Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Scottie’s out of service…briefly!


Hi EOTers–just wanted to let you know that Scottie’s computer is down (yes, again!) and it’s taking longer to fix than we anticipated.  We promise he’ll be back soon.  Trust us, this is driving him crazy!


  • 1. VIRick  |  August 9, 2015 at 4:09 pm

    Yay! This is the best EoT news we've seen here in over two weeks!!

  • 2. VIRick  |  August 9, 2015 at 4:50 pm

    First Third-Gender Passport Has Been Issued in Nepal

    Nepal has joined the few countries which allow third-gender passports, as it issues its first one. The country issued the passport, which allows ‘other’ as a gender category alongside ‘male’ and ‘female’. Monica Shahi was the first person to receive such a passport. The only other countries which allow third-gender, or gender ‘x’ passports are Australia and New Zealand. (India does, too, although it wasn't mentioned in the article.)

    The country, which announced in January 2015 that it would introduce third-gender passports, has been hailed as one of the most progressive on LGBT rights. Nepal in 2011 added third- gender categories to its census and citizenship cards.

  • 3. VIRick  |  August 9, 2015 at 7:26 pm

    Australia: Canberra Airport Comes Out in Rainbows for Equal Marriage

    Canberra Airport has switched on a rainbow lights display at its newest terminal for equal marriage. The lights, accompanied by the message ‘#WeCanDoThis’, were switched on as thousands took to the streets of several cities across Australia to push for same-sex marriage.

    “We hope that the rainbow image across the gateway to Australia’s national capital will have similar impact to lighting up the White House after the historic US Supreme Court ruling determining marriage equality in the US in June this year,” managing director Stephen Byron said. He said the issue was “personal” explaining that his brother married his husband in New Zealand last year. The airport is owned and operated by the Snow family.

  • 4. Fortguy  |  August 9, 2015 at 11:38 pm

    It seems to me that in most parts of the world transgender rights and acceptance seem to lag a decade or two behind gay rights. Yet, in South Asian countries, the reverse seems to be the case. It is interesting that many South Asian countries are much more progressive on transgender issues than many Western democracies while maintaining many colonial anti-buggery laws and attitudes toward gay people.

  • 5. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 12:40 am

    Bolivia is About to Enable its New Gender-Neutral Family Code

    In October 2014, Bolivia's new gender-neutral family code was first passed by the Bolivian Senate, then by the Bolivian House, and was then finally signed into law by the Bolivian President, Evo Morales. It's scheduled to go into effect a bit later this month, August 2015.

    At the time of its passage, on 31 October 2014, an extended, detailed article appeared, and covers a host of changes:

    Some highlights pertinent to same-sex couples (first in Spanish, then in English):

    La tercera diferencia es que las uniones libres podrán registrarse desde el primer día de convivencia y no después de dos años, como se hace ahora.

    Según la diputada del Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS), Marianela Paco, respecto a la constitución del matrimonio o de la unión libre, en el nuevo Código de las Familias se elimina la redacción de géneros, aunque no cambia el espíritu de la norma. “En el matrimonio y la unión libre se reconocerá el término cónyuge sin distinción”, resalta el artículo 137 del Código. Este artículo no abre ni cierra las puertas para las uniones entre personas del mismo sexo. Lo que hicimos en la redacción de esta norma es evitar la discriminación para cualquier persona”," comentó Paco.

    Sin embargo, enfatizó que la Asamblea trabajará una norma específica para la población de Gay, Lesbianas, Bisexuales, Transexuales (GLBT).

    (The third difference is that cohabiting couples can register on the first day of coexistence and not after two years, as is done now.

    According to the deputy for the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS), Marianela Paco,
    regarding the formation of marriage or cohabitation, in the new Family Code, specially- designated genders are eliminated, but this (theoretically) does not change the spirit of the law. "In marriage and cohabitation, the term spouse will be recognized without distinction, as highlighted in Article 137 of the Code. This article does not open nor close the door for unions between persons of the same sex. What we did in the wording of this provision is to prevent discrimination against anyone," said Paco.

    However, she stressed that the Assembly will work on a specific law for the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender (GLBT) population).

    So, Bolivia's Constitution prohibits marriage between same-sex couples. However, this same constitution is utterly silent on the subject of "uniones libres," whether registered or not. Plus, not only that, but now, such "uniones libres" can be registered immediately without having to wait two years. In addition, the new gender-neutral Family Code utilizes "cónyuge" (spouse) throughout. Thus, whether they intended it or not, in their sweeping effort toward non-discrimination, it would appear that they may well have legalized same-sex civil unions, a point which is particularly encouraging if such unions can also be immediately registered.

    And lest we forget, Bolivia's recently-enacted constitution lists 23 ways that discrimination is prohibited. Article 14(II) of Bolivia's "Constitución Política del Estado" states:

    "El Estado prohíbe y sanciona toda forma de discriminación fundada en razón de sexo, color, edad, orientación sexual, identidad de género, origen, cultura, nacionalidad, ciudadanía, idioma, credo religioso, ideología, filiación política o filosófica, estado civil, condición económica o social, tipo de ocupación, grado de instrucción, discapacidad, embarazo, u otras que tengan por objetivo o resultado anular o menoscabar el reconocimiento, goce o ejercicio, en condiciones de igualdad, de los derechos de toda persona.

    The State prohibits and sanctions all forms of discrimination based upon sex, color, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc.

  • 6. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:46 am

    Westboro Baptist Church (and other such ilk) will be upset about this. To which I say, 'Awww, poor babies."

  • 7. guitaristbl  |  August 10, 2015 at 1:23 pm

    Thanks for the update ! It would be a pity for the site to die after ME was achieved in the US. There is still much to fight for, including in courts.
    For example we are waiting for the district court's decision in the Rowan county case anytime now I guess..!

  • 8. Christian0811  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:09 pm

    I'll be more excited when they repeal the marriage prohibition but I guess this is a step in the right direction

  • 9. Christian0811  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    I thought Germany allowed third-gender recognition too?

  • 10. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:20 pm

    Ohio Supreme Court Advisory Opinion on Judicial Performance of Civil Marriages of Same-Sex Couples

    Dated 7 August 2015: (Syllabus): A judge who exercises the authority to perform civil marriages may not refuse to perform same-sex marriages while continuing to perform opposite-sex marriages. A judge may not decline to perform all marriages in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples based on his or her personal, moral, or religious beliefs. <a

    At this juncture, it would seem appropriate for other state Supreme Courts to issue similar advisory opinions, in particular those of Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas.

  • 11. jpmassar  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:39 pm

    A federal judge has ordered South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson to pay more than $135,000 in legal fees for a couple who challenged the state ban on same-sex marriage.

  • 12. davepCA  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:48 pm


  • 13. davepCA  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:49 pm

    Also excellent!

  • 14. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 2:54 pm

    This Is What It’s Like In Argentina Five Years After It Adopted Marriage Equality

  • 15. JayJonson  |  August 10, 2015 at 3:57 pm

    The contempt hearing for Texas Attorney General Paxton and State Health Commissioner Cole before Judge Garcia scheduled for Wednesday has been cancelled after a conference call in which Paxton and Cole promised that they would obey the law and issue the appropriate documents to gay and lesbian couples and individuals. While I would have loved to see Paxton held in contempt, I am glad that he caved and that the numerous people who have been mistreated by the state health commission will finally be treated fairly.

    More info here:

  • 16. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:18 pm

    At Last!!

    Judge Rules: Kansas Same-Sex Marriage Ban is Unconstitutional

    Wichita, KS — A federal judge has voided the Kansas ban on same-sex marriages as unconstitutional in the wake of a US Supreme Court decision on the issue. On Monday, 10 August 2015, US District Judge Daniel Crabtree summarily ruled, in "Marie v. Moser," that the provision in the Kansas constitution that prohibits issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, or in recognizing such marriages, violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. That ruling also applies to any Kansas statute, law, policy, or practice that bars or fails to recognize such unions.

    But Crabtree stopped short of issuing a permanent injunction so as to give Kansas the opportunity to voluntarily comply, as its attorneys have assured the court they will do. The court says some facts in the court record suggest Kansas officials have not uniformly complied with the US Supreme Court ruling.

  • 17. DrBriCA  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:26 pm

    Only ten months later…..

  • 18. guitaristbl  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    Yeah I wouldnt hold my breath for the Alabama and Texas ones especially…

  • 19. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:38 pm

    …. and only 6 weeks after the US Supreme Court ruling itself!

    Per Equality Case Files:

    "Marie v. Moser" (Kansas marriage case in federal court)

    Memorandum and Order. State wanted the case dismissed as moot. Court denied that request and issued declaratory relief, but deferred its ruling on a permanent injunction. <a href="http://_” target=”_blank”>_

  • 20. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:54 pm

    Guitar, I'm not, nor would I advise anyone else to stop breathing in eager anticipation of those two courts doing something sensible.

    I'm merely suggesting that would seem to be appropriate for them to follow behind Ohio's Supreme Court in issuing similar directives as advisory opinions.

  • 21. Sagesse  |  August 10, 2015 at 4:54 pm

    Fascinating. An excellent opinion; wonder how generally applicable it might be in other states.

    For context:

    1. All judges in Ohio are subject to partisan primaries and non-partisan elections.
    2. This opinion applies to judges as marriage officiants; marriage licences are issued by county clerks.
    3. There are no state-wide LGBT anti-discrimination protections.
    4. Ohio does not have an RFRA-type law.

  • 22. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 5:40 pm

    Christian, perhaps I'm more excited about the future prospects in Bolivia than I ought to be. However, as a former resident of two of Bolivia's immediate neighbors (Brasil and Chile), let me attempt to provide a more Latino perspective.

    First off, it would be a gross understatement to assert that Bolivia is "economically-challenged." On a scale of worthlessness, when I lived near-by, among all South American currencies, its currency was at the very bottom of the pile. Then, it defaulted on its foreign debt,– totally. Basically put, since then, they've had to re-invent their country from scratch. Personally, I'm rather impressed with the resulting re-invention.

    Of all the world's nations which have actively attempted to counter discrimination and to advance indigenous rights, women's rights, and LGBT rights, Bolivia is undoubtedly the least financially able, the vanguard, if you will, of what was once called the Third World. If Bolivia can tackle all of these issues (seemingly simultaneously), then no other country anywhere can claim that it is too poor to follow suit,– or not "western" enough in its cultural orientation,– or whatever.

  • 23. A_Jayne  |  August 10, 2015 at 6:05 pm

    I'm glad this was not dismissed. When it comes time for the injunction, it can now include an order for the state of KS to pay the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees. Looking forward to that day, too.

  • 24. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 6:16 pm

    As of today's date, Paxton and Cole are not yet clear of Judge Garcia. Here's why:

    Per Equality Case Files:

    "DeLeon v. Abbott" (Texas marriage case in district court)

    UPDATE: Judge Garcia has postponed the contempt hearing until 10 September:

    "It is therefore ORDERED that the hearing previously scheduled for Wednesday, 12 August 2015, at 10:00 AM is hereby re-scheduled for Thursday, 10 September 2015 at 10:30 AM at the John H. Wood Courthouse, Courtroom No. 1, 655 E. Cesar Chavez Blvd.. San Antonio. Texas."

  • 25. Zack12  |  August 10, 2015 at 6:43 pm

    Crabtree took long enough to issue his order.
    Now let's see if KS will FINALLY comply with the SCOTUS ruling.

  • 26. Christian0811  |  August 10, 2015 at 6:54 pm

    You make a compelling case, it is impressive that they have made a turn around to be sure!

    Still, it's hard not feel backhanded when the constitution bans discrimination based on sexual orientation but simultaneously bans marriage equality for the sole purpose of perpetuating the animus instigated by the Vatican. :/

  • 27. 1grod  |  August 10, 2015 at 6:57 pm


  • 28. allan120102  |  August 10, 2015 at 7:03 pm

    In my opinion he was the worst federal judge to hear a case from ssm. He was one of the slowest even when its federal appeals court had order that bans were unconstitutional. Even the one of Louisiana was fast when the fifth order him to reverse its ruling. Crabtree not even issue a permanent injunction and let Kansas play its game for several months and even weeks after the SC issue its ruling.

  • 29. allan120102  |  August 10, 2015 at 7:13 pm… It looks like 55 couples have at least married in Quintana Roo and are joining Mexico institute of social insurance.

  • 30. 1grod  |  August 10, 2015 at 7:29 pm

    Using Crabtree's logic, hopefully the 11 circuit will als act on Alabama and Florida cases under appeal.

  • 31. davepCA  |  August 10, 2015 at 7:53 pm

    Aw dammit, I was REALLY looking forward to this. I had popcorn ready and everything.

  • 32. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 8:39 pm

    Christian, that's why I see the gender-neutral dodge-around with registered "uniones libres" (cohabitation becoming civil unions, once registered) as a plausible alternative.

    Bolivia seems to be following in the footsteps of both Ecuador and Chile on this matter, a move which is far, far more-progressive than two other neighbors, Paraguay and Peru (both of which have done absolutely nothing whatsoever).

    And as far as the Vatican is concerned, no one in these countries really cares. Remember that then-Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, the current Pope Francis, was Archbishop of Buenos Aires at the very time when Argentina legalized same-sex marriage. He knows. Instead, it has more to do with mindlessly-entrenched social mores, including machismo and the evangelistas.

    Oh wait!! That sounds like a new EoT salsa group: "Machismo and the Evangelistas"

  • 33. SethInMaryland  |  August 10, 2015 at 9:08 pm

    Big News In Australia , the liberal party ( the conservatives over there ) is meeting to discuss marriage equality in a few hours. This is big because they have meet twice in the last day to discuss the issue. This could mean that a free vote may be coming and very soon

  • 34. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:22 pm

    yeah. me too. What am I going to do with all this popcorn now. It's too early for Xmas tree garlands.

    … or is it????

  • 35. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:34 pm

    Resistance to marriage equality may be futile… but the resistors sure can make resistance annoying and troublesome as hell… excuse my French.

    Flying the confederate flag 150 years after the south lost the war is a form of resistance…
    As I said b4, evil, like any other form of energy can never be truly destroyed… only mitigated. Looks like Ken Paxton and Texas, and now Ohio are being mitigated pretty well. Let's see how much more resistance Roy Moore, Rick "Frothy Mixture" Santorum, And Mike Huxterby have left in them… before they are fully mitigated to irrelevance.

  • 36. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:36 pm

    Where the HELL, are all these guys finding these husbands… that's what I want to know.

