Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

SCOTUS update and open thread

Community/Meta Discrimination Transgender Rights

This morning, the Supreme Court released orders from last week’s conference. We’re waiting to see what the Court will do with a follow-up case to Masterpiece Cakeshop that involves a similar issue with a bakery in Oregon refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple. The Court has been considering whether to take up the issue but there was nothing in today’s order list related to the case.

Equality Case Files reports that the case has been relisted for the May 16 conference along with a case involving bathroom use by people who are transgender and one in which the Court is being asked to reconsider whether California’s ban on so-called LGBT “conversion therapy” for minors is constitutional.

55 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. VIRick  |  May 13, 2019 at 6:41 pm

    Puerto Escondido, Oaxaca: First Same-Sex Marriage

    Per Moisés Romero: ‏

    Este fin de semana (11 de mayo 2019), el oficial del registro civil, Iván Mijiangos Peña, respetuoso de los derechos y apegado a la jurisprudencia que emitió SCJN, realizó en Puerto Escondido, Oaxaca el primer matrimonio igualitario (en esta municipalidad) entre Norma y Gloria; una de ellas es de nacionalidad Cubana.
    https://twitter.com/FSIMERMAN/status/112804215144

    Last weekend (11 May 2019), in Puerto Escondido, Oaxaca, the civil registry official, Iván Mijiangos Peña, respectful of the rights and adhering to the jurisprudence issued by the SCJN, realized between Norma and Gloria the first equal marriage (in this municipality); one of the women is of Cuban nationality.

    This is at least the 4th municipality in Oaxaca state to have registered a same-sex marriage, either with an instant in-house amparo having been issued (de facto since March 2017, and officially since August 2018), or, as in the present case, following the jurisprudence of the SCJN (meaning, without amparo, and de facto since 10 November 2018). Those municipalities, so far, are: Ciudad Oaxaca (from March 2017), Jalapa de Marqués (from 10 November 2018), Salina Cruz (from 14 February 2019), and Puerto Escondido (San Pedro Mixtepec) (from 11 May 2019). The state has 142 civil registry offices.

  • 2. VIRick  |  May 13, 2019 at 7:56 pm

    UK Government Rejects Report Calling for Marrige Equality in Overseas Territories

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    The United Kingdom Government has rejected contentious recommendations from the British Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee calling for the imposition of same-sex marriages in the Overseas Territories and for changes to voting rights. On Sunday, 12 May 2019, the Theresa May-led administration made it clear it was not prepared to intervene in domestic matters in its BOTs. "We have no plans to introduce an Order-in-Council on these issues,” the response stated.

    The FAC report, released in February, called for sweeping changes like voting rights for Britons, imposition of same-sex marriage, and a return to the imposition of public beneficial ownership registers by 2020.
    https://cayman27.ky/2019/05/uk-govt-rejects-repor

  • 3. allan120102  |  May 14, 2019 at 10:37 am

    Hidalgo has become the third state this year to legalize ssm and the first to do it this year without court interference
    They were 18 votes in favor six abstentions and I believe two or 4 votes against.

  • 4. VIRick  |  May 14, 2019 at 8:53 pm

    Hidalgo Congress Votes in Favor of Marriage Equality

    Per LXIV Legislatura de Hidalgo‏:

    Sesión Ordinaria, el 14 de mayo 2019 – Con 18 a favor, 2 en contra, y 8 abstenciones, se aprueba dictamen en materia de matrimonio igualitario en Hidalgo.
    https://twitter.com/CongresoHidalgo/status/112834

    Ordinary Session, 14 May 2019 – With 18 in favor, 2 against, and 8 abstentions, the draft bill pertaining to the marriage equality matter is approved in Hidalgo.

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    The 18 members in favor consisted of Areli Miranda Ayala (PRD), the proponent of the bill and the lone PRD member, plus the solid bloc of all 17 Morena members. PRI (4), Nueva Alianza (1), PT (1), and PES (2) all abstained. PAN voted against. However, Hidalgo has a 30-member congress, and PAN has 4 members in it, so apparently, in addition, two PAN members were also "conveniently absent" from today's historic vote.
    https://twitter.com/Kiwi_lloron

    Ever since last year's elections, this is how we have been anticipating Morena to operate, by voting favorably on some one else's proposal in favor of marriage equality. Let us hope that Hidalgo has set the example, as there are at least a half-dozen additional Mexican states without marriage equality, but with Morena holding an absolute majority of seats in the state congress, including Edomex, Guerrero, Oaxaca, Sinaloa, Tabasco, and Tlaxcala. Plus, in conjunction with PRD, PT, PES, and/or MC, Morena would have absolute majorities in Baja California Sur, Durango, Sonora, Veracruz, and Zacatecas.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mexican_sta

    Yesterday's positive vote in the Hidalgo congress was also the first occasion wherein which a state congress voted favorably for marriage equality legislation since the spate of activity during May-July 2016, when 4 states did so. In the long 3 years since, we have only won in 4 additional states because of Supreme Court rulings.

  • 5. VIRick  |  May 14, 2019 at 10:02 pm

    Map of Mexico Showing 17 Jurisdictions with Marriage Equality

    Per Daniel Berezowsky:

    In the middle of today's news concerning the positive vote in favor of marriage equality in Hidalgo state, Daniel has up-dated his map of Mexico to reflect this change. However, in doing so, I also noticed that he, like Rex Wockner, has also included Oaxaca as having marriage equality. I am not disagreeing with this assessment, but am merely pointing it out.
    https://twitter.com/danberezowsky

    It does not matter as to what method has been utilized to attain marriage equality, whether it be by the state congress voting to change the law (like in Hidalgo today), or by having the Supreme Court change the law for the state (like in Aguascalientes), or by the issuance of some administrative fiat making a de facto change (like in Quintana Roo, Chihuahua, or Baja California). Basically put, Oaxaca is in this third category of administrative fiat, led by the state director of the Civil Registry of Oaxaca.

    Or, as Rex phrases it, in 2 states, same-sex couples can marry with minimal extra fuss: Baja California and Oaxaca.

