Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Equality news round-up: Eric Fanning confirmed as Secretary of the Army, and more

Transgender Rights

Capitol Hill
Capitol Hill
– The Senate confirmed Eric Fanning as Secretary of the Army, making him the highest ranking out gay person.

– There’s been some activity in two of the five challenges to North Carolina’s HB2 (more on those five cases later.) Equality Case Files reports the updates.

Buzzfeed‘s Chris Geidner interviewed President Obama, discussing transgender rights.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 3:20 pm

    Mexico news. News coming from different states.
    NL governor says the state will abide if the federal congress legalize ssm, and the state will support the motion
    Meanwhile lgbt groups in NL say the state should hurry up and legalize ssm. Weird that is the only state where lgbt are not protected at state level.
    Queretaro to analyze a ssm proposal and may legalize it in the upcoming months.
    Part of PAN will vote against ssm proposal….. no surprise here.

  • 2. theperched  |  May 18, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    Hidalgo's Governor says he's for ssm if a bill is discussed but punts and says many debates are required. He says the state may come around eventually. He also says that if Mexican Congress approves the constitutional changes then all states need to fall in line:

    San Luis Potosi has a lawsuit for taking too long so I'd put that into the pile making it 14 in the short term.

  • 3. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 6:23 pm

    It seems deputies in BCS are contradicting each other. One said the bill could be voted on by June, but more agree that the bill is in the freezer than not. Lots of them punt to 'we need to consult the public'. Oy vey…

  • 4. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 3:35 pm

    Sonora. LGBT groups strikes against the governor for saying that marriage equality will only be legal if they acquire amparos. Many are dissappoint saying that the civil registry had no problem with giving licenses. I am not sure if that takes Sonora out of the list. As the governor have the control to stop civil registries. The governor says she will abide and support the motion of legalizing ssm when it comes from the federal government.

  • 5. theperched  |  May 18, 2016 at 3:45 pm

    Mexican President's proposal on marriage should give several Governors around the country kicks in the butt to step it up.

    Several from his PRI party are coming around and PRD who is Left doesn't want to be outshone so they should crank up the pressure on their states as well.

    PAN Governors are the most likely to act like nothing's happening.

    By the way, since Morelos is a state constitutional change, it has to be ratified by municipalities – or what's the best word for "ayuntamiento"?

  • 6. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 4:20 pm

    "Ayuntamiento" in Spanish means "town hall" or "town council" which, as it pertains to Mexico, I freely translate rather interchangeably with "municipality" (municipio), as states are only sub-divided into municipalities. In this instance, the town councils (ayuntamientos) of a majority of the municipalities (municipios) within the state must give their approval, as this particular reform requires a change to the state's constitution.

  • 7. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 3:53 pm

    SSM stop in Sonora thanks to the governor. So dissappoint of her. That means that only 9 states have marriage equality. She should be ashamed of herself. Civil registries have stop issuing ssm licenses to ss couples.

  • 8. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 4:24 pm

    Per Rex Wockner:

    MEXICO » Hoy día, 18 de mayo 2016, Michoacán es el noveno estado con matrimonio igualitario. El voto del congreso fue 27-0 con 8 abstenciones.

    MEXICO » Today, 18 May 2016, Michoacán became the 9th Mexican state with marriage equality. The vote in the state congress was 27-0 with 8 abstentions.….

    Morelia, 18 de mayo 2016 – Diputados aprueban matrimonios igualitarios en Michoacán.

    Con la abstención total del PAN y una del tricolor, los diputados locales aprobaron los matrimonios igualitarios en Michoacán. De los 40 diputados en la entidad, 27 votaron a favor, 8 en abstención y cero en contra de la reforma al Código Familiar.

    Morelia, 18 May 2016 – Congress approves marriage equality in Michoacán.

    With the total abstention of PAN and one of the tricolor (PRI), the deputies of the state congress approved marriage equality in Michoacán. Of the 40 state deputies, 27 voted in favor, 8 abstained, and 0 voted against the reform of the Family Code.

    Apparently, 5 others were not present.

  • 9. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 4:27 pm

    Per Rex Wockner:

    MEXICO » Esta tarde, 18 de mayo 2016, el Congreso de Morelos aprueba matrimonio igualitario, 20-6, y ahora los ayuntamientos tienen que ratificarla.