  • 37. SethInMaryland  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:43 pm

    no updates yet, may be a little while

  • 38. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:52 pm

    If Australia could pass marriage Equality by the end of the year… that would be an awesome cap to 2015… the year of Marriage around the Globe.
    Let's see, to recap, Nationwide Marriage equality has come to these countries in 2015:
    USA!, Ireland, Greenland, Slovenia, Mexico And Finland (technically), Luxembourg, and in the Pitcairn Islands. Have I missed any?

    Perhaps in 2016 we'll see ME in Cuba, Germany, Switzerland, Bolivia, Chile, Austria, Columbia, and Israel. And by 2020…Japan, China, and Poland.

  • 39. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    Only slightly longer than the VI

  • 40. Raga  |  August 10, 2015 at 10:57 pm

    And the crazy continues in Alabama:

  • 41. SethInMaryland  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:02 pm

    Taiwan has chance this year or next , it might just happen this year sometime in oct

  • 42. VIRick  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:13 pm

    Ah Tony!!

    We started last (without a court case until the Supreme Court ruled), and despite the local drama, still beat Kansas, Texas, Kentucky, Alabama, the Northern Marianas,– and American Samoa.

  • 43. allan120102  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:22 pm

    Well to be honest Slovenia doesn't have marriage equality yet and Mexico only have it on certain states. We might get Colombia as soon as August 30 as the 22 or 23 country worldwide depending on Slovenia and Mexico.

  • 44. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:29 pm

    Fashionably late… but not TOO late.

  • 45. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:30 pm

    That's why I said "Technically"… to be honest.

  • 46. SethInMaryland  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:33 pm

    just curious , how do u know the ruling in Columbia will be released by the 30 ?

  • 47. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 10, 2015 at 11:56 pm

    Midnight Ponderings, off topic, but still ME related, I'm wondering if now that SCOTUS has proclaimed a fundamental right to SSM… if and how this will follow through in public high schools. Will there follow in high schools across the land… Dating Equality? When I was that age, being out or even thinking of having a marriage type relationship, (much less a boyfriend) between gays (and or lebesians) was out of the question not to mention the realm of possibility. I hope, now, young gays and lebesians can be free from living in the shadows or closets and will not have the idea instilled that they will be outcasts in society. If YouTube is any indication, young gays and probably lebesians too are much better off than their counter parts from the 1980s, 70s, 60s, 50s and so on and so on. One day we may hear stories of ss couples, now married for years who met as high school sweethearts.

  • 48. SethInMaryland  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:21 am

    update nothing so far, they went into break and returning later to discuss the issue

  • 49. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:24 am

    According to the brief itself, this advisory board isn't the first to come to this conclusion. They state that they follow the same conclusions as other Ethics Authorities: specifically, Neb. Adv. Op. June 29, 2015, Az. Adv. Op. March 9, 2015, La. Comm on Jud. Ethics July 14, 2015, Pa. Jud. Comm Summer 2014. So this opinion while not binding is very strongly worded, steeped in law and precedent. It's brilliant in fact. If such a case should make it to a circuit court or SCOTUS, the circuit panel or the Obergefell Five could just sign their name to this opinion… well and add a few more facts that aren't specific to only Ohio Ethics and law of course. I can imagine Roy Moore, and the Texas Supremes are already writing up an opinion the polar opposite of this… Not to mention the republicans in the Texas Legislature.

  • 50. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:36 am

    Per Geraldina González de la Vega, a clerk at Mexico's Supreme Court:

    From today's discussion among the justices at the Supreme Court, it would appear that at least seven of the eleven justices, namely Justices Zaldívar, Sánchez Cordero, Silva, Gutiérrez, Pérez Dayán, Franco, and Aguilar are willing to strike down Campeche's ban on same-sex adoption and/or its separate "sociedad de convivenica" (its limited version of civil union for same-sex couples) which includes the same-sex adoption ban, with one justice even referring to it as an exercise in apartheid. I never expected to see the word "apartheid" in a Spanish-language text, but nevertheless, there it is:

    Ministro Gutiérrez: la distinción entre matrimonio y soc de convivencia es ejercicio de un apartheid. "Separados pero iguales."

  • 51. SethInMaryland  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:41 am

    they have now returned to discuss marriage equality

  • 52. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:48 am

    In my opinion, the BEST, judge was republican appointed Judge Posner from the 7th circuit, as was his opinion. Even his op-ed bitch slap bench slap of the Obergefell dissenters, especially the Chief Justice was AWESOME!

  • 53. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 2:23 am

    According to what was posted right after the conclusion of the hearing before the Constitutional Court in Colombia on 30 July 2015, the quoted commentary itself stated:

    "Based on yesterday's hearing, a decision in the current case is expected later this summer."

  • 54. JayJonson  |  August 11, 2015 at 5:43 am

    Australia's Liberal Party rejects free vote on marriage equality. Australia will likely remain without marriage equality until at least after the next national election.

    "But Tony Abbott, who firmly opposes same-sex marriage, conceded after a six-hour meeting of his colleagues that it was the last parliamentary term in which the Coalition could maintain its current position.

    The prime minister held out the possibility of a free vote or alternatively a plebicite (sic) of the entire population during the next term of parliament – a position seen by supporters of same-sex marriage as a stalling tactic."

    " The Labor party immediately sought to capitalise on the decision, tweeting that a Shorten Labor government would introduce a bill for marriage equality within its first 100 days.

    Bill Shorten, the Labor leader, said Australia was “stuck in the past” under Abbott and it was time for change."

  • 55. ebohlman  |  August 11, 2015 at 6:47 am

    I don't see that there would ever be true dating equality in high schools simply because a non-straight kid's potential pool of dates is a lot smaller than a straight kid's. Past high school, most people's dating pools are nowhere as near geographically constrained as a HS kid's. Gay men (but not lesbians) tend to migrate from less-dense to more-dense areas when they reach adulthood, but kids are pretty much constrained to live where their parents choose.

  • 56. DJSNOLA  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:02 am

    This is true and to an extent is very true for adult gays. Living in areas that are less populated severely limits ones ability to find a partner. Apps like scruff , grindr, tindr can help to some extent but long distance relationships are hard to work. Nonetheless the opportunity will still be there for highschool students in the future even if somewhat limited. Im actually dating a guy I met in highschool right now(went to an all boy school with 1400 guys so that made it a fairly large dating pool)…however we didnt date in highschool and really hardly knew eachother.

  • 57. DJSNOLA  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:05 am

    stuck in the past indeed. So Australia will for sure be last english speaking country without marriage equality or would that go to hong kong(sort of still a country) or singapore?

  • 58. Zack12  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:13 am

    Sad to say but as long as Abbott is in power, marriage equality will not be coming to Australia.
    Mind you, if Julia Gillard had done the right thing when she was PM and allowed a vote instead of throwing LGBT people under the bus, Abbott wouldn't be an issue.

  • 59. DJSNOLA  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:24 am

    true once the opportunity arises that doesnt mean it will remain… good example in america is employment non discrimination. We had the chance and we passed it up. So now its much harder to do

  • 60. itscoldoutside  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:44 am

    We have judicial vacations in Slovenia until September 10th so Colombia will probably get it first. The justices here already held two conferences on the matter. They've thrown out a request by the haters to review the constitutionality of the new law and will proceed to decide directly on the referendum question. The US, Mexico and ECtHR decisions all happened since their last conference so they'll take that into account when they return as well.

    Though I have to say I don't believe Germany and Austria will get marriage equality any time soon. I think Europe (apart from Switzerland) is done with marriage equality at least until 2020.

  • 61. SethInMaryland  |  August 11, 2015 at 8:27 am

    Australia is far behind it's not even funny , they poll over 70% every time this question is asked, the their politician are so out of main stream with the public it's not even. You have the liberal party who are nothing then a butch of religious lunatics in charge, you also have the coward labour party which is the half support party that try to use marriage equality as a political stunt earlier to win votes knowing it would it might cause damage to the actual passage

  • 62. AndresM11  |  August 11, 2015 at 9:55 am

    Hi guys!! I just learned per the Equality Case Files twitter that the Eight Circuit finally realesed their opinions affirming the District Court's rulings in South Dakota, Nebraska and Arkansas and denying the motions to dismiss as moot present by the States 😀

    Another day, another victory! I really hope this site stays active so I can keep in touch with Tony, VIRick, Raga, Rose and the rest of the people who make this place so special for a lawyer living in a place like Venezuela :)

  • 63. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 11, 2015 at 10:00 am

    Thanks for the news Andres!
    Hope 2 stay in touch with you 2

  • 64. weaverbear  |  August 11, 2015 at 11:02 am

    As long as the orthodox remain in control of marriage laws in Israel, we will NOT see marriage for same sex couples being performed there. Recognized when they happen elsewhere is under the control of the Knesset and has been recognized, but more than that we cannot expect for now. Forgive me for being a downer here Tony, but there are still too many ultra-orthodox within the country who are in my opinion little different for our community and our rights as many on the far religious right, whether they be Xian fundamentalists here in the US or hardline conservative Muslims in parts of the middle east.

    There still remain too many on the far religious right in Israel who feel the ultra orthodox man who stabbed people at Tel Aviv's pride recently was acting appropriately.

  • 65. Zack12  |  August 11, 2015 at 11:08 am

    I'm sure they gritted their teeth while doing so but at least they did it.
    I too hope the site stays up although I have a feeling it won't now that marriage equality has been won.
    A shame too, since there are still plenty of other battles to fight.

  • 66. JayJonson  |  August 11, 2015 at 11:20 am

    RE other Supreme Courts, I noticed that the Louisiana Commission on Judicial Ethics is cited in a footnote as having reached a similar conclusion to the one reached by Ohio. But I have been unable to find the opinion on the Louisiana Supreme Court website.

  • 67. weaverbear  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:02 pm

    My husband and I were in high school together (and sadly did not know it at the time). We met 11 years after the fact and have been together ever since. It's been 45 years since he graduated, 43 for me, and we've been partnered for 34, legally married for 7.

  • 68. weaverbear  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:05 pm

    Thanks to the EoT people for getting a thread up for us to comment on. Here's hoping a new one will get opened every couple of days.

    Marriage Equality was crucial for us, but its far from the end of the battle. If you can be denied housing or lose your job for being LGBT, and such still remains the case in much of this country and the world, then our Equality remains on trial.

  • 69. itscoldoutside  |  August 11, 2015 at 12:39 pm

    This is such a disappointing development. I was certain it was a done deal. But maybe the wait will be for the best in the end. Perhaps the supporters will get more votes in the next election because of this? Which benefits everyone.

    Though I am concerned about that plebiscite he's talking about.

  • 70. Bruno71  |  August 11, 2015 at 1:26 pm

    There are many English speaking countries who won't have ME until well after Australia, like Jamaica, Guyana, The Bahamas, and other Caribbean nations.

  • 71. 1grod  |  August 11, 2015 at 1:28 pm

    eight Circuit: Rosenbrahn v. Daugaard

  • 72. 1grod  |  August 11, 2015 at 1:43 pm

    Rick: The Alabama Supreme Court is still receiving submission on the question of lifting its temporary injunction against probate judges. How can this opinion be formally forwarded to them? G

  • 73. sfbob  |  August 11, 2015 at 1:46 pm

    Most likely it will be Jamaica.

  • 74. JayJonson  |  August 11, 2015 at 2:37 pm

    Some Texans who post here may know the answer to a question I have. Texas allows a discount on marriage licenses (from $81 to $21) to couples who take a marriage preparedness course. In Dallas, and perhaps everywhere in the state, one can fulfill the requirement to get the discount by attending a workshop offered by Ahthem Strong Families (, which seems to be funded by faith-based groups.

    Does anyone know if Anthem Strong Families discriminates against same-sex couples? And, if so, how can that be legal? Would it not violate Judge Garcia's order that the state treat opposite-sex and same-sex couples equally?

  • 75. tx64jm  |  August 11, 2015 at 3:12 pm

    You'd be better to go here:

    However, you should be aware that most of the providers of marriage counseling classes are faith based organizations.

  • 76. dorothyrothchild  |  August 11, 2015 at 5:12 pm

    This makes me so mad. I have blood coming out my whatever!

  • 77. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 5:44 pm

    Mexico's Supreme Court Strikes Down Gay Adoption Ban

    Today, 11 August 2015, Mexico's Supreme Court ruled a law in the state of Campeche that bans same-sex couples from adopting children is unconstitutional. The 9-1 decision in favor of striking down the ban comes against the backdrop of the debate over marriage rights for same-sex couples that continues to gain momentum in the country.

  • 78. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 5:54 pm

    Puerto Rico Governor Bans Anti-Transgender Discrimination

    On Monday, 10 August 2015, Puerto Rico Gov. Alejandro García Padilla issued two executive orders that extend rights to transgender people in the US commonwealth. One of the orders that García signed specifically prohibits hospitals from discriminating against potential patients based on their gender identity when they seek treatment in an emergency room. The second mandate allows trans Puerto Ricans to change the gender on their driver’s licenses.

    “My administration is committed to the eradication of all types of discrimination,” said García in a press release that his office issued on Tuesday.

    In 2013, García signed two bills into law that ban anti-LGBT discrimination in Puerto Rico and added sexual orientation and gender identity to the island’s domestic violence laws. The governor earlier this year announced his administration would no longer defend the US commonwealth’s ban on the recognition of same-sex marriages and those in which one person is trans.

  • 79. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 11, 2015 at 6:26 pm

    LOL… I mean hahaha

  • 80. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 7:05 pm

    Eighth Circuit Deals Finishing Blows to State Marriage Bans

    The Eighth Circuit has dispensed with marriage cases under its jurisdiction. Nearly seven weeks after the US Supreme Court issued its historic decision in favor of marriage equality nationwide, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, 11 August 2015, affirmed that state bans on same-sex marriages within its jurisdiction are unconstitutional. In three separate opinions, a three-judge panel delivered instructions upholding lower court rulings against marriage bans in South Dakota, Arkansas, and Nebraska.

    The three-judge panel consisted of US Circuit Judge Roger Wollman, a Reagan appointee; US Circuit Judge Lavenski Smith, a George W. Bush appointee; and US Circuit Judge William Benton, another George W. Bush appointee.

    For Arkansas, in "Jernigan v. Crane," the panel affirmed the district court judgment asserting the state’s ban on same-sex is unconstitutional. A motion to dismiss the case filed by the state in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision on marriage is denied.

    For Nebraska, in "Waters v. Ricketts," the panel upholds a district court preliminary injunction against the marriage ban and instructs the court to issue final judgment in the case in favor of the plaintiffs. All pending motions in the case are denied.