    Also, note the identical map of Mexico being displayed here, on this, an official CDMX government web-site:

    Per Subsecretaría de Derechos Humanos del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Mexico:
    https://twitter.com/SSDDHH_CDMX

  • 6. allan120102  |  May 15, 2019 at 12:36 pm

    Guatemala is on the verge in of prohibiting ssm the third reading and final approval of the law is expect today, and Jimmy Morales the president has state that he is waiting to sign it to make Guatemala a pro life and pro family country. Like I state before. Guatemala, Honduras, and Paraguay will be the hardest countried in latin america to get ssm

  • 7. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 2:58 pm

    Supreme Court of Mexico Extends Pension Benefits to Cohabiting Same-Sex Couples

    Per Suprema Corte (SCJN):

    Parejas del mismo sexo que viven en concubinato tienen derecho a recibir una pensión de viudez. Limitar el goce de esta pensión solo para parejas de hombre y mujer viola el derecho a la seguridad social y el de protección a la familia. Amparo en Revisión 750/2018
    https://twitter.com/SCJN/status/11272254815253667

    Same-sex couples living in cohabitation are entitled to receive a widow/widower's pension. Limiting the enjoyment of this pension only to opposite-sex couples violates the right to social security and the protection of the family. Amparo en Revisión 750/2018

  • 8. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 3:49 pm

    Austria Recognizes Third Gender on Official Documents

    An Austrian intersex activist has been issued non-binary documents featuring a third gender option, a first for the country. The individual, identified as Alex Jürgen in a press release from Austrian rights group Lambda, received the documents on Tuesday, 14 May 2019.
    
    The 42-year-old had been fighting a legal battle to have their non-binary gender appropriately recognized in the official documents. Jürgen’s passport now features “X” as the gender marker, while their birth certificate uses the term “divers,” which can be roughly translated from German as “miscellaneous” or “other.”

    In June 2018, Austria’s Constitutional Court ruled that citizens have a right to have their gender identity accurately reflected in official documents, allowing for more than just the “male” or “female” options. For the birth certificate, the court declared the terms “inter,” “open” and “divers” to be acceptable, but Austrian Minister of Interior Herbert Kickl decided in December that civil registries should only use the term “divers” to identify a third gender option, which can only be recognized when the individual presents a certificate from a panel of doctors attesting to their intersexuality.
    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/05/14/austria-thi

  • 9. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 4:10 pm

    US State Dept. Denying US Citizenship to Married Same-Sex Couple's Child, 2nd Case

    Washington — On Wednesday, 15 May 2019, the US State Department lost again in court in its bid to refuse US citizenship to some children who are born overseas to married same-sex couples. US District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington, DC, denied the government's request to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a married lesbian couple — one woman is a US citizen, the other is not — whose son was denied US citizenship. The non-citizen parent, an Italian citizen, gave birth to the child, and the US government is arguing that his lack of a biological relationship to the US citizen parent makes him ineligible for citizenship. The couple has another son whom the State Department deemed a US citizen because the US citizen parent gave birth to him.

    Sullivan on Wednesday rejected the Justice Department's argument that the couple in the case before him, Allison Blixt (the US citizen) and Stefania Zaccari (the Italian citizen), lacked standing to sue. He also found that at this early stage of the proceedings, the couple had "plausibly" alleged that the State Department's policy unconstitutionally discriminated against same-sex parents and was motivated by a discriminatory purpose.

    Sullivan pressed Justice Department lawyer Vinita Andrapalliyal to explain where the State Department found legal authority to impose a biological relationship requirement. Andrapalliyal said it was articulated in a document called the Foreign Affairs Manual. Sullivan asked how that language ended up in the manual. When Andrapalliyal replied that it had been in the manual for several decades, Sullivan said he wasn't satisfied with an answer that something had "always been that way" — he noted that was an argument used to justify slavery.

    Sullivan is the second judge this year to rule against the government in a case involving similar facts. In February, a federal judge in California ruled that a child born overseas to a married gay couple where one man is a US citizen and the other is not wasn't eligible for US citizenship since the child wasn't biologically related to the US citizen. The Daily Beast, which has written a string of stories on this legal fight, reported earlier this month that the government is appealing that decision.

    In the California case, US District Judge John Walter wrote in his February decision that the section of US immigration law typically applied to children born overseas to married parents did not require a biological relationship with both parents. In both the DC and California cases, the State Department applied a section of US immigration law that relates to children born overseas out of wedlock, even though both couples are married.

    In the California case, the judge applied the section that pertains to married couples, and Blixt and Zaccari have argued for that as well. They've raised the same argument as in the California case that a biological relationship requirement isn't supported by the law.
    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/s

  • 10. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 4:31 pm

    North Carolina Bathroom Bill "Mastermind" Wins GOP Primary in Vacant NC-9

    The architect of North Carolina’s infamous anti-LGBTQ HB 2 has won the Republican primary in a special election for a seat in the US House of Representatives from the Charlotte-area district, NC-9. On Tuesday, 14 May 2019, Dan Bishop, currently a state senator, “easily won” the primary for the GOP nomination in the Ninth Congressional District, "The Charlotte Observer" reports. He received 48 percent of the vote in a field of 10 candidates; his closest rival had 20 percent.

    The special election in the Charlotte-area district will take place because last November’s vote, which saw the narrow victory of an equally anti-LGBTQ Republican, Mark Harris, over Democrat Dan McCready, was nullified due to evidence of fraud relating to the collection of absentee ballots on the part of Harris supporters. In that matter, five people have been arrested on fraud charges. McCready, who supports LGBTQ rights, will run against Bishop in the special election on 10 September.
    https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/5/15/bathr

  • 11. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 5:25 pm

    Cuba Announces It Is Preparing New "Inclusive" Family Code in Midst of Tensions with LGBTI Community

    Per LGBT Mariage News:

    Cuba Anuncia que Elabora Nuevo Código de Familia “Inclusivo” en Medio de las Tensiones con la Comunidad LGBTI

    La prensa oficialista de Cuba ha anunciado este martes, el 14 de mayo 2019, que la Unión de Juristas del país trabaja en un nuevo Código de Familia que no limite los derechos de las personas y en el que no haya discriminación.
    https://www.cibercuba.com/noticias/2019-05-15-u1-

    On Tuesday, 14 May 2019, the Cuban government press announced that the Union of Jurists of the country is working on a new Family Code that does not limit the rights of people and in which there is no discrimination.

  • 12. VIRick  |  May 15, 2019 at 6:18 pm

    San Luis Potosí: Congress to Vote on Marriage Equality Tomorrow, 16 May 2019

    San Luis Potosí: CEDH Pide a Diputados Votar a Favor de Matrimonio Igualitario

    Mañana, el 16 de mayo 2019, es un día histórico para que los legisladores locales aprueben el matrimonio igualitario, exhortó Jorge Andrés López Espinosa, presidente de la Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos (CEDH).
    https://pulsoslp.com.mx/slp/cedh-pide-a-diputados

    San Luis Potosí: CEDH Calls on Deputies to Vote in Favor of Equal Marriage

    Tomorrow, 16 May 2019, will be an historic day once state legislators approve equal marriage, exhorted Jorge Andrés López Espinosa, president of the State Human Rights Commission (CEDH).

