job back. I want my career back.

O’BRIEN: Can you get it back realistically?

ALMY: There have been about 14,000 men and women who have been thrown out under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” So you’ve got to figure there’s maybe two or 3,000 of those who want to come back in. How do you revive a career that’s been completely derailed like mine where I’ve been out for four years now?

O’BRIEN: The repeal won’t automatically lift the ban, and the services could take months to implement the policy. There is no guarantee that ousted members like Almy could return. As it moves forward what advice would you give the members of the military who are closeted? What do you tell them? Wait?

SARVIS: Well, they have to keep in mind that this law has not gone away and serve in silence until you get the green light.

O’BRIEN: When the time comes, breaking that silence will not come easily. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If it is repealed soon, and I decide to come out, I think it will be some pushback from the colleagues.

O’BRIEN: Pushback in what way?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Pushback and major penalties from the co- workers.

O’BRIEN: You will lose friends?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, I will probably lose some friends.

O’BRIEN: Make it worth it, still?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, because I am me. I am who I am.

O’BRIEN: For CNN in America, I’m Soledad O’Brien, Washington, D.C.

If you get a chance to watch it, vs. reading the transcript, do. It is always incredibly powerful watching someone who is serving silence speaking about how physiologically difficult it is to hide who you are on a daily basis and fear you are going to lose your career.

This is the type of clip that is so useful in changing the minds of Americans, as they hear from themselves the stories told by LGBTs about the impact of current laws and policies on their lives.

2422103 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.prop8trialtracker.com%2F2010%2F06%2F25%2Fcnns-soledad-obrien-talks-dadt-with-soldiers-both-current-and-former%2FCNN%27s+Soledad+O%27Brien+talks+DADT+with+soldiers+both+current+and+former2010-06-25+22%3A31%3A02couragecampaignhttp%3A%2F%2Fprop8trialtracker.com%2F%3Fp%3D2422 June 25, 2010