    For South Dakota, in "Rosenbrahn v. Daugaard," the panel not only affirms the district court ruling against the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, but dismisses a request from the state to dismiss the lawsuit as moot. “South Dakota’s assurances of compliance with Obergefell do not moot the case,” the panel writes in the South Dakota opinion. “These assurances may, however, impact the necessity of continued injunctive relief. The district court is better positioned to consider the issue on appropriate motion. This court leaves to the court’s discretion whether to vacate the stay of the injunction.”

    The Missouri appeal of "Lawson v. Kelly" had been previously withdrawn by the state immediately after the US Supreme Court ruling in "Obergefell v. Hodges."

    So, not only is "Baker v. Nelson" dead, but also, so is the 8th Circuit’s 2006 decision in "Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning.”

  • 81. VIRick  |  August 11, 2015 at 9:00 pm

    "DeLeon v. Abbott" (Texas marriage case in district court)

    As promised, Judge Garcia has followed up yesterday's phone conference with a more detailed order today, 11 August 2015, for moving forward.

    "Court ORDERS Defendants to submit an advisory to the Court, no later than Monday August 24, 2015:
    (1) notifying the Court they have created, issued, and implemented policy guidelines recognizing same-sex marriage in death and birth certificates issued in the State of Texas, and
    (2) assuring the Court that the Department of State Health Services has granted all pending applications for death and birth certificates involving same-sex couples, assuming the applications are otherwise complete and qualify for approval."

  • 82. Fortguy  |  August 11, 2015 at 9:55 pm

    Jay, I posted the following article link a little over a month ago on a previous EoT thread:

    Aman Batheja and Sophia Bollag, The Texas Tribune: Few Options for Gay Couples in State Marriage Classes

    To provide a brief summary, the marriage license discount is $60 for those who participate in classes offered under the Twogether in Texas program which the Lege authorized in 2007. There are 2,500 organizations authorized to participate in the program, and most of these are churches or other faith-based groups. I know nothing about Anthem Strong Families and will not presume to speak for them. However, because of the sheer number of participating orgs, I'm sure there must be some in Dallas or the greater Dallas-Fort Worth area that are either secular or aligned with LGBT-inclusive and affirming churches or their related missions.

    Good luck to you, and best wishes on your quest. I hope this is helpful.

  • 83. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 12:56 am

    Germany only recognizes it for Inter-sex, not for Trans-gender.

    In the case of both India and Nepal, they are officially referring to hijra, the male-to-female trans-gender, a third gender which is also unofficially recognized in other parts of South Asia as well, including Pakistan, Thailand, and Malaysia.

  • 84. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 1:08 am

    Graeme, that's an excellent question, but as pointed out in the Ohio advisory opinion, and cited as recent precedent, a matter which was carefully noted by Tony, similar advisory opinions have already been issued by the respective courts in Nebraska, Arizona, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania.

    So, I would forward the full advisory opinions of all five state Supreme Courts on to their "illustrious" counterpart in Alabama. And while we're at it, we probably ought to forward additional sets of copies on to the Supreme Courts of Texas and Kentucky.

  • 85. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 1:25 am

    "…. 55 couples have at least married in Quintana Roo …."

    In all instances, these 55 couples would be Mexican citizens applying to the IMSS (Mexico's version of Social Security) for spousal benefits, a federal program which is already available to all legally-married same-sex couples nationwide.

    Same-sex couples who are non-resident and/or non-citizen (of Mexico), but who may have married in Quintana Roo, would not qualify for IMSS benefits. As a result, the total number of couples who have gotten married in Quintana Roo since legalization would be higher, given the very distinct possibility that a fair number of foreign-citizen same-sex couples have also taken advantage of the ability to be married there.

  • 86. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 6:38 am

    Thanks for the link Fortguy.

  • 87. 1grod  |  August 12, 2015 at 8:06 am

    Coosa Co AL town hall – little new:

  • 88. Christian0811  |  August 12, 2015 at 9:53 am

    Hm interesting :)

  • 89. Christian0811  |  August 12, 2015 at 10:01 am

    Well that is true, but I can't imagine the Vatican helps any :/ after all Catholicism does dominate south of the rio grande. But you're right, plenty of South American countries have catholic majorities and also have ME.

  • 90. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 10:37 am

    One of the plaintiffs in the Utah marriage equality case ran for Salt Lake City Council and came in first in his race. An open lesbian also led in the race for Mayor. Salt Lake City may become even more gay friendly.

  • 91. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 10:48 am

    More love from Justice Ginsburg:

    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Aug. 8 presided over the ceremony during which gay U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam Ted Osius and his husband renewed their wedding vows.

    The private ceremony took place at Osius’ official residence in Hanoi.

    Osius told the Washington Blade that Ginsburg officiated the wedding of gay friends of his and his husband, Clayton Bond. The two men nevertheless did not know Ginsburg until she arrived in Vietnam earlier this month on a trip sponsored by the State Department’s U.S. Speaker Program where she met with Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung, Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court Truong Hoa Binh and other senior officials from the Southeast Asian country.
    Ginsburg accepted the couple’s invitation to stay at their home in Hanoi while she was in the Vietnamese capital. Osius said a colleague suggested that he and Bond ask Ginsburg to renew their vows.

    “We thought it might be meaningful not only to us, but to the LGBT community in Vietnam,” Osius told the Blade.

    Osius told the Blade that he and Bond used the same vows they wrote for their 2006 wedding in Canada. The couple invited several young Vietnamese LGBT rights advocates to the ceremony.
    Osius told the Blade that Ginsburg told him and Bond that “officiating over the renewal of our vows was ‘a joy.’”

    “She is one of the most extraordinary people we have ever met,” said Osius.

    Osius and Bond renewed their vows less than two months after the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said same-sex couples have the constitutional right to marry throughout the country. The ceremony also took place against the backdrop of an increasingly visible Vietnamese LGBT rights movement.

    – See more at:

  • 92. SethInMaryland  |  August 12, 2015 at 10:58 am

    Love Ginsburg ; ) maybe this will help give a spark in Vietnam , For them this battle has only began. I think it was this year or last that they made their first inch of progress

  • 93. Iggy_Schiller  |  August 12, 2015 at 11:33 am

    She is just amazing… But I'm so afraid to think that a republican justice could replace her. It could be as tragic as it was the replacement of Marshall by Thomas =/

  • 94. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 11:41 am

    Guam's senate has passed a marriage equality and LGBT employment nondiscrimination bill. I am not sure what the prospects for its passage by the house and being signed into law by the governor are. The following is from Towleroad:

    "Guam’s Senate quickly passed a LGBT employment nondiscrimination bill and an official marriage equality bill today that formally adheres to the Obergefell decision in the U.S.

    Sen. Nerissa Bretania Underwood, who created Bill No. 119 dubbed the “Guam Marriage Equality Act of 2015,” opened the session with remarks on the relevance of the bills to Guam citizens and bringing Guam into uniformity with U.S. law following the Obergefell decision, as Metro Weekly reports:

    “This is a historical moment in which we must do more than just obey or comply. It is a time when we must affirm and recognize those in our society who choose to marry members of the same gender because it is not just a matter of compliance; it is a matter of fairness. It is a matter of justice. It is a matter of equality. It is a matter that acknowledges the full humanity of all of our citizens who wish to express their love for another human being through lawful marriage. I thank all those who have paved this way. And while it has taken some time for people organize around and further articulate the need for change, today, we have solidified this endeavor.”

    Underwood’s bill also alters gender-specific terminology related to marriage, changing words like husband and wife to the gender-neutral word spouse. The employment nondiscrimination bill clarifies that sexual orientation, military status, gender identity and expression are now protected classes, prohibiting employers from discrimination."

  • 95. DrBriCA  |  August 12, 2015 at 12:13 pm

    She is a class act. Love her!

  • 96. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 12, 2015 at 12:24 pm

    'New lawsuit challenges Mississippi same-sex adoption ban'
    (… )

    Roberta Kaplan is the lead attorney representing the plaintiffs.

  • 97. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 12:38 pm

    Jay, Guam's legislature is absolutely identical to that of the Virgin Islands (despite the fact that we are on opposite sides of the world).

    From Wikipedia: The legislative branch (of Guam) is unicameral, with a single house consisting of fifteen senators, each serving for a two year term.

    So, there's only one remaining question: How quickly will the governor sign the new legislation?

  • 98. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:19 pm

    Thanks for the clarification, VIRick. Hope the governor signs the legislation quickly.

  • 99. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:20 pm

    Roberta Kaplan will take no prisoners. The state's attorneys will be hopelessly outclassed. I like the odds for the plaintiffs in this case.

  • 100. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:24 pm

    In "Miller v. Davis," the federal suit against the Rowan County KY Clerk who won't issue marriage licenses:

    On 12 August 2015, the Federal Judge, David L. Bunning, granted the preliminary injunction against Rowan County Clerk, Kim Davis.

    "IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 2) against Defendant Kim Davis, in her official capacity as Rowan County Clerk, is hereby granted.

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Kim Davis, in her official capacity as Rowan County Clerk, is hereby preliminarily enjoined from applying her 'no marriage licenses' policy to future marriage license requests submitted by Plaintiffs."

  • 101. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:37 pm

    Jackson, MS (August 12, 2015) – A federal lawsuit was filed today challenging the constitutionality of Mississippi’s law banning adoption by same-sex couples. Mississippi is the only state left in the nation that bans gay couples from adopting without regard for their qualifications as parents or the best interests of the child.

    The case, "Campaign for Southern Equality v. Mississippi Department of Human Services," was filed today, 12 August 2015, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi on behalf of four same-sex couples: Kari Lunsford and Tinora Sweeten-Lunsford, who are seeking to adopt a child; Brittany Rowell and Jessica Harbuck, also seeking to adopt; Donna Phillips and Janet Smith, parents to a young daughter (who wish to complete a second-parent adoption); and Kathryn Garner and Susan Hrostowski, who have a 15-year-old son (and who also seek a second-parent adoption, as well as the ability to adopt). Two organizations, the Campaign for Southern Equality and the Family Equality Council, join the case as plaintiffs representing the LGBT families across Mississippi.

  • 102. sfbob  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:47 pm

    Kaplan is the lead attorney so the case is in good hands. And aside from that it should be an open-and-shut deal anyway. Couples are either married or they are not and for the state to condone the existence of two classes of marriage is patently unconstitutional.

    Aside from that the complaint hammers again and again on the point that gay and lesbian couples are being discriminated on the basis of their sexual orientation. We aren't going to get our rights vindicated in Congress unless and until Republicans no longer control either the House or the Senate or both so barring some unforeseen moment of sanity among the haters there we are going to have to fight for our full equality within the federal courts. Building up a set of cases where it is undeniable that we are being discriminated against may or may not succeed in winning full equality by means of a judicial ruling but it certainly doesn't hurt.

  • 103. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 2:57 pm

    Puerto Rico Celebrates Marriage Equality in Style

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — More than 60 same-sex couples are preparing to exchange vows as part of a mass marriage ceremony in Puerto Rico to celebrate the US Supreme Court ruling in the socially conservative U.S. territory.

    Organizers say the event will take place Sunday, 16 August 2015, in San Juan’s (charmingly romantic) colonial district, Viejo San Juan. Event organizer, Ada Conde Vidal, said that while the majority of couples are Puerto Ricans, others from Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Venezuela are participating.

    Ada Conde Vidal was the lead plaintiff who had filed the federal lawsuit in Puerto Rico seeking to have her marriage recognized prior to the Supreme Court decision. Puerto Rico has since struck down laws that prohibited same-sex marriage and the recognition of such marriages (and more).

  • 104. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 12, 2015 at 4:04 pm

    This is great news. Thanks Rick.

    In this day and age, the majority of federal judges just aren't putting up with recalcitrance to federal law. Most judges understand that slippery slope. If you give these religionists an inch, they'll certainly take a mile. Tell them they can cite their religious beliefs to stop gays and lebesians from fully participating in civil secular society… next they'll cite the same religious beliefs to not pay taxes, not work on their purported holy days, require religious teachings in public schools, require religious tests to hire and fire or hold public office, stop alcohol, birth control and sex toy sales… just to name a few.

    Religious freedom is a two way street. The U.S. constitution protects everyone under its jurisdiction, including minorities, from religious oppression, religious duty, and religious compliance. There are too many religions in the US, too many beliefs, for civil law to take sides with shifting and evanescent majorities. One need only look to the history of majorities in our own US congress to see how temporal and fleeting these majorities are and how a majorities tend to shift like the wind… or the jasmine in my mind.

  • 105. JayJonson  |  August 12, 2015 at 4:15 pm

    A very nice analysis by Judge Bunning, who was appointed to the bench by George W. Bush. He is the son of former Senator Jim Bunning, a Hall of Fame baseball pitcher. Despite those political connections, he issued a fair and compelling opinion.

  • 106. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:01 pm

    In his decision, Bunning characterizes the case as assertion of conflicting rights, one the fundamental right to marry recognized in the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, the other the right to free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. “The tension between these constitutional concerns can be resolved by answering one simple question: Does the Free Exercise Clause likely excuse Kim Davis from issuing marriage licenses because she has a religious objection to same-sex marriage?” Bunning writes. “For reasons stated herein, the Court answers this question in the negative.”

    For the plaintiffs in the case, two same-sex couples and two different-sex couples seeking to be married in Rowan County, Bunning determines they’re entitled to receive marriage licenses at the clerk’s office because of a fundamental right to marry and the absence of a compelling state interest to withhold from them the documents. “Even if Plantiffs are able to obtain licenses elsewhere, why should they be required to?” Bunning writes. “The state has long entrusted county clerks with the task of issuing marriage licenses. It does not seem unreasonable for Plaintiffs, as Rowan County voters, to expect their elected official to perform her statutorily assigned duties. And yet, that is precisely what Davis is refusing to do.” Although Davis claims she may refuse licenses as result of the right to free exercise of religion and freedom of speech, Bunning denies those are adequate reasons for her to shut down operations in her office.

    The clerk in question already filed notice with the court the she intends to appeal to the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

  • 107. guitaristbl  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:12 pm

    Reading Bunning's opinion makes it quite clear imo how ridiculous her claims are and how this appeal is a waste of time..

    Oh I want Sutton on the panel that will hear this one please. Just for the joy of it.

  • 108. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:20 pm

    The VI then, would do well to continue to mirror Guam and follow in these foot steps (presuming the Governor doesn't attemp to veto the legislature).

    Have the news reports indicated how many in the legislature voted for or against this bill?

    If the vote was unanimous, or by over 2/3, then the Governor may not be able to veto this legislation… should he be so inclined.

  • 109. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:20 pm

    Still, let's hope both Sutton and Cook do not end up on the panel hearing this appeal. In the meantime, too, don't expect any marriage licenses to be issued to anyone in Rowan County KY, despite the two preliminary injunctions, during said appeal.