  • 13. Randolph_Finder  |  May 16, 2019 at 3:40 am

    Tensions in this case, are is the reaction to the march, I guess. I don't really view that as being anti-LGBTI, the regime would have reacted similarly to a march in favor of Rye Bread.

  • 14. allan120102  |  May 16, 2019 at 10:07 am

    Same sex marriage is now legal in SLP by a vote 14 in favor 12 against and 1 abstention.

  • 15. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 12:55 pm

    Mexico: All Mexican Consulates Worldwide Are Permitted to Marry Same-Sex Couples

    Desde de hoy, el 16 de Mayo 2019, las parejas de ciudadanos mexicanos del mismo sexo ya podrán contraer matrimonio en todos los consulados de México en el mundo. Marcelo Ebrard, la Secretaría de Relaciones Exterior (SRE), instruyó hacer adecuaciones a los procedimientos consulares para que todas las personas, sin distinción de sexo, puedan contraer matrimonio en oficinas de México en todo el mundo.
    https://twitter.com/Pajaropolitico/status/1129099

    Beginning from today, 16 May 2019, same-sex couples who are Mexican citizens will now be able to marry at all Mexican consulates worldwide. Marcelo Ebrard, Foreign Affairs Minister (SRE), has instructed that adjustments be made to the consular procedures so that all people, without distinction of sex, can marry in Mexican consulates around the world.

    The signing of the decree can be seen here:
    https://twitter.com/SRE_mx

    With the signing of this decree, Mexico has pushed itself to the absolute forefront in "exporting" same-sex marriage worldwide. To date, the only other nation to do something similar is the UK. However, in Britain's case, same-sex marriages will only be conducted within British consulates if the host country has no objection. Mexico is making no such allowances. And no other nations, besides Britain and Mexico, have "exported" their same-sex marriage law to cover their foreign consulates, although Spain is likely to follow suit shortly.

    Per Católicas México‏:

    Excelente noticia la que da la SRE de México‏ al informar que los mexicanos en el extranjero podrán contraer matrimonio, sin importar su orientación sexual, en cualquier consulado de México en el mundo.
    https://twitter.com/CDDMexico/status/112915902466

    There is excellent news emanating from the SRE of Mexico informing that Mexicans abroad can marry, regardless of their sexual orientation, in any consulate of Mexico worldwide.

  • 16. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 2:26 pm

    San Luis Potosí: Marriage Equality Bill Passes in Congress

    Just like Areli (PRD) a few days ago in Hidalgo, El Mijis (PT) pulled off a major miracle in San Luis Potosí by rounding up ALL of the Morena members (plus, in the case of El Mijis, in addition, all those of the splinter parties) to vote favorably for marriage equality:

    Per Congreso del Edo SLP:

    En consecuencia, se somete a consideración Dictamen que reforma los Artículos 15, 105 en su párrafo primero, y 133 del Código Familiar para el Estado de San Luis Potosí. Se aprueba por Mayoría.

    El 16 de mayo 2019, el Congreso del Estado de San Luis Potosí aprueba los Matrimonios Igualitarios.
    https://twitter.com/CongresoEdoSLP/status/1129073

    Consequently, the draft bill that reforms Articles 15, 105 in its first paragraph, and 133 of the Family Code for the State of San Luis Potosí is submitted for consideration. It is approved by the Majority.

    On 16 May 2019, the State Congress of San Luis Potosí approved Marriage Equality.

    Per "El Mijis" (Pedro Carrizales) (PT):

    Ganó el amor, (junto con) la empatía, y las miles de personas que incansablemente lucharon por hacer realidad el matrimonio igualitario. Hoy, nos miramos gloriosos de saber que el Congreso SLP es y seguirá siendo de nosotros, los soñadores incansables. Comencemos a hacer historia.
    https://twitter.com/mijisoficial/status/112910997

    Love won, (along with) empathy, and the thousands of people who fought tirelessly to make equal marriage a reality. Today, we look at ourselves gloriously knowing what the SLP Congress is and will continue being for us, the tireless dreamers. Let's start making history.

    Per La Jornada de Aguascalientes:

    San Luis Potosí se convierte en el estado (la jurisdicción) número 18 que aprueba el matrimonio igualitario en México con 14 votos a favor, 12 en contra, y una abstención. ¿Hasta cuando se esta realidad llegará a Aguascalientes?
    https://twitter.com/jornadags/status/112912944394

    San Luis Potosí becomes the 18th state (jurisdiction) to approve marriage equality in Mexico with 14 votes in favor, 12 against, and one abstention. When will this reality reach Aguascalientes?

    Note: the 18 jurisdictions comprise 17 states, including Oaxaca, Hidalgo, and now. San Luis Potosí, plus the Federal District, CDMX. In addition, from the question asked above, it would appear that the Supreme Court ruling against Aguascalientes from early April 2019 has not yet gone into effect there.

  • 17. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 3:25 pm

    Chihuahua: Morena Presents Initiative for Marriage Equality

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    El 16 de mayo 2019, la diputada Lourdes Valle presentó la iniciativa de la bancada de Morena para aprobar matrimonio igualitario en Chihuahua. Ya pasa a comisiones para debate y votación.
    https://twitter.com/Kiwi_lloron

    On 16 May 2019, Deputy Lourdes Valle presented the initiative from the Morena caucus for the approval of equal marriage in Chihuahua. It now goes to the committees for debate and a vote.

    Note: In the face of multiple Supreme Court rulings, Chihuahua currently has marriage equality because of an executive order from the state governor to that effect. In the meantime, the marriage law in Chihuahua has yet to be revised.

  • 18. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 3:41 pm

    Mexico: List of States with Sufficient Votes in Congress Favoring Marriage Equality

    In celebration of the positive vote for marriage equality in the San Luis Potosí congress, Daniel has re-published his optimistic state list where positive votes in favor of marriage equality are likely, given Morena's ostensible commitment:

    Per Daniel Berezowsky:

    En estos congresos, el Partido Morena Mexico y aliados tienen los votos suficientes para aprobar el matrimonio igualitario:

    In these congresses, the Morena Party of Mexico and its allies have sufficient votes to approve marriage equality:

    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Baja California Sur
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Durango
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Edomex
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Guerrero
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Hidalgo
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Oaxaca
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">SLP
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Sinaloa
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Sonora
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Tabasco
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Tlaxcala
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Veracruz
    <img class="emoji" draggable="false" alt="" src="http://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/72×72/2705.png">Zacatecas
    https://twitter.com/danberezowsky/status/10721914

  • 19. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 6:18 pm

    San Luis Potosí Congress: Final Vote Count

    One week ago, the preliminary vote line-up showed that there were 13 votes in favor, Morena (6), PT(2), PRD (2), MC (1), PES (1) and Popular Conscience (1), and 11 against, PAN (6), PRI (2), Verde (2), and Nueva Alianza (1). With a 27-member congress, 14 favorable votes are required. According to an even earlier report, of the 5 PRI members, several were supposedly in favor, and several more were uncertain.