  • 110. guitaristbl  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:23 pm

    Oh I did not.Even if SCOTUS itself rules that she has to issue the licenses I expect her to make a show out of it and wait to get arrested while shouting "They violate my religious freedom, look I am going to jail for believing in jesus christ !!" with a bunch of liberty council loons around cheering for her.

  • 111. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:41 pm

    Let's hope that neither Bunning nor the sixth circuit issue a stay on Bunnings order. Or, only a very short and temporary one if that. This woman should learn from the obstinate clerk in Pennsylvania… Santai-Gaffney, that resistance is futile. As long as Ginsburg and Kennedy are on the High Court, she'll never win her right not to serve and her right to discriminate.

    I would not be upset if she is incarcerated for up to three years (the remainder of her office term), for contempt of court. It would do her good to have some time to contemplate and reflect on the evil of her narcisstic ways.

  • 112. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:41 pm

    HAGATNA, Guam — On 12 August 2015, lawmakers in Guam approved two seprate bills, one that formally extends marriage rights to same-sex couples, and the second to ban anti-LGBT discrimination in the U.S. territory.

    KUAM reported members of the Guam Senate by a 13-2 vote margin approved the bill that amends the island’s legal code to create “equality in civil marriage.” Lawmakers then unanimously passed the anti-discrimination measure.

    It would appear that the Governor of Guam won't be able to successfully veto either measure.

  • 113. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 12, 2015 at 5:44 pm

    Actually, I would like for them to try the 'religious belief' for subordinates. Religion is a choice, but running for office, or accepting a job in a 'political office', is even more of a choice IMO.

    The US Constitution, Article IV, paragraph 3, states:
    "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

    And since the early 20th century, the US Constitution has been interpreted to apply to ALL governmental bodies and personnel, not just the Federal Government.

  • 114. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 12, 2015 at 6:05 pm

    And thus, The Guamanian legislature has proclaimed…"Make it so". And lo! It shall be done. And so it shall.

  • 115. VIRick  |  August 12, 2015 at 8:29 pm

    Hundreds of Vietnamese Trans People Demand New Identification

    Nearly 600 transgender people in Vietnam have proposed having their names and identification papers changed. In the wake of Vietnamese Pride, the trans community have come together to demand recognition of their gender identity.

    The Vietnamese Ministry of Health has suggested an adjustment of the country’s trans population's identification be added to a draft amendment to the Civil Code, as the country’s current regulations do not allow the “modification of transgender people’s identification."

  • 116. Zack12  |  August 12, 2015 at 10:08 pm

    Indeed, a George W district court judge ruling in our favor is one thing but the ones on the circuit courts are much more ideological.
    Wishing two bigots who made clear their feelings on us in Sutton's option upholding the gay marriage bans is a bad idea in my book, especially if they are sore losers.

  • 117. Fortguy  |  August 13, 2015 at 12:16 am

    I'm suspecting they're throwing in the towel on birth and death certificates in light of the SCOTUS Obergefell ruling and Judge Garcia's clear support of ME. Besides, they are now having to defend themselves on another birth certificate front regarding U.S.-born citizens of undocumented immigrants:

    Charles Kuffner, Off the Kuff: Lawsuit filed over state refusal to issue birth certificates

    State Health Services officials have decided that they no longer recognize matrículas consulares, a Mexican government identification card that Mexico issues to its citizens through its consulates abroad, as a valid form of ID. Nowhere in the 14th Amendment establishing birthright citizenship is there any requirement for parental identification at all as long as someone was born within the U.S. The amendment was needed during Reconstruction to extend citizenship to persons forcibly separated from their families by slave merchants and whose provenance was irrelevant to their previous status as someone's property.

    Nevertheless, nothing makes "constitutional conservatives" redder in the face and causing blood vessels to pulse in their foreheads than using the Constitution to demand that they stop discriminating upon those they hate. Besides LGBT persons, they really hate immigrants. They will lose.

    Charles Kuffner, Off the Kuff: I’m not the only one who thought the state’s response to the birth certificate lawsuit was specious

    In addition, Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, a Democrat, is now weighing in to try to pile on to the problems the state agency under GOP direction has created for itself.

    Julián Aguilar, The Texas Tribune: County Judge Asks State to Resolve Birth Certificate Issue

  • 118. JayJonson  |  August 13, 2015 at 6:59 am

    Complete victory over Paxton and Cole in Texas. The Department of State Health Services has issued the proposed guidelines requested by Judge Garcia. Lambda Legal has described it as a complete win across the board.

    Judge Garcia had given them until August 24 to develop the guidelines. The fact that they did it so quickly (after stalling John Hoskins-Stone and other widowers and same-sex parents for more than 40 days) shows that it really wasn't so difficult to comply with the law if they want to do so.

    The Towleroad article embeds the court filings from the Department of Health Services.

    Read more here:

  • 119. JayJonson  |  August 13, 2015 at 7:07 am

    Rowan County Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Defies Court Order and Turns Away More Gay Couples:

    from the Associated Press:

    Associated Press

    "The latest on a county clerk in Kentucky who has defied a judge's order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples (all times local):

    9:40 a.m.

    A Kentucky clerk's office has turned away two gay couples seeking marriage licenses, defying a federal judge's order that dismissed her argument involving religious freedom.

    Hours after the judge's order to issue licenses to same-sex couples, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office still turned away the two couples, one after the other, on Thursday morning.

    Davis has argued that her Christian beliefs prevent her from issuing licenses to same-sex couples. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled gay marriage bans unconstitutional, Davis stopped issuing licenses to any couple, gay or straight.

    Five couples sued her, and U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning on Wednesday ordered her to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling.

    On the street Thursday, gay-rights activists held signs reading "clerk not clergy" and "obey the law."


    9:30 a.m.

    A second gay couple has arrived at the Rowan County Clerk's office in Kentucky for a marriage license.

    James Yates and William Smith Jr. were turned away a month ago. They've been a couple for nearly a decade.

    On Thursday morning, they described a disconnect between the clerk's actions and their experience in the community of Morehead, a college town they say has long been open and accepting.

    They held hands as they walked into the clerk's office.

    From the street, gay-rights activists shouted "Good luck!" and held signs reading "clerk not clergy" and "obey the law."

    The couple then waited in line.

    Earlier Thursday morning, clerk Kim Davis' office turned away gay couple David Moore and David Ermold. On Wednesday, a federal judge ordered her to issue licenses to gay couples, rejecting her argument involving religious freedom and her Christina beliefs.


    9 a.m.

    A Kentucky clerk's office has turned away a gay couple seeking a marriage license, defying a federal judge's order that dismissed her argument involving religious freedom.

    Hours after the judge's order to issue licenses to same-sex couples, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office still turned away David Moore and David Ermold on Thursday morning.

    Deputy clerk Nathan Davis says the office was advised by attorneys with the Christian law firm Liberty Counsel to continue refusing same-sex couples as it appeals the order.

    Kim Davis has argued that her Christian beliefs prevent her from issuing licenses to same-sex couples. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled gay marriage bans unconstitutional, Davis stopped issuing licenses to any couple, gay or straight.

    Five couples sued her, and U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning on Wednesday ordered her to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling."

  • 120. DJSNOLA  |  August 13, 2015 at 8:15 am

    Wow Guam is putting the rest of the country to shame! Done and done!

  • 121. DJSNOLA  |  August 13, 2015 at 8:21 am

    Maybe we do so that a case like this is back at the supreme court !

  • 122. jpmassar  |  August 13, 2015 at 11:06 am

    An attorney for a county clerk in Kentucky says a judge telling her to issue gay marriage licenses is the same as ordering a nurse who has religious objections to perform an abortion or telling someone opposed to war to fire on an enemy soldier.

    Jonathan Christman represents Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis. He asked U.S. District Judge David Bunning to stay his order Thursday to give Davis time to appeal to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. He said if Davis were forced to issue licenses to same-sex couples it would be something no "earthly court can provide to rectify."

  • 123. DrBriCA  |  August 13, 2015 at 12:15 pm

    These reports should de included in the reply brief for her impending request for a stay on the Bunning decision. She's showing that she has no regard for the current order, whose effect should be in full force. She's in contempt of the order. Based of the fact that she's already ignoring the order, there's no reason to actually stay the order. If she cannot comply with provisions handed down from both the legislative and judicial branches, then she needs to be removed from office.

  • 124. weaverbear  |  August 13, 2015 at 12:32 pm

    "An attorney for a county clerk in Kentucky says a judge telling her to issue gay marriage licenses is the same as ordering a nurse who has religious objections to perform an abortion or telling someone opposed to war to fire on an enemy soldier. "

    Fine, she doesn't have to do this when she resigns her position. Period. If she is "unable" to comply with this current requirement of her job, even though this is a new requirement, then she is not qualified to hold the job. End of discussion.

    A person morally opposed to killing should not enlist to serve in a combatant position and if drafted, they have the option of applying for CO status.

    A nurse who is morally opposed to abortion, doesn't have to assist in one, as long as he or she is not applying to work in a place where those procedures are performed. As a physician, while I fully support any individual's right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy or not, I'm not comfortable doing them, per my personal beliefs, so I did not train to do them. Just because I won't do them doesn't mean someone else shouldn't have the right to have one OR if qualified, perform one. This woman's holding her position and refusing to issue licenses to couples who wish to marry and are legally entitled to do so, would be like my taking a position as an abortion provider and then refusing to do them.

    Incidentally, I don't believe in doing infant circumcision, so I don't, but if someone wishes to have one on their infant son, I refer them to someone who can and will. I'm not easy with doing an elective cosmetic surgical procedure on someone who's unable to consent to it. Given that, it would be unethical for me to apply for a position as a mohel, if I have no intention of doing them, just like it's unethical for Kim Davis to continue to serve as a county clerk and deny anyone their legal rights.

    Lastly Kim, as a fellow person of faith, let me simply say, my faith tells me how to live. It does not tell me to tell others how to live..

  • 125. Raga  |  August 13, 2015 at 12:42 pm

    Colorado Court of Appeals affirms Colorado Civil Rights Commission's ruling upholding an administrative law judge's decision that Masterpiece Cakeshop did discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Obergefell is already being felt in sexual orientation discrimination cases! I bet this'll go all the way to the US Supreme Court only to be denied cert! (Assuming the CO Supreme Court affirms, and that there's a federal claim in there somewhere.)

    The Court interprets Obergefell in support of the argument that the baker's distinction between the couple's sexual orientation and same-sex marriage ("we didn't discriminate based on sexual orientation, we only refused to bake for a same-sex marriage") is one without a difference:

    "Further, in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015), the Supreme Court equated laws precluding same-sex marriage to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Id. at ___, 135 S. Ct. at 2604 (observing that the “denial to same-sex couples of the right to marry” is a disability on gays and lesbians” which “serves to disrespect and subordinate them”). The Court stated: “The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality. This is true for all persons, whatever their sexual orientation.Id. at ___, 135 S. Ct. at 2599 (emphasis added). “Were the Court to stay its hand . . . it still would deny gays and lesbians many rights and responsibilities intertwined with marriage.” Id. at ___, 135 S. Ct. at 2606.

    "In these decisions, the Supreme Court recognized that, in some cases, conduct cannot be divorced from status. This is so when the conduct is so closely correlated with the status that it is engaged in exclusively or predominantly by persons who have that particular status. We conclude that the act of same-sex marriage constitutes such conduct because it is “engaged in exclusively or predominantly” by gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. Masterpiece’s distinction, therefore, is one without a difference. But for their sexual orientation, Craig and Mullins would not have sought to enter into a same-sex marriage, and but for their intent to do so, Masterpiece would not have denied them its services."

  • 126. Zack12  |  August 13, 2015 at 1:36 pm

    It will be intresting to see what the 6th Circuit does here.
    For all purposes, the 6th circuit (next to the 5th and 9th) is a George W far right court.
    A court that has two members (Sutton and Cook) who are no doubt still smarting over their ruling being overturned a couple of months ago.
    I could easily see them dragging this out as a way for revenge.
    Let's hope I'm wrong on that.

  • 127. guitaristbl  |  August 13, 2015 at 1:37 pm

    The 9th is a far right court ? I think you mean the 8th..

  • 128. ianbirmingham  |  August 13, 2015 at 2:43 pm

    "I will say that people are cruel, they are cruel, these people are cruel," said a tearful David Ermold, who was denied a license to marry his partner of 17 years. "This is how gay people are treated in this country. This is what it's like. This is how it feels."

    The clerk's office rejected the couples' bid for licenses just hours after U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning ordered Davis to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling.

    Davis wasn't at her office Thursday, but deputy clerk Nathan Davis said the office was advised by its attorneys with the Christian law firm Liberty Counsel to continue refusing same-sex couples as it appeals. …

    Attorneys for the couples said they were considering asking the judge to hold Kim Davis in contempt, which could bring a hefty fine or the threat of jail time. …

    After Yates and Smith were told that Kim Davis was on vacation Thursday, they marched to Rowan County Judge Executive Walter Blevins' office.

    He explained that his office isn't equipped to issue licenses. He also said that because deputy clerks are at work, he wasn't sure his signature would be valid.

    Blevins has been critical of Davis. He shook the couple's hands and told them: "I apologize that you had to come today and walk away empty-handed."

  • 129. VIRick  |  August 13, 2015 at 2:52 pm

    Andres, please note, further down in my post about Puerto Rico, that a number of same-sex couples are coming from Venezuela to participate in San Juan's mass marriage ceremony, scheduled to take place there this Sunday, 16 August 2015.

  • 130. VIRick  |  August 13, 2015 at 3:28 pm

    New Federal Lawsuit Concerning Birth Certificates in Florida, "Chin v. Armstrong:"

    "Despite repeated requests, the Florida Office of Vital Statistics has refused to recognize same-sex spouses on birth certificates, even after the US Supreme Court ruled in June that all states must fully recognize all marriages between same-sex spouses.

    "On 13 August 2015 three married same-sex couples, Catherina “Cathy” Pareto and Karla Arguelo, Debbie and Kari Chin, and Yadira Arenas and Alma Vazquez, filed a federal lawsuit challenging Florida’s refusal to issue them accurate birth certificates listing both spouses as parents of their children. Equality Florida, the largest organization representing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Floridians, is also a plaintiff in the case." The plaintiffs are being represented by attorneys from NCLR.

    Catherina Pareto and her spouse, Karla Arguelo, were the lead plaintiffs in an earlier state court lawsuit in Miami-Dade, "Pareto v. Ruvin," challenging Florida's same-sex marriage ban. They were also the first same-sex couple to be married in Florida, as Judge Zabel proceeded to marry them right in her court room immediately after she lifted her stay in the case.