    In the final tally, the last 3 uncertain PRI members voted as follows: 1 may well have voted in favor while the other 2 voted against. On the other hand, 1 Verde member backed away and finally chose to abstain, while the second one may have switched sides.

    Per Marce Guerrero:

    En contra:
    6 diputados del PAN
    4 diputados del PRI
    1 diputado de Nueva Alianza
    1 diputado de Verde

    A favor:
    Bloque MORENA (6) – PT (2) – PRD (2) – MC (1) – PES (1) – CP (1)
    Beatriz Benavente del PRI
    https://twitter.com/Marce_Guerrero

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    San Luís Potosí con 14 votos a favor (Morena, PT, PRD, MC, PES, Verde, y CP), 12 en contra (PAN, PRI, y Panal) y 1 abstención (Verde).
    https://twitter.com/Kiwi_lloron

    There is a discrepancy here: One person who is local claims that the 5th PRI member gave us the required 14th vote, while another who is usually accurate states that it was a Verde member who switched sides and voted in favor.

    And here is the answer, as Marce is correct. Beatriz Benavente of PRI voted in favor. As for the 2 Verde (PVEM) members, one abstained, while the other voted against.
    https://twitter.com/Planoinforma

  • 20. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 7:35 pm

    San Luis Potosí Congress: The exact list of each member's vote:

    A favor de la propuesta votaron los siguientes 14 legisladores:

    •Paola Alejandra Arreola Nieto, PT
    •Beatriz Eugenia Benavente Rodríguez, PRI
    •Consuelo Carmona Salas, Morena
    •Pedro César Carrizales Becerra, PT
    •Isabel Gonzales Tovar, PRD
    •Eugenio Guadalupe Govea Arcos, MC
    •Mario Lárraga Delgado, PES
    •Angélica Mendoza Camacho, Morena
    •Edson Quintanar Sánchez, Morena
    •Emmanuel Ramos Hernández, PRD
    •Alejandra Valdés Martínez, Morena
    •Oscar Carlos Verá Fabregat, Conciencia Popular
    •Rosa María Zuñiga Luna, Morena
    •Marité Hernández Correa, Morena

    En contra de la propuesta votaron los 12 congresistas

    •Martha Barajas García, PNA (Nueva Alianza)
    •Rubén Guajardo Barrera, PAN
    •Edgardo Hernández Contreras, PVEM (Verde)
    •Rolando Hervet Lara, PAN
    •Vianey Montes Colunga, PAN
    •Mauricio Ramírez Konishi, PRI
    •Rosario Sánchez Olivares, PRI
    •Laura Patricia Silva Celis, PRI
    •Ricardo Villarreal Loo, PAN
    •José Antonio Zapata Meraz, PAN
    •Martín Juárez Córdova, PRI
    •Sonia Mendoza Díaz, PAN

    Una abstención fue del legislador Candido Ochoa Rojas, PVEM (Verde)
    http://planoinformativo.com/660015/se-impone-mayo

  • 21. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 8:47 pm

    9th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Same-Sex Spousal Survivor Benefits

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 16 May 2019, in "Reed v. KRON/IBEW Local 45 Pension Plan," the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decisiin in favor of David Reed, reversing a lower court decision which had found that the KRON/IBEW Local 45 Pension Plan did not have to provide him with spousal survivor benefits, even though David was the registered domestic partner of a former KRON4 employee. David is represented by the NCLR and Renaker Hasselman Scott LLP.

    David Reed and Donald Lee Gardner began dating in 1998. They quickly fell in love and committed themselves to caring for and protecting one another, including becoming California registered domestic partners in 2004. They were together for 16 years and were married for only five days before Donald passed away in 2014.

    The Opinion is here:
    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2

  • 22. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 10:14 pm

    Yucatán: Same-Sex Marriage Thought for the Day: Marry in Guatemala

    Per lamacucacuca:‏

    Bien, pues para los Yucatecos, va a ser más fácil irnos a Guatemala o a Miami. Nos casamos en los consulados mexicanos si tenemos pareja del mismo sexo y listo.
    https://twitter.com/akhusharmuta

    Well, then for Yucatecos, it will be easier for us to go to Guatemala or to Miami. We will get married in the Mexican consulates if we have a same-sex partner and that is that.

    Plus, right now, we could really use a flood of Mexican same-sex couples pouring into Guatemala to marry at the Mexican Consulates there. Perhaps afterward, if we are lucky, Guatemalans will then realize that the sky did not fall after all.

    Embajada (y Consulado) de México en Guatemala
    2da Avenida 7-57, Zona 10, Ciudad de Guatemala

    Consulado de México en Quetzaltenango (in the southwest interior)
    5ta Calle 17-24, Zona 3, Quetzaltenango

    Consulado Honorario de México en Retalhuleu (on the southwest coast)
    5ta Calle 3-67, Zona 1
    Hotel Posada Don José, Retalhuleu

    Consulado de México en Tecún Umán (on the border, opposite Tapachula)
    3ra Avenida 4-74, Zona 1
    Tecún Umán, San Marcos

  • 23. arturo547  |  May 16, 2019 at 11:21 pm

    Taiwan legalises same-sex marriage.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/17/tai

  • 24. VIRick  |  May 16, 2019 at 11:51 pm

    Taiwan: Parliament Approves Same-Sex Marriage

    Per AFP News Agency:‏

    On 17 May 2019, Taiwan's parliament approves same-sex marriage.
    https://twitter.com/AFP

    On 17 May 2019, Taiwan's parliament legalized same-sex marriage in a landmark first for Asia as the government survived a last-minute attempt by conservatives to pass watered-down legislation. Lawmakers comfortably passed a bill allowing same-sex couples to form "exclusive permanent unions" and another clause that would let them apply for a "marriage registration" with government agencies.

    "In Taiwan, a marriage takes effect when it is registered, so allowing marriage registration is no doubt recognizing the marriage itself," Victoria Hsu, a gay rights lawyer, told AFP.
    https://news.yahoo.com/taiwan-parliament-vote-asi

  • 25. JayJonson  |  May 17, 2019 at 7:14 am

    This was an easy and obvious decision. The District Judge who ruled against the same-sex couple is either a dolt or a bigot. Anyone know anything about Jeffrey S. White?

    White was appointed by George W. Bush in 2002. However, in 2012, he ruled DOMA unconstitutional in the Golinski case, about a court employee who was denied health benefits. It was one of the precursors of Windsor.

    In his ruling in the Golinski case, White wrote that animus towards gays “is clearly present” in the legislative history of DOMA.

    So he is not a bigot.

    But how could he get this case so wrong?

  • 26. Randolph_Finder  |  May 17, 2019 at 12:23 pm

    Not quite equality, the bill that passed
    "It was backed by LGBTQ groups, despite the fact it could see same-sex couples denied rights enjoyed by hetrosexual couples, such as adoption and cross-national marriage."

    But compared to the other two bills proposed, it was *much* better.

    But still a gigantic step forward.

  • 27. Randolph_Finder  |  May 17, 2019 at 12:27 pm

    OK, with SLP and Hidalgo having Marriage Equality pass the legislature… Who will be *LAST*, Yucatan?

  • 28. VIRick  |  May 17, 2019 at 1:32 pm

    The measure which did pass did so by a vote of 66 in favor and 27 against. Of the 3 proposals under consideration, it was the best to be offered. The newly-passed law will go into effect in Taiwan from 24 May 2019, the exact deadline date given to the Legislative Yuan by the Supreme Court ruling.

    Per Xiani P.Ch.:

    Taiwan se convierte en el primer país de Asia en legislar a favor del derecho de las parejas del mismo sexo a contraer matrimonio (con características asiáticas, ≠ matrimonio igualitario debido a adopción limitada, y reconocimiento de matrimonios transnacionales también limitado).
    https://twitter.com/Xiani_PCh

    Taiwan becomes the first country in Asia to legislate for the right of same-sex couples to marry (with Asian characteristics, ≠ equal marriage because of limited adoption, and recognition of transnational marriages also limited).

  • 29. SethInMaryland  |  May 17, 2019 at 1:49 pm

    I believe this will open the door for Thailand , Japan and maybe Vietnam. Also India down the line when a much more liberal government takes over

  • 30. VIRick  |  May 17, 2019 at 1:55 pm

    France: 6th Anniversary of Marriage Equality

    Per Jonatan Avila:

    Un día como hoy, el 17 de mayo 2013, en Francia se aprobó el matrimonio igualitario.

    En 1998, fue creada una unión civil para parejas de distinto o del mismo sexo. En mayo 2013, se aprobó el matrimonio entre del parejas del mismo sexo. Ese año, también se permitió que estas adoptaran.
    https://twitter.com/hashtag/matrimonioigualitario

    On a day like today, on 17 May 2013, marriage equality was approved in France.

    In 1998, civil unions were created for couples of different or of the same sex. In May 2013, marriage between same-sex couples was approved. That same year, they were also allowed to adopt.

  • 31. scream4ever  |  May 17, 2019 at 3:37 pm

    I think the courts will beat the government to it in India.

  • 32. VIRick  |  May 17, 2019 at 4:21 pm

    The US House Passes the LGBT-Inclusive Equality Act

    On 17 May 2019, for the first-time ever, one chamber of the US Congress has approved legislation, with bipartisan support, that will amend the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 to comprehensively ban discrimination against LGBT people. Under the new Democratic majority elected in the mid-term election, the House approved the legislation by a vote of 236-173, as openly gay Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY) presided over the chamber.

    At other times during debate, gay Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and lesbian Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) served as speaker pro tempore. Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), the most senior openly gay member of Congress and chief sponsor of the Equality Act, said the legislation would “grant full legal equality to the LGBTQ community here in America” and that the vote was “truly historic.”
    https://www.washingtonblade.com/2019/05/17/in-fir

    Looking at the voting results slightly differently, 173 Republicans voted against the Equality Act, a measly 8 voted in favor, while 16 others were either absent or chose to abstain. All 228 Democrats who were present voted in favor. The House was only able to pass the LGBT-inclusive Equality Act because it has a Democratic majority.
    https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/5/17/173-r

  • 33. VIRick  |  May 17, 2019 at 6:23 pm

    I will refrain from betting on which state in Mexico will be the "last in line" on marriage equality, although at the moment, Yucatán certainly appears as if it is willing to claim that dubious distinction.

    Instead, I will take a slightly different tack. There is in Mexico what I like to call "the tipping point." That point happens when the procrastinators and obfuscators begin to notice what other states are doing, a fact which finally seems to be occurring, now that we have won in 2 states, back-to-back, after a 3-year legislative hiatus. In particular, I am hopeful that the Morena legislators in the many states on that list above are doing their comparisons right now, with the end result being that they will speed up the process of legislating in favor of marriage equality within their own respective states. None of them truly want their state to be the "last in line," although some/many will attempt to hold out until the last feasible moment. Thus, I am hopeful that we are fast approaching that last feasible moment, and that most of the rest will collapse like a deck of cards.

    In addition, it is extremely significant that the critical 14th positive vote in favor of marriage equality in San Luis Potosí came from a priista, Beatriz Eugenia Benavente Rodríguez, as that vote of hers (besides giving us a win) is a major break-through into a political party which in the recent past has been less-than-helpful in passing the required legislation. Other priistas in other states must be keenly aware of this vote, the first and only positive vote for marriage equality from a PRI member in all 3 of the recent congress votes, be it in Yucatán, Hidalgo, or San Luis Potosí.

  • 34. arturo547  |  May 17, 2019 at 6:45 pm

    The next one must be Thailand. Japanese people’s views in the issue are changing but the problem is that they are governed by a conservative party which gas a ñor of popularity. The case of Nepal is a pain in the… And about Vietnam, no law has even been proposed.

    The case of India is complex because there is no uniform marriage law but different, so which one can the lgbt people take to court?

  • 35. ianbirmingham  |  May 17, 2019 at 8:01 pm

    173 Republicans voted against the Equality Act, 16 skipped the vote, and only 8 in favor – and that's happening years after same-sex marriage was legalized!

    Are these the remarkable numbers that the Log Cabin Republicans will point to from now on as ironclad evidence of the great success of their brilliant strategy?

    What more will it take to get the Log Cabin Republicans to finally admit that they were just incredibly stupid and totally wrong?!?

    Could there possibly be any clearer proof of their abject and total failure???