    Read more here:

  • 131. Zack12  |  August 13, 2015 at 4:21 pm

    I meant the 8th… but I can't fix the typo now.. arrgggghhh!
    On a note related to the 9th though, Bush certainly did his best to try and blunt the left leaning 9th circuit with his Federalist Society judges.

  • 132. VIRick  |  August 13, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    Costa Rica's President Introduces Common-Law Same-Sex Marriage Bill

    On 13 August 2015, marking a significant step for Central America, the office of Costa Rican President Luis Guillermo Solís introduced a bill to the nation's parlimanent for the legalization of same-sex common-law marriages. In Costa Rica, common-law marriages carry the same rights and benefits as traditional marriage, but they require approval of a judge after three years of cohabitation. If the measure is approved, the pacifist country would become the first in Central America to legally-recognize same-sex couples as married.

    The president's center-left Citizen Action Party has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to human rights and LGBT equality. Earlier this year, a same-sex couple that had been together for 12 years was granted a common-law marriage by a judge, a major victory for LGBT rights in the region and an added catalyst for full legalization.

  • 133. ianbirmingham  |  August 13, 2015 at 5:24 pm

    More info from Equality Florida:

    Florida’s Bureau of Vital Statistics is refusing to allow hospitals to list both same-sex parents on their baby’s birth certificate. The state has had almost a year to fix this problem ever since a federal judge declared the marriage ban unconstitutional.

    Attorney General Pam Bondi could have avoided yet another costly lawsuit by directing all state agencies to simply follow the law. Instead she turned her back on repeated requests to take action and once again turned her back on LGBT Floridians.

    Today, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Florida attorneys Elizabeth Schwartz and Mary Meeks filed a complaint on behalf of Equality Florida Institute and three plaintiff couples to demand that the Bureau update its policies and respect the marriages of same-sex couples.

    Even now, AG Bondi could stop our suit with a phone call directing state agencies to comply with the law. …

    We hoped we wouldn’t have to take the fight back to court in order to protect our families. But the state of Florida is breaking the law, and we are 100% committed to holding the state of Florida accountable to treating LGBT people equally.

    We know the law is on our side, and we will continue to push forward and defend Florida’s families.

    Let's win this together,

    Nadine Smith
    CEO, Equality Florida

  • 134. allan120102  |  August 13, 2015 at 5:51 pm

    Lol was just going to post that, beat me by minutes. Btw Is almost a given that if any nation of CA legalize ssm it will be CR. As the southern countries of CA are typical more Liberal than the northern ones. Costa Rica and Panama are my bet on allowing ssm, but the northern ones like Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador will probably be the last as they are really conservative. Nicaragua might be influence by C.R but its more of a no than a yes. Btw this comes from someone that lives In Honduras and I am going to say homophobia is still strong. Even in University I have people that see me and talk to me but once they know I am gay they talk behinds my back or even stop talking to me. My boyfriend can;t even be out because all oh his friends always say that homosexuals are going to hell.

  • 135. sfbob  |  August 13, 2015 at 6:51 pm

    Fortunately he failed.

  • 136. VIRick  |  August 13, 2015 at 8:06 pm

    According to another source, "The Tico Times," the bill in question was actually presented to the Costa Rica legislature yesterday, 12 August 2015:

    Bill 18.483 would reform several articles of the family code to formally recognize “stable” relationships of more than three years between two people, regardless of their “sex, identity, sexual orientation or choice” with all the personal and property protections of legal marriage. Under the bill, if a same-sex couple meets the conditions of being together for more than three years, and living together, the couple could meet with a lawyer or appear before a civil judge to codify their relationship.

  • 137. weaverbear  |  August 13, 2015 at 8:27 pm

    Forgive the re-post of this folks, but we're already over 100 comments and this was originally posted as a reply, making it harder to find. Hopefully Jacob Combs or one of the other EoT staffers will get a new thread opened soon.

    Kim Davis, the county clerk from Rowan County Kentucky is defying the court orders and is refusing to issue marriage licenses to anyone right now. I guess in her mind if she refuses to issue licenses to everyone, then she isn't technically discriminating against the same sex couple she wishes to deny the ability to marry.

    "An attorney for a county clerk in Kentucky says a judge telling her to issue gay marriage licenses is the same as ordering a nurse who has religious objections to perform an abortion or telling someone opposed to war to fire on an enemy soldier. "

    Fine, she doesn't have to do this once she resigns her position. Period. If she's "unable" to comply with this specific current requirement of her job, even though it's a new requirement, then she's not qualified to hold the job. End of discussion.

    As for her attorney's assertions, a person morally opposed to killing should not enlist to serve in a combatant position and if drafted, they have the option of applying for CO status.

    A nurse who's morally opposed to abortion, doesn't have to assist in one, as long as he or she isn't applying to work in a place where those procedures are performed. As a physician, while I fully support any individual's right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy or not, I'm not comfortable doing them, per my personal beliefs, so I did not train to do them. Just because I won't do them doesn't mean someone else shouldn't have the right to have one OR if qualified, perform one. This woman's holding her position and refusing to issue licenses to couples who wish to marry and are legally entitled to do so, would be like my taking a position as an abortion provider and then refusing to provide them.

    Incidentally, I don't believe in doing infant circumcision, so I don't, but if someone wishes to have one on their infant son, I refer them to someone who can and will. I'm not easy with doing an elective cosmetic surgical procedure on someone who's unable to consent to it. Given that, it would be unethical for me to apply for a position as a mohel, if I have no intention of doing them, just like it's unethical for Kim Davis to continue to serve as a county clerk and deny anyone their legal rights, based on her moral or religious objections.

    Lastly Kim, as a fellow person of faith, let me simply say, my faith tells me how to live. It does not tell me to tell others how to live..

  • 138. Zack12  |  August 13, 2015 at 9:16 pm

    Wish I could say the same for other courts.

  • 139. VIRick  |  August 13, 2015 at 9:48 pm

    Now that Florida has been re-stirred, in digging back through my archives, I found this gem, the last sighting of Pam Bondi, the "illustrious" AG of Florida:

    "Elusive Bondi and Inauguration Day"

    Florida Inauguration Day, 6 January 2015:

    After ducking out the back doors and/or not even bothering to appear at any number of pre-inaugural activities, thus successfully dodging reporters and reporters' awkward questions, here's the best part of Bondi's re-inauguration, just as had been anticipated:

    "But she did attend her own inauguration, (having previously skipped the inaugural prayer breakfast), 90 minutes later on the steps of the Old State Capitol Building in downtown Tallahassee. Escorted by her brother, Brad, (rather than by any of her numerous ex-husbands or her commitment ceremony mate), Bondi …. smiled broadly as she took the oath of office.

    No mention was made of gay marriage during her inauguration. It was held across the street from the Leon County Courthouse, where three hours earlier, gay couples began signing their applications for marriage licenses. Governor Rick Scott, who has said it's up to Bondi to decide what to do on the issue, also didn't mention the topic in his speech."

    So, there they both were for their simultaneous inaugurations, inanely talking to no one in particular about nothing in particular, while being completely up-staged by far more exciting events, for which they both had a full frontal grandstand view, simultaneously occuring on the front steps of the Leon County courthouse, immediately across the street. And that's why or own Jim Brenner, lead plaintiff in "Brenner v. Scott," wanted to be across the street from the inauguration, assisting in the up-staging.

    Karma can be such a bitch, can't it?

  • 140. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 13, 2015 at 11:52 pm

    For those wondering, all of Mexico is considered part of North America, with Central American countries located South of Mexico (Guatemala and Belize through Panama). All of the countries South of the Panama/Columbia border are considered South American countries.

  • 141. Fortguy  |  August 14, 2015 at 12:30 am

    Gosh, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. The legislation would essentially legalize marriage between gay couples immediately if they can prove they've been shacking up for the past three years and can prove that to appropriate authorities. I wonder what percentage of straight couples seek formal marriage licenses after fewer years of shacking up without an unplanned pregnancy. Nevertheless, this is a positive step forward. Once any SSMs are recognized legally, it makes it so much harder to justify not recognizing anyone who seeks to marry.

    In the Central America/Caribbean region, I predict things will happen in this order: Dutch islands accepting ME followed by Costa Rica. Then either Panama or the British overseas territories of the Caymans or the Virgins. After that, probably Cuba. Beyond that, who knows?

    The Dominican Republic, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras are small, traditional countries. Nicaragua, whose political center is so much farther to the left than the rest, may come our way especially if Cuba precedes them. The rest of Spanish Central America needs expats to tell them that LGBT rights isn't the end of the world, and to return home loud and proud.

    The British Islands are horribly homophobic, but subject to regional court renderings and tourist markets. Imagine having a Montserrat wedding celebration that included white-gowned effigies of Phyllis Schlafly, Anita Bryant, and Michelle Bachmann (with Lady Marcus!) being dropped into the bowels of the island's volcano as a good-will ceremonial sacrifice. This would certainly give the island an edge over its rivals in attracting the gay marriage industry!

    Haiti would probably have to wait because creating a government that lasts longer than you can exhale and providing everyone with a universal first-grade education must be more of a priority.

    The independent nations of the British Commonwealth, such as Belize, Guyana, Jamaica, and the smaller islands are not a short-term hope. Maybe the Bahamas stand out as being more receptive. The rest will have to be embarrassed for their complete legal unconcern for the violence LGBT people face with an emphasis that international tourists who leave their comfy resort compounds are not immune.

  • 142. VIRick  |  August 14, 2015 at 12:36 am

    Argentina Cashes In as Same-Sex Marriage Capital

    To the rest of the world, Argentina is the land of wine, mate tea, tango, and soccer. More recently, however, the South American nation has gained a reputation as a destination for gay tourism in Latin America.

    Argentina is currently the only country in the world where any two consenting adults, regardless of nationality or sexual orientation, can get married. Based on Law 26,618, known as the Equal Marriage Act of 2010, same-sex couples can legally marry in the country and have their union recognized internationally. As a result, hundreds of couples every year travel to Argentina to tie the knot in the offices of the civil registry of Buenos Aires. An average of seven same-sex couples get married every day in Argentina.

    The company, Gay Marriage Argentina, has capitalized on this phenomenon and is now facilitating the marriage process for interested couples. Leandro, a company partner, stated they have already organized the marriages of more than 100 international couples since they began just over two years ago. He says most of their customers come from Venezuela, followed by couples from Colombia, Mexico, and Peru.

    The company offers a variety of services, including photography, a translator (for those who do not speak Spanish), and the required paperwork. Their packages vary from US$749 to $2,999, and premium services offer live streaming to anywhere in the world, hotel accommodations, visits to tourist attractions, and spa services

    According to the Argentinean Constitution, foreigners in the country enjoy the same rights and privileges as citizens, and can “make wills and marry under the law.” Leandro says Argentina is the only nation out of the 20-plus countries where same-sex marriage is legal that allows foreign couples to marry. “Canada is a special case, because the country allows foreigners to marry, but only if same-sex marriage is already legal in their home country,” he explains.

    “There are countries with reciprocity agreements. It’s not an immediate process, but it can be done. Your marriage can be legal even in countries where same-sex marriage has not been legalized,” he adds. Since same-sex marriage became legal in Argentina in 2010, over 10,500 same-sex couples have been married in the country, and 10 percent of those couples have been foreigners.

  • 143. VIRick  |  August 14, 2015 at 1:46 am

    "The legislation would essentially legalize marriage between gay couples immediately if they can prove they've been shacking up for the past three years and can prove that to appropriate authorities."

    This is basically what is already the law in Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador, Colombia, and Costa Rica (at least as applicable to heteros, but spreading to include same-sex couples, once the appropriate gender-neutral language is applied). We usually translate the concept to mean "civil union," with the emphasis on the fact that the government will recognize as "de facto" any union that has survived the required time-frame. The concept has been pushed by women's rights organizations all over Latin America because, despite the Catholic Church and the evangelistas, most of the poorer classes in those societies simply start living together without any formalities, and thus too, without any rights or protections for the stay-at-home partner. Most simply can't afford a church wedding, and thus don't bother. So far, we're mostly talking hetero, and that was the entire thrust of Laura Chinchilla, the previous president of Costa Rica, in her successful bid to obtain the 3-year time-frame to de facto governmentally-recognized civil unions in Costa Rica (and which thus provide all the benefits and protections assured a married couple).

    The time-frame in the other cited countries is two years, with Bolivia dropping the wait entirely once their new gender-neutral Family Code kicks in later this month. And Chile's waiting period will also disappear as of 21 October 2015.

    Essentially, Costa Rica is planning to stretch their de facto civil unions to include same-sex couples within the definition, which is basically what the other countries, already cited, have already done.

    "…. (with Lady Marcus!) …."

    OMG! I just realized what the reference alludes to!!!

  • 144. Pachilola  |  August 14, 2015 at 2:28 am

    I shall ask Obama to marry me – Robert Mugabe rant over gay marriage legalization

    Following the legalization of same sex marriage all over America, Zimbabwe’s 90-year-old president Robert Mugabe, has said he would ask President Barack Obama's hand in marriage ..While speaking in his weekly radio interview with Zimbabwe’s national radio on Saturday, he said

    “I’ve just concluded since President Obama endorses the same-sex marriage, advocates homosexual people and enjoys an attractive countenance thus if it becomes necessary , I shall travel to Washington, D.C., get down on my knee , and ask his [Obama’s] hand,”

    “I can’t understand how this people dare to defy Christ’s explicit orders as our Lord prohibited mankind from sodomy,”

    He also added that the American Government is run by pervert, Satan-worshipers who insults the Great American nation

  • 145. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 14, 2015 at 2:50 am

    More good news. I hope they follow through soon, and ME becomes legal in Isla Nublar as well. I'd love to get married in Costa Rica and honeymoon in Isla Nublar, 120 miles west of Costa Rica.

  • 146. AndresM11  |  August 14, 2015 at 9:36 am

    Thanks for the info VIRick! :) It is refreshing to learn that several LGBT brothers and sisters from my dear Venezuela are finally receiving the equal treatment each and every one of us deserve :) I'm so looking forward to seeing the pictures of the happy couples!

    By the way, my twitter account is @AndresM11 hope we can all stay in touch through social media :)

  • 147. AndresM11  |  August 14, 2015 at 9:44 am

    By the way, I've always been curious as to why the Obama administration hasn't been more active in the issue of nominating Circuit Judges. I think that currently there are 2 vacancies in the 3rd Circuit, 2 in the 5th, 1 in the 6th, 2 in the 7th, 1 in the 8th and 1 in the 11th, however, the only current nominee is Judge Restrepo for a seat in CA3, whose nomination was stalled in the Judiciary committee until recently and is now pending a vote by the Senate.