  • 36. ianbirmingham  |  May 17, 2019 at 8:53 pm

    Trump on Track to Flip the Ninth Circuit to Republican by 2020

    Aside from the 9th Circuit, only the Second and Eleventh Circuits currently have a majority of Democratic appointees (the Tenth is tied)," Ben Feuer said. "The Second Circuit is +5 Democratic by my count and the Eleventh is +2 Democratic. Those aren't very significant differentials — certainly not on par with the Ninth Circuit of yore."

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/trump-on-track-to-fl

  • 37. VIRick  |  May 17, 2019 at 11:15 pm

    Soledad, San Luis Potosí: Cost-Free Marriages for All

    Per Paula Montero‏:

    El municipio de Soledad en San Luis Potosí es el único en México donde los matrimonios al civil son gratuitos, sea en oficina o a domicilio. Y ahora, también lo serán para parejas del mismo sexo tras aprobación del matrimonio igualitario.
    https://twitter.com/pauvalpa

    The municipality of Soledad in San Luis Potosí is the only one in Mexico where civil marriages are free, either at their office or at home. And now, they will also be free for same-sex couples following the approval of marriage equality.

    Note: Soledad de Graciano Sánchez, with a population of 225,000, is the second-largest city in the state of San Luis Potosí, and abuts the eastern flank of the state capital of the same name.

    Additional Spanglish note: With same-sex marriage imminent throughout San Luis Potosí state, Thomas and Charlie will soon be able to marry in their namesake city of 100,000 people, Tamazunchale.

  • 38. VIRick  |  May 18, 2019 at 2:07 pm

    Villanueva, Zacatecas: Another Municipality Allows Same-Sex Marriage

    El presidente municipal de Villanueva, Zacatecas, Miguel Ángel Torres, anunció que a partir de este sábado, el 18 de Mayo 2019, las parejas conformadas por personas del mismo sexo pueden realizar los trámites para acceder al matrimonio civil igualitario, sin necesidad de presentar un amparo.

    En reunión con colectivos de la diversidad sexual de todo el estado, el presidente munícipal (PRD) anunció que las autoridades del Registro Civil de esta localidad otorgarán a las parejas del mismo sexo el mismo trato humano y administrativo dado a las parejas heterosexuales. “Aquí en Villanueva, independientemente de que haya amparos o no, la presidencia municipal no tiene inconveniente en que se realicen los matrimonios igualitarios."
    https://www.facebook.com/senadisex/posts/14224180

    The municipal president of Villanueva, Zacatecas, Miguel Ángel Torres, announced that as of this Saturday, 18 May 2019, same-sex couples can perform the procedures to access civil marriage equality, without having to present an amparo.

    In a meeting with sexual diversity groups from across the state, the municipal president (PRD) announced that the authorities of the Civil Registry of this town will grant same-sex couples the same human and administrative treatment given to heterosexual couples. "Here in Villanueva, regardless of whether there is an amparo or not, the municipal presidency has no objection to the realization of equal marriages."

    Villanueva is at least the third municipality (of 58) in Zacatecas state to allow same-sex couples to marry without amparo, following behind Ciudad Zacatecas and Cuauhtémoc. Villanueva, at the neck of the state's southern prong, abuts Ciudad Zacatecas on its southern edge, while simultaneously abutting Aguascalientes state on most of its western flank.

  • 39. ianbirmingham  |  May 18, 2019 at 9:47 pm

    Thousands march in Northern Ireland for same-sex marriage

    The demonstrators in Belfast on Saturday want same-sex couples to be treated the same way in Northern Ireland as they are in the rest of the UK, where same-sex marriage is legal. The issue is a stumbling block to restoring Northern Ireland’s Catholic-Protestant power-sharing administration, which has been suspended for more than two years.

    https://www.apnews.com/7662c745746c4f28904380ab60

  • 40. VIRick  |  May 19, 2019 at 12:06 am

    Massachusetts: 15th Anniversary of Marriage Equality, First in the USA

    Today, 17 May 2019, marks the 15th anniversary of the first legal, state-recognized same-sex marriage in the USA. Tanya McCloskey and Marcia Kadish were married at City Hall in Cambridge MA on 17 May 2004, the very day the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s marriage equality ruling from the previous year went into effect. They had already been together nearly 20 years.

    Marriage licenses had been issued to same-sex couples in Minnesota in 1971, in Colorado in 1975, and in San Francisco in February 2004 (and in the case of San Francisco, ceremonies were performed), but those licenses were eventually invalidated. McCloskey and Kadish’s union, though, had the full blessing of their state, the first to legalize same-sex marriage (while side-stepping Vermont's same-sex civil unions).

    They received their license shortly after midnight on 17 May 2004, and obtained a waiver of the three-day waiting period mandated between the license’s issuance and the wedding. When the Cambridge City Hall opened a few hours later, they were first in line among couples planning to marry, entirely by accident, Kadish said. They arrived early “because we wanted to go to everybody else’s wedding,” she told Morning Edition. “We wanted to participate all day long in weddings.”
    https://www.advocate.com/news/2019/5/17/day-2004-

  • 41. ianbirmingham  |  May 19, 2019 at 8:29 am

    The Minnesota marriage in 1971 was later re-validated:

    In 1970, a young man named Richard John “Jack” Baker applied for a marriage license with Michael McConnell in Hennepin County, Minnesota. They were turned down, and their claim was eventually dismissed by the Minnesota Supreme Court.

    Yet prior to the Minnesota ruling, the couple reapplied in Blue Earth County, Minnesota, and successfully received a license. They were married by a Methodist minister in a quiet ceremony in a friend’s home on September 3, 1971.

    The couple is still together today, and as both men are into their 70s, they went to the state to confirm their Social Security benefits as a couple. In the process, they asked for it to be determined once and for all if their marriage is a legal one.

    On September 18, 2018, a district court in Minnesota issued a ruling that said, “The marriage is declared to be in all respects valid.”

    It was now time for the federal government to respond.

    February 16, 2019, just two days after Valentine’s Day, the Social Security Administration sent a letter to the couple, confirming once and for all that their 1971 marriage was legal, stating that they were indeed entitled to monthly husband’s benefits.

    https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/02/first-sex-mar

    Accordingly, the actual anniversary of the world's first legally recognized same-sex marriage is September 3rd, and this year they will celebrate their 48th anniversary.

  • 42. VIRick  |  May 19, 2019 at 9:38 am

    Ian, I only quoted the Advocate article, even if I found some fault with its wording, which I was not completely successful in "fixing."

    In addition to what you have presented regarding the Minnesota marriage, the marriages in Colorado in 1975 were also later deemed as to never having been invalidated, and thus, are still recognized as valid by the state and federal government, even to this day.