    I'm sure Mitch McConnell and his fellow republicans would do anything they can in order to prevent more Obama nominees from being confirmed, however I think the President should at least try to nominate some candidates so the voters realize it's the GOP who's stalling the whole process.

  • 148. DJSNOLA  |  August 14, 2015 at 11:18 am

    Spent time in Zambia last year on a safari . Everyone in the neighboring countries to Zimbabwe hates this man. Thankfully this ass is 90 years old and wont be long for this world. Hes not only an incredibly homophobic man but incredibly racist too. what he did to the dutch white farmers there is unforgivable. cant die soon enough.

  • 149. lengriff  |  August 14, 2015 at 11:58 am

    I hope it was a photo shoot safari!

  • 150. VIRick  |  August 14, 2015 at 4:34 pm

    Mexico: From Alex Alí Méndez Díaz:

    Mexico igualitario está imparable: Leyes de Hidalgo y Puebla en la SCJN, solicitamos el inicio de declaratorias de inconstitucionalidad en Oaxaca y Sinaloa.
    (Mexico equality is unstoppable: Laws of Hidalgo and Puebla (banning same-sex marriage) are before Mexico's Supreme Court, we (also) formally requested the initiation of the declarations of unconstitutionality in Oaxaca and Sinaloa.)

    In addition, other states with cases before Mexico's Supreme Court are Jalisco, Durango, Nuevo León, and Yucatán.

  • 151. Christian0811  |  August 15, 2015 at 12:00 am

    Well that was depressing, though enlightening :/

  • 152. NXA  |  August 15, 2015 at 7:27 am

    “Canada is a special case, because the country allows foreigners to marry, but only if same-sex marriage is already legal in their home country.”

    That can't be right? Edith Windsor got married to her female partner in Ontario, Canada at a time when same-sex marriage was not legal in the US (although recognized by the State of New York).

  • 153. NXA  |  August 15, 2015 at 7:30 am

    True say.

  • 154. NXA  |  August 15, 2015 at 7:39 am

    I wonder what the justification is for the three year period for the "common-law" marriages. I'm assuming there is another type of marriage ("traditional" through church) which doesn't require the three year cohabitation period. Costa Rica is definitely progressing which is of course great, but there seems to remain some discrimination in the treatment of same-sex couples vs straight couples. Unless I am missing something?

  • 155. JayJonson  |  August 15, 2015 at 9:21 am

    Thousands rally in Melbourne for marriage equality. This report from The Age includes a video of Labour Leader Bill Shorten addressing the crowd.

  • 156. VIRick  |  August 15, 2015 at 1:15 pm

    NXA, you're not missing a thing. There's progress, yet still some residual discrimination, given the intrinsic two-tier system. Still, comparing Costa Rica to its immediate neighbors (and the influence it has over them), Costa Rica is, as always, the leader in this arena. You can bet that people in both Panama and Nicaragua are watching and listening.

    As far as the 3-year cohabitation period is concerned, my guess is that that is the price the ex-president, Laura Chinchilla, had to pay in order to get any legislation passed in the first instance. Remember, she was thinking in terms of women's rights, and of extending benefits and protections to (mostly less-affluent) women already in a cohabiting hetero relationship.

    I also suspect that uncertain financial costs further figured into the initial equation, as it was probably difficult to determine in advance exactly how many applicants there would actually be. The more conservative view would be to set a fairly lengthly time-frame, given that one could still anticipate an initial rush, then determine real costs and their affordability, and shorten down the waiting time later, if need be.

    OK, I've dug back through my archives, and at the time of the law's original passage, here's what I wrote:

    "Costa Rica May Have Accidentally Approved Same-Sex Unions."

    Costa Rican lawmakers approved a bill on Monday (1 July 2013) that changed Article 22 of the "Law of Young People" according to the local newspaper, "La Nación." The text previously stated that unions were only recognized if they were between a man and a woman. Now, conservative lawmakers are realizing they may have accidentally approved same-sex unions by voting for the new bill that recognizes (in an English translation of some arcane, deliberately obscure Spanish):

    “The right to recognition without discrimination contrary to human dignity, social and economic effects of domestic partnerships that constitute publicly, notoriously unique and stable, with legal capacity for marriage for more than three years.”

    And they’re freaking out. Lawmaker Manrique Oviedo of the PAC (Citizen Action Party) is urging President Laura Chinchilla to veto the bill, stating that he “feels deceived” and “he made a mistake” when he voted for it, according to Amelia Rueda Al Aire. Justo Orozco, of the Costa Rican Renovation party, said the case would have to be looked into since “you can't give rights to those who don’t deserve them.”

    Yet, according to Lawmaker José Maria Villalta, a member of the leftist Broad Front Party, those conservative lawmakers simply didn’t read the entire bill before approving it. He said this has now "opened the door for recognizing the rights of same-sex unions," according to SDP Noticias.

    President Laura Chinchilla duly signed the legislation into law on 4 July 2013. And now, they're clarifying this original legislation to specifically include same-sex couples within the definition of common-law marriage (which according to at least one court in Costa Rica, is already the law).

  • 157. VIRick  |  August 15, 2015 at 2:36 pm

    Kentucky: Newspaper Slams Liberty Counsel’s “Losing Cause” In Support Of Renegade Clerk Kim Davis

    Dated 15 August 2015, the "Lexington Herald Leader" has published a BLISTERING editorial which attacks the finances and motives of the Liberty Counsel in their defense of renegade county clerk Kim Davis. An excerpt:

    Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis has chosen to prolong her moment in the limelight by defying a federal judge’s order to issue marriage licenses to legally-qualified people who apply for them. US District Judge David Bunning kindly but firmly told Davis Wednesday, 12 August 2015, that in our system her religious beliefs don’t trump the rights of the taxpayers who pay her almost $80,000 annual salary. Sharing Davis’ glow is Liberty Counsel, which describes itself as a nonprofit that provides pro bono legal representation related to “religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family,” funded by tax-deductible donations and grants. In 2012, those gifts reached just over $3.5 million, and in 2013 topped $4.1 million, according to IRS filings.

    The husband and wife team who founded and run Liberty Counsel, Anita and Matthew Staver, were paid $137,758 and $153,591, respectively, in 2013. The staff of five ran up $184,479 in travel expenses that year and spent $429,584 on conferences, conventions, and meetings. Liberty Counsel paid one independent contractor over $600,000 for “email alert services,” and another almost $500,000 for printing and mail services. “Case costs,” were reported at $105,487. Liberty’s attorneys know they can’t win the case in Rowan County. Same-sex marriage is legal since the Supreme Court’s 26 June decision, and it’s Davis’ job to issue marriage licenses. So, why is Liberty Counsel marching alongside Davis in this losing cause? It takes a lot to keep that marketing machine humming and those executives paid, and the only way to keep those donations coming is to stay in the news. For that purpose, a losing cause is just as good as, perhaps better than, a winning one.

    The piece concludes: “Davis can resign if she’s morally unable to issue the marriage licenses while the appeal is pending. Law-abiding, taxpaying Rowan County citizens have been denied their constitutional rights for almost two months while Davis has kept her job and Liberty has ginned up its marketing machine.”

  • 158. sfbob  |  August 15, 2015 at 3:10 pm

    Just one quibble with one of your statements. You said:

    "If she's 'unable' to comply with this specific current requirement of her job, even though it's a new requirement, then she's not qualified to hold the job."

    I would modestly suggest that it is NOT at all a new requirement. She was always required to issue marriage licenses to all legally-qualified applications. That was so both before and after June 26th. The fact that the universe of legally-qualified applicants has now been expanded is really neither here nor there. In fact, given that she clearly always held reservations about complying with the law–not to mention her oath of office–shows she was unfit to hold office in the first place.

  • 159. weaverbear  |  August 15, 2015 at 4:06 pm

    Point well taken. I'm sure she however sees it as a new requirement.

  • 160. JayJonson  |  August 16, 2015 at 8:37 am

    Pam Bondi doesn't think Florida should have to pay legal fees to the attorneys who represented the plaintiffs in the same-sex marriage battle.

  • 161. DJSNOLA  |  August 16, 2015 at 10:14 am

    hahaha I wasnt hunting. If you ever have the chance to go on a safari I encourage you to. Its beautiful!

  • 162. JayJonson  |  August 16, 2015 at 11:47 am

    So sorry to learn of the passing of Julian Bond, who campaigned for marriage equality and gay rights generally. He was a steadfast ally and will be sorely missed.

  • 163. jpmassar  |  August 16, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    Last week, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi objected to a motion concerning legal fees from lawyers who represented gay couples seeking to have their marriages recognized in Florida. In response, she wrote that because Florida voluntarily dismissed its appeal after the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the right to same-sex marriage nationwide, the state should not have to cover the cost of the lengthy appeals process it initiated.

  • 164. VIRick  |  August 16, 2015 at 4:02 pm

    Jay, this article from the "Tampa Bay Times" confuses me, and that may well be because Bondi herself is confused:

    "After losing its yearslong defense of Florida's same-sex marriage ban, the state is arguing it shouldn't have to pay the full cost of its crusade. Last week, Florida Attorney-General Pam Bondi objected to a motion concerning legal fees from lawyers who represented gay couples seeking to have their marriages recognized in Florida. In response, she wrote that because Florida voluntarily dismissed its appeal after the US Supreme Court affirmed the right to same-sex marriage nationwide, the state should not have to cover the cost of the lengthy appeals process it initiated.

    Last year, when a federal judge in Tallahassee struck down Florida's gay marriage ban, the Attorney General's Office went the route taken by many other Southern states and continued to fight. First, it appealed the ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Then, when judges there refused to delay the lower court's decision from taking effect, the state appealed again, taking the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. It was unsuccessful there as well. Each time the state filed an appeal, lawyers for the gay couples fought back.

    Yet on 10 August 2015, Bondi wrote that opposing lawyers "are not entitled to appellate attorneys' fees." She did not contest the likelihood that the state will be required to reimburse the attorneys for their work at the lower court level. A spokesman for her office declined to comment."

    OK, the only Florida appeals of which I am aware that were voluntarily withdrawn by the state following the US Supreme Court ruling were those in STATE court, namely "Pareto v. Ruvin" and "Huntsman v. Heavilin." To the best of my knowledge, the double-case in federal court, "Brenner v. Scott," is still pending before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition, all references in the quoted paragraphs #2 and #3 allude to the federal case and its history of appeals. Plus, where is Bondi filing her objection? The article doesn't say. Does Bondi herself know?

  • 165. sfbob  |  August 16, 2015 at 4:33 pm

    The article seems a bit unclear but I suspect Bondi is unclear as well.

    The fact is that Bondi continued to litigate all of the cases up until Obergefell was decided. So they weren't moot until then and some may still not be moot to the extent to the state has not requested to withdraw them. And even if they file such a request now they have essentially been holding the plaintiffs hostage (though of course they are now free to marry regardless, based on Obergefell). So who does Bondi think she's kidding? She'll probably have to find out the hard way that her actions have consequences.

  • 166. sfbob  |  August 16, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    Oh there's no doubt about how she sees things. And she's quite incapable of seeing that she's simply wrong.

  • 167. seannynj  |  August 16, 2015 at 8:30 pm

    You're totally over looking the fact that those white dutch farmers stole the ancestral lands from the blacks through apartheid. Mugabe maybe scum but at least he has righted a wrong as leader of his country that no American president has dared to do here.

  • 168. VIRick  |  August 16, 2015 at 8:38 pm

    Renovando Votos en su Isla Durante Histórica Ceremonia
    (Renewing Vows in Puerto Rico during Historic Ceremony)

    Pareja del mismo sexo formaliza su unión en la boda masiva celebrada hoy en el Paseo de la Princesa en el Viejo San Juan.
    ( Same-sex couples formalized their union in the mass wedding held today (16 August 2015) in the Paseo de la Princesa in Viejo San Juan.)

    You can see 43 of the couples' wedding pictures in sequence at the bottom of this article from "El Nuevo Día," including that of Ada Conde Vidal and her wife Ivonne Alvarez, the lead plaintiffs in the Puerto Rico marriage suit.

  • 169. VIRick  |  August 16, 2015 at 8:53 pm

    Lágrimas de Emoción en la Primera Boda Gay Masiva
    (Tears of Joy in the First Mass Gay Wedding)

    Bajo lluvia, unas 60 parejas se casaron hoy en un gran evento en el Viejo San Juan.
    (On a rainy day, some 60 couples were married today in a major event in Old San Juan.)

    More wedding pictures accompany this additional article:

  • 170. VIRick  |  August 16, 2015 at 11:44 pm

    AUSTRALIA: Liberal Party MP Warren Entsch Defies PM Tony Abbott, Introduces Marriage Equality Bill

    On 17 August 2015, member of Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s own Liberal Party introduced a marriage equality bill in defiance of Abbott’s mandate that all government MPs vote against any such attempt. The BBC reports:

    The bill was introduced by government backbencher Warren Entsch, one of several government backbenchers who plan to defy Mr Abbott by crossing the floor of the parliament to vote in favour of marriage equality. Mr Abbott has said the matter should be “put to the people” in a non-binding plebiscite after the next general election, due in 2016. Meanwhile, cross bench senators have backed an Australian Greens bill calling for a gay marriage plebiscite before the election. In an impassioned speech, Mr Entsch spoke of how his bill, which has cross-party support, was designed to promote a more inclusive Australia. “Being gay is not a lifestyle choice,” the Queensland MP told the parliament. “This bill does not create different classes of marriage,” he said. “A divided nation is what we will be if we continue to allow discrimination in relation to marriage on the basis of a person’s sexuality.”

    Abbott has threatened to fire any Coalition frontbenchers who defy him on gay marriage, but that threat apparently does not extend to backbenchers like Entsch. It appears unlikely that Entsch’s bill would be approved.

    I don't seem to understand the parliamentary system. Why would his measure be unlikely to be approved? Up until that last sentence, I was quite excited about the prospects.

    Also, a non-binding plebiscite is a total sham and a complete waste of time, money, and energy, as it won't commit anyone to anything.

  • 171. Steve27516  |  August 17, 2015 at 7:16 am

    Rick, thank you for posting this. What a beautiful day for all my friends in Puerto Rico!

  • 172. ebohlman  |  August 17, 2015 at 12:56 pm

    The Equality Act should be named after him.

  • 173. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 17, 2015 at 1:01 pm


    It is the CON way – if you are against it, appear to be busy on the problem in order to delay, delay, delay (in the US, it is 'we must study the situation more to see if there IS a problem'; in Australia it must be holding non-binding plebiscites). And if someone interferes with your delay, er, I mean appearing to be busy, then put them off by saying, "Can't you see I'm busy working on your problem?"

    Oh, and isn't your last sentence underplaying how much of a sham a non-binding plebiscite is AFTER the election?

  • 174. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 17, 2015 at 1:06 pm

    My solution?

    The state of Florida pays little to nothing. Pam Bondi herself is responsible for the parts not paid by the state of Florida.

  • 175. Waxr  |  August 17, 2015 at 1:43 pm

    I had the honor of meeting Julian Bond back in the 1960s when he was fighting for his rightful seat in the Georgia legislature. He was a small, soft-spoken man, but people listened to him.

  • 176. GregInTN  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:19 pm

    The District Court has granted a stay:

  • 177. Silvershrimp0  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:24 pm


  • 178. VIRick  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    Per Equality Case Files:

    The 6th Circuit issued a final order and the mandates this morning, 17 August 2015, in the marriage cases that went to the Supreme Court (MI, TN, KY, OH). This is a formal move that closes out the 6th Circuit's involvement and returns jurisdiction in the cases back to the district courts.

    The mandates are all identical and simply read, "Pursuant to the court's disposition that was filed 08/17/2015 the mandate for this case hereby issues today."

  • 179. FredDorner  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    The judge didn't actually issue a stay pending appeal, he merely gave the bigoted clerk the courtesy of not arresting her while she files an emergency stay request with the 6th circuit, but he's not actually staying his own order (apart from a very temporary stay).

    I can understand why the courts do that sometimes but if I were the judge I'd just toss her in jail. As a procedural matter I can see an argument for not enforcing the order before the 6th circuit declines the emergency stay request, primarily so the Judge Executive for the county isn't put in the position of issuing the license in her absence and thereby making the case moot.

    More detail here:

  • 180. VIRick  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:38 pm

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 17 August 2015, in "Miller v. Davis," the Rowan County KY Clerk who won't issue marriage licenses:

    Davis's motion for a stay pending appeal is denied (at the District Court level), but the Court temporarily stays said order "pending review of Defendant Davis’ Motion to Stay by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals."

  • 181. FredDorner  |  August 17, 2015 at 2:56 pm

    Here's the link to the order:

    Unless the 6th circuit judges are complete idiots and grant a stay, this should all be over in a few days.

  • 182. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 17, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    I wouldn't put anything past the sixth circuit. It'll all depend on the luck of the draw and the panel selected. If she looses a stay request at the panel level, I wonder if she can request an en banc review. I wonder how far the Liberty Council is prepared to take this. Probably all the way to SCOTUS because their fight makes for good fund raising fodder from their supporters. After SCOTUS denied cert to the Albuquerque photographer, I doubt they would grant cert here. Although, there may be some differences as New Mexico has anti discrimination laws including sexual orientation, and Kentucky probably does not.

  • 183. Zack12  |  August 17, 2015 at 4:06 pm

    I agree, let's hope Sutton or Cook aren't on the panel that will be hearing this.

  • 184. FredDorner  |  August 17, 2015 at 4:15 pm

    The Kentucky case involves a government actor and the Establishment and Equal Protection clauses of the US constitution, while the New Mexico case involved a private actor and the state's public accommodation laws. A state actor in Kentucky simply cannot do what this clerk is trying to do – otherwise one's rights under the US constitution would vary from county to county.

    This satire is worth reading and makes a few good points:

  • 185. HalPri  |  August 17, 2015 at 5:38 pm

    I don't understand something. Back before the SSM ruling, surely Davis was occasionally sick, or on vacation, or otherwise not in. Were couples unable to get marriage licenses on those days? Or was there someone else in the office that could sign for her when she was away? And if there is such a person, why can't that person issue licenses in cases that offend Davis's sensibilities? I'm wondering why the judge didn't say, we'll let the appeals court decide about Davis in particular, but meanwhile couples that come to her office need to get licenses.

  • 186. VIRick  |  August 17, 2015 at 6:04 pm

    Agreed. Furthermore, this preliminary injunction remains in effect:

    On 12 August 2015, the Federal Judge, David L. Bunning, granted the preliminary injunction against Rowan County Clerk, Kim Davis.

    "IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 2) against Defendant Kim Davis, in her official capacity as Rowan County Clerk, is hereby granted.

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Kim Davis, in her official capacity as Rowan County Clerk, is hereby preliminarily enjoined from applying her 'no marriage licenses' policy to future marriage license requests submitted by Plaintiffs."

  • 187. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 17, 2015 at 8:38 pm

    True, the actors are different, but I believe that in the Kentucky Case as in the New Mexico case, the discriminators are making the same claims, relying their "religious liberties" or "deeply held beliefs" to deny services. However, you are right in that there is a distinct difference between a business denying service based on its owners beliefs and a public official who basically works for all the tax payers who can't discriminate in what taxes they will pay based on their deeply held beliefs. I can see a public business having some latitude (very little in fact), though an employee or public servant should have no latitude whatsoever to deny services to certain segments of the population. Doing so effectively subverts the establishment clause when an individual uses his beliefs or religion as a test as to he or she will or will not serve. If Sutton or some such judge allows this, they're opening a can of worms to Jewish, Buddhist or Muslim people not serving Xtians and vice versa. This clerks claims are absolutely ridiculous.

  • 188. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 17, 2015 at 9:15 pm

    From what I understand, there are five clerks under her. Four are fundies (so fundie they probably make the usual fundie seem middle of the road), and have stated they will not sign, even for Davis, any license request, especially for same-sex couples. The fifth hasn't stated whether s/he (I'm pretty certain it is a woman) would sign or not.

    I'm not sure if the 'alternate' when Davis is away is among the first group described above, or the fifth person who hasn't stated if they would or would not sign a marriage license.

  • 189. VIRick  |  August 17, 2015 at 9:44 pm

    One of the deputy clerks, on the nut-job side of the equation, is her own son.

  • 190. VIRick  |  August 17, 2015 at 10:16 pm

    Texas Gay Couple Settles Lawsuit over Marriage License Denial

    Granbury, TX — Attorneys for a same-sex couple who sued a Texas county clerk who denied them a marriage license on religious grounds have announced they’ve reached a settlement of the lawsuit. In a statement, attorneys for Jim Cato and Joe Stapleton said Monday, 17 August 2015, that they’ve settled their federal lawsuit against Hood County Clerk Katie Lang for what they’ve spent in attorneys’ fees, almost $44,000.

    Hood County Attorney Lori Kaspar referred requests for comment to the county’s special attorney, Grant Blaies of Fort Worth, who didn’t return messages. Cato and Stapleton filed the lawsuit on 6 July 2015, after they’d been refused a marriage license for almost a week, shortly after the Supreme Court recognized the right of same-sex couples to marry. The couple was granted a license later the very day they filed their lawsuit.

  • 191. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 18, 2015 at 2:42 am

    I read somewhere, that one of the clerks in her office is willing to issue licences, but this woman, the actual elected clerk refuses to allow the deputy clerk to issue licences because the licence would still have the her (Davis)'s name on the licence. And she can't have none of that….it would appear to everyone and her god that she condones same sex marriage. So, she's holding all potential marrying couples hostage because….she's afraid god will smite her and send her to the 7th level of hell for disobeying him….I guess. Or she's just a bigot.

  • 192. TheVirginian722  |  August 18, 2015 at 2:54 am

    No surprise there, as nepotism runs in the family. Kim Davis was elected in November 2014 to succeed her mother, Jean Bailey, who had served as Clerk for 37 years. Of course, Kim worked in her mother's office for most of that time. They consider it their family business.

    The dynasty seems to be losing its appeal to the voters, though. In the May 2014 Democratic primary (yes, Kim is a Democrat), she received 1,817 votes, Elwood Caudill received 1,794 votes, and Charlotte Combess received 322 votes, giving Kim a 23-vote win with 46% of the vote. In the November 2014 general election, Kim received 3,909 votes and Republican John Cox received 3,444.

    Rowan County is strongly Democratic by tradition, and all 18 of its voting precincts have huge Democratic majorities in voter registration. In a state where he was extremely unpopular, even President Obama won 45% of Rowan's vote in 2012, and Mitch McConnell lost the county in his 2014 re-election bid.

    In the 2014 general election, the Democrats swept 15 of 16 local partisan offices on the ballot, losing only the office of "Jailer" to the Republicans. (Yes, Rowan County elects their Jailer.) Isn't it nice to know that Kim will be in the custody of a Republican Jailer when she is put behind bars?

    When she was elected, she promised that "I will be the very best working clerk that I can be and will be a good steward of their tax dollars and follow the statutes of this office to the letter.” Obviously, she has done none of those things.

    One of the hot issues in Kim's campaign was covered in "Candidate Complicit In Dog Napping Wins Election," in which Kim's daughter, Ally Mae, was caught on surveillance tape stealing Ross Madden's dog, "Charlie Brown." Kim and her courthouse cronies are accused of covering up the crime.

  • 193. JayJonson  |  August 18, 2015 at 6:11 am

    As Rose would say, stupid should hurt. I hope that the county taxpayers are well aware of how much Lang's stupidity has cost them.

    Read more here:

  • 194. JayJonson  |  August 18, 2015 at 6:52 am

    Of course, the local newspaper, Hood County News, is trying to spend this as a victory for the county since they got the lawyers to settle for $44,000 instead of the $70,000 they originally asked for. Moreover, they think it is worthy of celebration that they are the first county to have to pay for the clerk's refusal to follow the law. Read more:

  • 195. aiislander  |  August 18, 2015 at 7:24 am

    You folks might enjoy this article on the "Incoherence of Court’s dissenters in same-sex marriage ruling"

  • 196. A_Jayne  |  August 18, 2015 at 8:16 am

    Good article. I especially liked this part:

    Justice Roberts continues by asking “Just who do we think we are?” to contradict the practices of these ancient civilizations. The answer, John, is that we’re the people who established a nation based on human rights and human liberty. We’re the people who overturned the traditions that perpetuated inequality and injustice for all those previous millennia.

    See more at:

  • 197. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 10:30 am

    Hi Fellow EoT's,
    Wow, I hadn't realized I had been off for so long……….it's ONLY been a week since I had total knee replacement surgery, so I've been laid up on the couch with the wife's computer.

    Anyways, have a great day folks!!!

  • 198. davepCA  |  August 18, 2015 at 11:43 am

    Hey, get well soon! As someone who has had experience with multiple similar surgeries, I can recommend that you follow the instructions from your doctor and physical therapist exactly – I've tried it both ways, following all instructions for one procedure, and slacking off with some of the instructions for a different procedure, and I can assure you that you'll heal faster and better, and get over the physical discomfort much quicker, if you do everything they tell you to do. Great to see you here again!

  • 199. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:08 pm

    Hi Dave,
    Thanks for the well wishes and yes, I have heard the advice to follow the directions and am doing what I need to do. Tomorrow starts physical therapy

    My surgeon told Lee and myself after I came out of recovery that the knee was really ugly inside and should have been done at LEAST 5 years ago……but NO, the VA really messed up and let me suffer……..but in just one short week, it's really feeling 100% better…..I look forward to the day, where the knee is functional and has little to no pain.

  • 200. AndresM11  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:18 pm

    Hi Rose! Hope you get well soon! We miss u a lot over here :)

    I don't know why, but medical exams have always terrified me hahaha (I passed out the last time I had a blood test, so you can imagine).

    I'm really glad everything went well in the surgery and that soon you'll have a 100% functional knee! :) Needless to say, we'll be all rooting for you and cheering you up during your recovery.

    PD: By the way, have you heard about the Kentucky clerk case? I read that she's still not issuing licenses to anyone despite a District Court's order :s That woman reminds me of a phrase you always tell us "stupid should hurt" hehehe

  • 201. JayJonson  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:32 pm

    Best wishes for a speedy recovery from the surgery, Rose.

  • 202. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:33 pm

    Thank you……but trust me, I have a couple of bruises that will take a few more days to heal they hit the lil veins so hard…….lol. I'm a diabetic and because of my size, they must think, it's hit the body hard and we'll go from there……..they had their lancet set to a number 5 and bruised my finger tip…..ouch!!!1

    I am able to get up off the couch and am able to go from couch to restroom pretty much on my own, still not eating much nor sleeping much, but working on it……lol :-)

    As for the Clerk in Kentucky……the woman should have been thrown in jail on contempt charges, should have been fined for EVERY day she WASN'T doing her job and she should be IMPEACHED!!!


  • 203. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:36 pm

    Thanks Jay……it's nice to be appreciated and fo have been missed :-)

  • 204. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 18, 2015 at 12:59 pm

    I agree with Dave – follow the instuctions diligently!

    One of my aunts had both knees replaced – with the first, she 'slacked off' and had a very difficult time getting her knee to work properly. With the second knee, she followed her doctor's and therpapist's instructions much more diligently, and was up and walking on her knee much more quickly, and with much less pain that went away much more rapidly.

    And strange as it may seem, I hear a hip replacement is a breeze when compared with a knee replacement. A hip replacement is not a 'walk in the park', but when compared with knee replacement, it is.

    I know something about major surgery – I had an appendectomy that resulted in a large scar across my lower abdomen (burst appendix that caused MAJOR infection) – for the first week, I couldn't even sit up without a tremendous amount of pain – a person doesn't realize how much the lower abdominal muscles get used for everyday activities. Four months later, I was still told by my doctor to not lift anything more than 25 pounds.

  • 205. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    Thanks Mike, I have a great water cooler therapy box, which is doing it's thing, I'm taking my meds like I'm suppose to and being careful in all walking areas. Tomorrow is the start of double trouble…..Therapy……….lol!!!

  • 206. JayJonson  |  August 18, 2015 at 1:39 pm

    I was thinking of you earlier today and quoted you in a post above about the clerk in Hood County Texas! So you are both appreciated and missed.

  • 207. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 18, 2015 at 1:45 pm

    I guess the attorneys for Hood County should speak with the attorneys for the Fort Wayne-South Bend archdiocese.

    After a jury awarded $1.9 million to a teacher who had undergone in vitro fertilization, the judge cut the award to $403,608.
    (… )

    I have a feeling this will not be the last word in this case. (Indiana is in the 7CA.)

  • 208. VIRick  |  August 18, 2015 at 2:44 pm

    From Equality Case Files:

    At the state court level, the Western District Court of Appeals in Missouri ruled on 18 August 2015 that an unmarried non-biological parent can seek custody and visitation with the children she raised with her same-sex partner.

    From NCLR's press release:
    The decision today, in "McGaw v. McGaw," recognizes that Melissa (McGaw) has been a parent to the children for the children’s entire lives and that she may seek custody to protect those parent-child bonds, even though she is not a biological parent. The Court of Appeals overruled an earlier decision in a different case, "White v. White," which had previously ruled that non-biological parents could not petition for custody.