    Instead, the article was attempting to state that these Massachusetts marriages of same-sex couples, beginning from 17 May 2004, were the first to have had specific prior state authorization and approval, based upon a state court ruling with statewide application. Perhaps I should have simply titled the post:

    15th Anniversary of Marriage between Same-Sex Couples in Massachusetts

  • 43. ianbirmingham  |  May 19, 2019 at 3:21 pm

    As Baker & McConnell were married pursuant to an officially issued Minnesota marriage license, they were actually "the first to have had specific prior state authorization and approval". Theirs was not an informal "handfasting" of the type often used today by polyamorous people; it was a legally valid marriage with full state approval in advance. The fact that the state later attempted, in a fit of bigotry, to unconstitutionally rescind its prior approval does not affect the reality that, as both Minnesota's own courts and the federal government now acknowledge, their pre-approved marriage was legally valid from the beginning.

    Shame on the Advocate for printing an article with this level of inaccuracy regarding an important historical landmark. Their article even creates the false impression that the Minnesota and Colorado marriages are still "invalid"!

    VIRick, I personally would have either avoided quoting the paragraph that I knew to be preposterously wrong, or inserted words sufficient to alert the reader to the Advocate's misstatements. One normally inserts a [sic] to indicate that a grammatically incorrect quote is being repeated from the source even though it is obviously incorrect. When the magnitude of the source's error goes far beyond the grammatical to the factual, and then beyond the factual to the fundamentally historic, the importance of properly informing the reader increases accordingly.

  • 44. VIRick  |  May 19, 2019 at 8:13 pm

    Chiapas: Gender Identity Proposal Before State Congress

    De aprobarse en el Congreso estatal la modificación del Código Civil, para reconocer la identidad de género entre la población transexual, Chiapas se uniría a los estados que protegen este derecho. Con esta modificación no sería necesario, como ocurre actualmente, iniciar un proceso judicial, donde a partir del desahogo de pruebas se pueda obtener una sentencia aprobatoria, destacó David Vázquez Hernández, de la Red por la Inclusión de la Diversidad Sexual en Chiapas.

    Explicó que, la ruta actual es un proceso que puede considerarse violatorio de los derechos humanos, puesto que una autoridad es quien determina la identidad de género del solicitante y solo puede iniciarse a partir de una denuncia. No obstante, si la iniciativa que presentaron a la diputada local, Aída Jiménez Sesma, cuenta con el apoyo de los legisladores locales, entonces el reconocimiento de la identidad de género no será más que un proceso administrativo, como ya ocurre en otros ocho estados del país.

    “En los términos actuales, una persona que desea cambiar su identidad de género debe presentar pruebas de intervenciones médicas, contrario a los parámetros internacionales; pero si el cambio se aprueba, el procedimiento será sencillo, sin esperar hasta un año o año y medio como sucede actualmente. Solo serán necesarios presentar el acta de nacimiento original y un comprobante de domicilio, que después daría paso a la modificación de la credencial para votar que expide el Instituto Nacional Electoral (INE)."
    http://www.diariodechiapas.com/landing/reconocimi

    If the modification of the Civil Code is approved in the state Congress to recognize the gender identity among the transgender population, Chiapas would join the states that protect this right. With this modification, it would no longer be necessary, as is currently the case, to initiate a judicial process, where from the sufficiency of evidence, an approving judgment can be obtained, said David Vázquez Hernández, of the Network for the Inclusion of Sexual Diversity in Chiapas.

    He explained that the current route is a process that can be considered a violation of human rights, since there is an authority which determines the gender identity of the applicant, and can only be initiated on the basis of a complaint. However, if the initiative presented to the state deputy, Aída Jiménez Sesma, has the support of state legislators, then the recognition of gender identity will be no more than an administrative process, as is already the case in eight other states in the country. (Correction: By my count, only 5 jurisdictions in Mexico currently recognize gender identity. If approved, this measure would make Chiapas the 6th.)

    "In the current terms, a person who wants to change their gender identity must present evidence of medical interventions, contrary to international parameters; But if this change is approved, the procedure will be simple, without waiting until a year or a year and a half as is currently the case. It will only be necessary to present the original birth certificate and proof of address, which would then lead to the modification of the voter registration card issued by the National Electoral Institute (INE)."

  • 45. VIRick  |  May 20, 2019 at 11:47 am

    Ecuador: Public Hearing on Marriage Equality, 2nd Case

    Per Corte Constitucional‏ del Ecuador:

    Hoy, el 20 de mayo 2019, inicia Audiencia Pública del caso Nro.0010-18-CN, presidida por el juez constitucional, Alí Lozada. Intervienen Rubén Darío Salazar y Carlos Daniel Verdesoto, los quejosos, y Gabriela Lemos Trujillo, su abogado, en audiencia pública sobre matrimonio igualitario.

    En representación de la Procuraduría General del Estado interviene Marco Proaño en audiencia pública, y en representación del Registro Civil del Ecuador, participa el señor Jesús Morán en la misma audiencia pública del caso Nro. 0010-18-CN sobre matrimonio igualitario, después de lo que el juez constitucional Alí Lozada da por concluida la audiencia pública.
    https://twitter.com/CorteConstEcu

    Today, 20 May 2019, the Public Hearing of case No.0010-18-CN begins, presided over by the constitutional judge, Alí Lozada. The following spoke at the public hearing on equal marriage: Rubén Darío Salazar and Carlos Daniel Verdesoto, the complainants, and Gabriela Lemos Trujillo, their lawyer.

    On behalf of the State Attorney-General's Office, Marco Proaño spoke at the public hearing, and on behalf of the Civil Registry of Ecuador, Mr. Jesús Morán participated in the same public hearing in case No. 0010-18-CN about equal marriage, after which the constitutional judge Alí Lozada then considerd the public hearing concuded.

    Note: According to additional photos posted onto the website of the Corte Constitucional, at some point in between, at least 9 additional persons also spoke at the public hearing, one of whom I recognize as being the complainant from marriage equality case #1, case 0011-18-CN, Efraín Soria. Another appears to be one of the lawyers from the Cuenca cases, Sylvia Bonilla. Pamela Troya was not present. Instead, she sent a communique calling upon the court to act in a timely manner within the legally-established time-frame.

    According to Ecuador's current Constitution of 2008 (its 20th), adopted in 2009, Article 68 allows for same-sex couples to enter civil unions with the same rights and obligations as married couples, a point which was considered to be quite forward-thinking, when adopted, only 10 years ago. Plus according to Article 11, paragraph II, one has a fundamental right to one's sexual orientation and gender identity. At the time, no other constitution, worldwide, recognized gender identity.