  • 209. JayJonson  |  August 18, 2015 at 2:54 pm

    VIRick, do you realize that Donald Trump has a peripheral connection with the Virgin Islands? His older sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, is an appellate judge who sits on the Third Circuit and is responsible for the Virgin Islands. She was appointed a District Court judge in New Jersey by Ronald Reagan and elevated to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals by Bill Clinton.

    "As an appellate judge for the Third Circuit — with chambers in Newark and jurisdiction over Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the United States Virgin Islands — she has forcefully rebuked prosecutors and defense lawyers, but also trial judges she considered inept. And in 2000, still new to the appeals court, she wrote a 40-page unanimous decision calling a New Jersey law banning late-term abortions “unconstitutionally and incurably vague” and saying that it put an “undue burden” on women’s constitutionally protected right to the procedure."

    Alas, Judge Barry's appointment to the bench features a cameo appearance by Donald Trump's former lawyer, the infamous Roy Cohn.

    Read more:

  • 210. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 3:01 pm

    Thanks Jay for thinking of me………I appreciate you and others……..and I'm glad to be back :-)

  • 211. Elihu_Bystander  |  August 18, 2015 at 3:33 pm

    Philly Archbishop Evicts LGBT Events Scheduled for World Meeting of Families; New Ways Ministry and Equally Blessed Respond

    New Ways Ministry’s workshop, “Transforming Love: Gender Identity from Catholic Perspectives” workshop, which was scheduled to take place at St. John the Evangelist parish, Philadelphia, on September 26, 2015, has been evicted from the space by Archbishop Charles Chaput of the Philadephia Archdiocese.

    The Moderator of the Curia of the archdiocese phoned the parish’s pastor, Fr. John Daya, OFM Cap, to tell him that the archbishop had seen a brochure for the program and did not want it to take place. Fr. Daya informed New Ways Ministry of the decision.

    Additionally, programs that were also scheduled at the parish by the Equally Blessed coalition have also been cancelled. The parish was to be a hospitality center for the Equally Blessed pilgrims, 14 families with LGBT members, who are attending the week-long World Meeting of Families. The Equally Blessed coalition consists of Call To Action, DignityUSA, Fortunate Families, and New Ways Ministry.

    Organizers are working on re-scheduling both the New Ways Ministry and Equally Blessed programs to the nearby Arch Street United Methodist Church, Philadelphia.

  • 212. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 18, 2015 at 7:39 pm

    Was wonderin what had happened to you. Welcome back.
    Get well soon.

  • 213. RnL2008  |  August 18, 2015 at 7:45 pm

    Hey Sweetie,
    Hope all is well with you and yours…..missed all of you folks and if ya ever want to drop me a note, my e-mail is posted on my profile page.

  • 214. Fortguy  |  August 18, 2015 at 9:45 pm

    Let me provide a Texas voter ID law update. In addition to the federal lawsuit in which the 5th Circuit recently struck down the law but allowed to remain in force until either district court issued a ruling conforming to their decision or the conclusion of a likely appeal by the state, there is a second lawsuit in state court:

    Charles Kuffner, Off the Kuff: Meyers voter ID lawsuit to proceed

    Let me provide some background and context to this case. Texas has two state supreme courts which to the best of my knowledge is a characteristic only Oklahoma shares. In matters lacking any federal concern, the Texas Supreme Court is the final arbiter in civil law while the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is where criminal appeals ultimately end.

    One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit currently filed in a Dallas County state district court is Justice Larry Meyers of the CCA. Meyers is suing, not as a justice on the state's highest criminal law bench, but as a private citizen. Although Meyers was last elected to the CCA as a Republican, he unsuccessfully sought election last year to a place on SCOTX (again, rhymes with "Kotex") as a Democrat claiming the GOP has moved too hard right for his comfort. By doing so, he is now the only Democrat to hold statewide office in two decades as he continues to serve the remainder of his term on the CCA until the 2016 election.

    The other plaintiff is a Dallas County election worker. The defendants are the state (represented, of course, by the awesome legal mind of AG Ken Paxton), Texas Secretary of State Carlos Cascos (the Texas SOS is not elected, and Cascos was appointed by Gov. Greg Abbott), and the Dallas County elections administrator.

    The plaintiffs have won the early round with the court ruling against defendants' motions deciding the court does have jurisdiction and upholding the plaintiffs' standing.

    Texas judges can be either very partisan, including the SCOTX majority and this creep, or dedicated to the ideal that judges should be impartial jurists making evidence-based decisions and generally resent being forced to run on partisan ballots at all. I suspect Meyers is among the latter. Indeed, as Dallas and Harris counties have been turning blue in recent years, many judges have been switching their partisan affiliations to Democratic in droves in order to keep their jobs.

    Meyers' footwork against voter ID is greatly appreciated, but it also undoubtedly serves another political motive on his part. He needs to convince Dem donors and interest groups that he is on their side as he seeks perhaps either reelection or a run at another seat on SCOTX in 2016, or a run for AG in 2018 or 2016 if Paxton is forced to vacate his seat so soon.

  • 215. VIRick  |  August 18, 2015 at 10:31 pm

    "…. SCOTX (again, rhymes with "Kotex") …."

    Fortguy, although it was a very difficult decision, I still feel that that's the best line, given its unquestioned aptness, in the entire account!

  • 216. VIRick  |  August 18, 2015 at 10:39 pm

    Jay, these small islands are way too tiny for such a large assh-le.

  • 217. Fortguy  |  August 18, 2015 at 11:18 pm

    Oh, too bad because I've mentioned the rhyme in a previous post some time ago! The good news is that most Dallas County judges are now Democrats. There is an intermediate appeals court where this case may go before ending up at sCOTEX where the case would be swatted down like liberal anti-colonial flies from Kenya. Thankfully, there is the federal track. Depending on how that works out, along with the three-judge federal panel in San Antonio considering redistricting cases, Texas' participation in a March 1 Super Primary looks increasingly doubtful, and a special session of the Lege increasingly likely. Stay tuned.

  • 218. Rick55845  |  August 19, 2015 at 5:11 am

    This topic is 10 days old. It's about time for another one. Maybe "Scottie’s (still) out of service…briefly! Part Deux!!"

  • 219. VIRick  |  August 19, 2015 at 12:09 pm

    Arizona: Ben Carson Heads To Border To Help Homocon Sheriff Paul Babeu Stop Future Mexican Boyfriends

    Ben Carson is heading to the Arizona border today to help homocon Sheriff Paul Babeu figure out how to stop Babeu’s future Mexican boyfriends from getting into the country. In March 2012 the Mexican ex-boyfriend of Babeu sued him for $1M, alleging that Babeu had threatened to have him deported if the boyfriend were to out him. Babeu’s run for the US House fizzled shortly thereafter, but not before it was revealed that he had spoken at an event staged by a group that wants to end illegal and most legal immigration and wants to end automatic citizenship for children born in the United States. Last year Babeu led a protest against migrant children during which “patriots” screamed and waved anti-immigrant placards as the children passed in government buses. Several weeks ago Babeu appeared on Fox News to defend Donald Trump’s racist attacks on Mexican immigrants. Babeu: “He’s tapping into the anger that I and every American should feel.”

  • 220. JayJonson  |  August 19, 2015 at 1:28 pm

    Judge Bunning has clarified that the temporary stay of his order that Kim Davis must issue marriage licenses to all qualified applicants expires on August 31 unless the Sixth Circuit rules otherwise. Read more here:

  • 221. VIRick  |  August 19, 2015 at 4:17 pm

    On the other hand, later today, 19 August 2015, Kim Davis' attorneys filed an "Emergency Motion for Stay of Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal" with the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals:

    It goes on and on for 313 pages!! I never got past the bold-lettered "Woe is me" part concerning the deadline date of 31 August 2015 in Judge Bunning's clarification.

  • 222. davepCA  |  August 19, 2015 at 4:22 pm

    Wow, Babeu is really quite a piece of work. I must have somehow missed this earlier news about him and his drama:

  • 223. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 19, 2015 at 5:28 pm

    Is Benny going down to Arizona to "help"… or to hitch his wagon to the anti migrant media train… see how many sound bites and endorsements he can get, as well as booking some air time on the news talk circuits. If he weren't campaigning for office, he wouldn't be headed down to Arizona to "help" some two bit back woods sheriff. Why is he all of a sudden interested in headin' down to Arizona to "help".

  • 224. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 19, 2015 at 5:39 pm

    You sure are optimistic aren't ya…

  • 225. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 19, 2015 at 5:48 pm

    I really really really hope the sixth decides to sit on her "emergency" stay request indefinitely, and when Davis continues to contempt the district court, Federal Marshalls show up and cart her off to a women's Federal Pen, book her, spray her down after a thorough body cavity search, and throw away the key… until she decides to comply with the law or quit. I bet she changes her tune after wearing orange for three days.

  • 226. ianbirmingham  |  August 19, 2015 at 6:16 pm

    After only 227 comments? Aren't over 400 comments needed to get a new thread?

  • 227. Tony MinasTirith  |  August 19, 2015 at 7:49 pm

    Yeah… if we're lucky.

  • 228. VIRick  |  August 19, 2015 at 7:53 pm

    Just for the record, Babeu is (still) the elected Sheriff of Pinal County AZ (Florence). It occupies most of the rural desert area between Phoenix and Tucson. You can see his up-dated pic here:

    And, btw, Ben Carson will be disappointed, as Pinal County doesn't actually touch directly against the Mexican border.

    Nevertheless, despite this "minor" geographical problem, here's what Babeu's sheriff's website has to say about the border:

    "Pinal County is the number one pass through county in all of America for drug and human smuggling, ground zero in the fallout over America’s unsecured Southern border.

    Pinal County contains an estimated 75 – 100 drug cartel cells and listening posts/observation posts, used to facilitate the illegal transportation of people and narcotics into the United States. There have been cartel murders on residential streets, cold blooded executions, and attacks on law enforcement.

    Sheriff Babeu has acted decisively to disrupt, dismantle and destroy cartel activities. He also assisted Senators McCain and Kyl with the “10-Point Border Security Plan.”

    Sheriff Babeu has emerged as a national leader on border security, and an outspoken critic of the Federal government’s failure to fulfill their most solemn obligation,– to keep us safe."

    There's no mention about boyfriends, past or present, let alone about any Mexican of any description ever being in his life.

  • 229. TheVirginian722  |  August 19, 2015 at 10:39 pm

    The Emergency Motion only "goes on and on" for 22 pages. All the rest of the 313 pages consists of exhibits of all the District Court documents we've already seen, including the transcripts of the two hearings which Judge Bunning conducted.

  • 230. Fortguy  |  August 19, 2015 at 10:42 pm

    Oh, good grief!

    Pinal County contains an estimated 75 – 100 drug cartel cells and listening posts/observation posts, used to facilitate the illegal transportation of people and narcotics into the United States.

    And he knows this because he tried to count them? Is his margin of error a result of the total exceeding his ten fingers? Once identified, didn't the thought ever occur to him to disable and eliminate them?

    There have been cartel murders on residential streets, cold blooded executions, and attacks on law enforcement.

    Funny. I wonder how much his local businesses, chambers of commerce, and tourist boards appreciate his characterization of local crime. Many border communities such as El Paso and Laredo make a point of emphasizing how much vastly safer their cities are overall in FBI violent crime statistics. Donald Trump even insulted Laredo suggesting he was placing himself at risk and in danger on his recent visit there. Statistically, Laredo is much safer than Manhattan.

    Sheriff Babeu has emerged as a national leader on border security, and an outspoken critic of the Federal government’s failure to fulfill their most solemn obligation,– to keep us safe.

    Too bad he hasn't emerged as a competent, effective, and soft-spoken hero dedicated to using his resources to keep Pinal County safe. Not that I'm suggesting that is in any way his job or anything.

  • 231. Elihu_Bystander  |  August 19, 2015 at 11:38 pm

    Re: Miller v Davis Emergency Motion to the 6th circuit

    The text contains electronic yelling. I'll bet the appellate judges will be impressed with that.

  • 232. VIRick  |  August 20, 2015 at 6:59 am

    Florence AZ hasn't been a border town since 1853 when, due to the Gadsden Purchase, the international border was shifted southward from the Gila River to its present location. However, since Florence sits on the south side of the Gila, had the Gadsden Purchase not occurred, Florence would thus still be a border town,– but on the MEXICAN side.

    The 4 Arizona counties which actually abut the current Mexican border are: Cochise (Bisbee), Santa Cruz (Nogales), Pima (Tucson), and Yuma (Yuma), all of which owe their US existence to the Gadsden Purchase (along with a goodly chunk of Pinal County and a portion of Maricopa County).

  • 233. sfbob  |  August 20, 2015 at 7:44 am

    Putting the word marriage in quotes whenever it refers to one of ours is I'm sure going to win the respect the judiciary.

    Surely there is something in the court's code of conduct about treating parties to the case with respect when it comes to filing briefs. Our side should demand that Liberty Counsel be sanctioned for what they've done.

  • 234. guitaristbl  |  August 20, 2015 at 9:20 am

    Such a whiny, out of this world 20 pages of the same nonsense they went on about in district court. She is a court clerk, if she cannot do her job resign. The next day she possibly gets what she wants all clerks and public employees should claim a religious objection to all their duties and be paid to sit around maybe.
    Also all her proposed solutions are hypothetical, part of the legislative duties and have nothing to do with the job of a court.

  • 235. guitaristbl  |  August 20, 2015 at 9:21 am

    The respect of many judges in the 6th ? Most certainly I assure you.

  • 236. Mike_Baltimore  |  August 20, 2015 at 10:54 am

    The troll, Jim from Texas, hasn't weighed in yet. So can this subject have really been explored?


  • 237. sfbob  |  August 20, 2015 at 1:45 pm

    Unfortunately you are probably right. On the other hand SCOTUS isn't likely to uphold their prejudices. We saw what they did with Sutton et al. The same would surely happen with respect to any lower-court judges who rule in Davis's favor.

    I would love it if Davis's case were assigned to Judge Daughtrey and some of the judges appointed by Obama, Carter or Clinton or for that matter any judge NOT appointed between 2001 and 2008. There are actually quite a few. The Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit was appointed during the Clinton administration. Of the remaining 22 circuit court judges there are two Carter appointees, three Reagan appointees, three GHW Bush appointees, four Clinton appointees, eight GWB appointees and two Obama appointees. So while the GWB appointees make up a significant proportion it's still entirely possible that none could end up hearing Davis's case.

  • 238. Zack12  |  August 20, 2015 at 2:28 pm

    They could still do an en banc if they wished.

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!