  • 46. ianbirmingham  |  May 20, 2019 at 2:20 pm

    Trump: Court-packing will drive my 2020 win

    In 2016, 56 percent of Trump voters listed the issue of Supreme Court appointments as the most important factor in their support for his candidacy while just 41 percent of voters for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton deemed it the most important issue. By contrast, 49 percent of Democratic voters characterized it as a significant factor but not the deciding one…

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/19/trump-j

  • 47. ianbirmingham  |  May 21, 2019 at 1:17 pm

    Alabama TV station calls airing same-sex cartoon wedding on 'Arthur' a ‘violation of trust’

    Alabama Public Television is refusing to air an episode of a popular children’s cartoon because it features two men marrying. The “Arthur” episode aired nationwide May 13 as part of the show’s 22nd season premiere. But children across the state didn’t get to see it because station leaders said they thought it would be a “violation of trust” with its viewers.

    The episode is available online.

    Misty Souder, a mother and substitute teacher in Alabama, told AL.com she thought the episode was a celebration of inclusion. She said she was disappointed the public television station chose not to air the episode and used the experience to teach her daughter a lesson in standing up for minority groups.

    A spokeswoman for PBS Kids said programs are “designed to reflect the diversity of communities across the nation.” "We believe it is important to represent the wide array of adults in the lives of children who look to PBS Kids every day,” PBS Kids spokeswoman Maria Vera Whelan told CNN.

    Show creator Mark Brown said his friend, the iconic Fred Rogers, taught him how television could be used to help children understand the world. "So many of us have have family or friends who are gay who are not represented in the media," Brown told CNN. "We have people in our family that are gay and raising children and looking for things to validate their families."

    https://www.wmur.com/article/alabama-tv-station-c

  • 48. VIRick  |  May 21, 2019 at 3:40 pm

    San Luis Potosí: Official State Journal Publishes Reforms on Equal Marriage

    San Luis Potosí: Periódico Oficial del Estado Publica Reformas sobre Matrimonio Igualitario

    A partir de hoy, 21 de mayo 2019, la unión de personas del mismo sexo ya tiene vigencia legal. En una edición extraordinaria, el órgano oficial del gobierno estatal publicó ayer (el 20 de mayo 2019) el Decreto 168, en el que se publica la modificación de los artículos 15, 105, y 133 del Código Familiar, recién aprobada el jueves pasado, el 16 de Mayo 2019, por el Congreso del Estado.

    Los artículos citados eliminan la obligatoriedad de circunscribir el matrimonio, el concubinato, y el parentesco de afinidad a las parejas heterosexuales y lo extiende a cualquier persona.
    https://pulsoslp.com.mx/slp/periodico-oficial-del

    As of today, 21 May 2019, the union of same-sex couples now has legal validity. In an extraordinary edition, the official organ of the state government yesterday (20 May 2019) published Decree 168, in which it publishes the modification of articles 15, 105, and 133 of the Family Code, recently approved last Thursday, 16 May 2019, by the State Congress.

    The articles cited eliminate the obligation of limiting marriage, cohabitation, and kinship affinity to heterosexual couples and extends it to any person.

    For Mexico, this is extraordinarily speedy work. The marriage equality bill was passed on Thursday, signed by the governor almost immediately thereafter, and then, by just the second working day, on the very following Monday, was already duly published in the official state journal, thus putting it into effect today, Tuesday, in what must be considered record-breaking time. For comparison with other jurisdictions, here are how many calendar days elapsed for each, between the date their congress passed their respective marriage equality bill and the date of the official publication of it, thus placing the measure into effect:

    10 Campeche
    17 Coahuila
    18 Colima
    65 CDMX
    36 Michoacán
    48 Morelos
    06 Nayarit
    04 San Luis Potosí

  • 49. VIRick  |  May 21, 2019 at 4:28 pm

    Yucatán: Alex Alí Méndez‏ Díaz to Arrive on the Scene

    Expect fireworks, a lot of media attention,– and lawsuits.

    Este sábado, el 25 de mayo 2019, como parte de México Igualitario, estaré en Yucatán. Hablaremos del matrimonio igualitario en el contexto de las obligaciones internacionales de México en materia de derechos humanos.
    https://twitter.com/alex_ali_md

    This Saturday, 25 May 2019, as part of México Igualitario, I will be in Yucatán. We will talk about marriage equality in the context of Mexico's international obligations in the field of human rights.

  • 50. guitaristbl  |  May 21, 2019 at 6:12 pm

    I just had the worst and most vivid dream I had in a while about RGB passing away. I woke up and rushed to this forum to make sure I was just dreaming.

  • 51. VIRick  |  May 21, 2019 at 7:35 pm

    At minimum, RBG must live for at least another 19 months.

    Actually, at this stage, I want all of them to keep living, even Thomas and Alito, just so the Assh-Ole-in-Charge can not appoint yet another stooge as their replacement. In 2021, with a Democratic president, both of those two are kindly invited to croak as quickly as possible thereafter. In fact, Gorsuch and the privileged, beer-drinking ding-a-ling can join them, as neither will be missed. Gorsuch does not even understand the universally-accepted concept of "presumed parenthood" as applied to married couples.

  • 52. FredDorner  |  May 21, 2019 at 8:18 pm

    It's nice to see that APTV is getting absolutely killed on Facebook. I suspect they'll lose a lot of donors over this and hopefully the board will force a change of directors.

  • 53. Randolph_Finder  |  May 22, 2019 at 12:04 pm

    I think if she passes away they'll be websites that will have that news first and put it on the front page. (CNN, NBCNews,…….)

  • 54. Randolph_Finder  |  May 22, 2019 at 12:12 pm

    Frankly, I think that they were in a lose-lose situation, where they'd lose support either way. If I worked for APTV and wanted to offend people the *least*, I'd show it *once* at 4AM (and yes, Arthur is on at 4AM today 5/22) so they can say that they showed it, but also that it wasn't at a time when the *little* kids would be watching.
    https://www.aptv.org/series/130/Arthur/

  • 55. FredDorner  |  May 22, 2019 at 12:33 pm

    That's all very true but it's still a bit unusual for any PBS station. From what I understand the executive leadership of APTV was taken over by Christian extremists not too long ago (they did a similar thing in 2005).

    If they had simply aired the episode at its regular time without comment it's unlikely there would have been any controversy at all…….although the Christian Taliban does seem to have an unhealthy obsession with the interspecies weddings of cartoon critters.

    What's really going to haunt them is the patently bigoted language they used to defend their decision. I think these bigots are so dumb that they're unaware of what they sound like to normal people. They must live in a Southern Baptist bubble.

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