    MEXICO » Late this afternoon, 18 May 2016, the Morelos state Congress voted 20-6 for marriage equality, and now sends the constitutional reform to the regional governments (town councils of the municipalities) to ratify it.….

    The Governor of Morelos, Graco Ramírez, welcomed the approval of the measure by the state Congress (after all, it was his proposal). The 6 deputies who voted against the measure (el dictamen) were all members of PAN.

    According to the news account, in Morelos, a majority of the town councils (ayuntamientos) of the various municipalities now need to ratify the constitutional change, after which it will then be published in the official journal, and will then become law. At that point, same-sex couples will be allowed to marry without amparo.

    This extra step, of having a majority of the town councils ratify the state constitutional change, applicable to Morelos state, is NOT applicable to Michoacán state, as there, the state congress was under direct court orders (since July 2015) to enact the same change to allow marriage equality.

    Morelos state is comprised of 33 municipalities. The most populous are Cuernavaca (state capital), Jiutepec, Cuautla (where local authorities have been very pro-active for marriage equality), and Temixco. Additionally, same-sex marriages have also occurred in the small towns of Xochitepec and Ayala.

  • 10. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    Breaking news from CR.
    The president have ask two important question to the International court of Human rights.(IDH) This might be important as it might be binding to all member states.
    an Jose, May 17 ( – The Government of Costa Rica sent two queries to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to determine whether the rights related to sexual orientation and gender identity are protected by the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR ).

    Presidential House explained in a press release Tuesday night, is intended to clarify whether the internal regulations of Costa Rica is in line with the Convention.

    "The two consultations reaffirmed the Government's commitment to move towards full compliance with human rights," said Zapote in its statement.

    The first of the consultations is whether the right of people to change their name, according to their sexual identity is protected.

    A day in Costa Rica is necessary to satisfy a procedure in the courts, so the Government consulted if the procedure is the most appropriate or whether a more flexible and free in the administrative procedure is necessary.

    "The current procedure is less expeditious and accessible," President said.

    Currently in the Legislative Assembly a bill that seeks to return easier precisely the name change according to gender identity of a person is processed.

    If the Inter-American Court is pronounced in the sense that in fact, this right is enshrined in the convention and that the current procedure in the country is not the most appropriate, the Executive Branch may terminate expect the adoption of a law in Congress to make the necessary changes and go to different ways to make those changes.

    The second query made by Zapote is whether the economic rights arising from a link between people of the same sex, are protected by the Convention; also consult if there must be a legal entity governing these relations.

    "The Advisory Opinion is a procedure that gives the possibility to countries that are part of the Inter-American Human Rights Court requesting the criteria on issues relating to the interpretation and application of the Convention," said Casa Presidencial.

    This consultation was signed by Ana Helena Chacón Echeverría, Vice President of the Republic, Marvin Carvajal Perez, Legal Director of the Office of the President and Eugenia Gutiérrez Ruiz, Legal Director a.i. the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship.

    Similarly, if the Court IDH states that the property rights of unions formed by same-sex couples are protected by the convention, pending in the Legislature to reform the current legal framework it would be unnecessary.

    The American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR), which Costa Rica signed, has supra-constitutional hierarchy, ie, which is above the Costa Rican Constitution and therefore the tico legal framework should respect the content of the convention.

    The Vice President of the Republic, Ana Helena Chacón Echeverría said that this consultation "in the Government of the Republic reaffirm our commitment to move towards full compliance with human rights in the country, and eliminate behaviors that are considered discriminatory by grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity ".

    He also stated that "we reaffirm our full confidence in the bodies that make up the Inter-American Human Rights System, which is the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, its main exponent".

  • 11. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 4:42 pm

    Somewhat off-topic, but again from Rex Wockner, who appears to be on a roll, what with TWO state congresses in Mexico both approving marriage equality on the same day:

    Dear gringo journos: Don't leave off the ñ wiggles and éíó accents when writing Spanish. Año means year. Ano means anus. Etc. Etc. Thanks!

    And that is the truth, as in "sí" meaning yes, not "si" meaning if.

  • 12. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 5:01 pm

    Pennsylvania: New Federal Suit Challenging Gender Policy on Birth Certificates

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 13 May 2016, a new federal lawsuit has been filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, "Doe v. Romberger," challenging Pennsylvania's policy for changing gender on birth certificates.

    The Plaintiffs are two transgender individuals (suing as Jane and John Doe) who want to change their gender on their birth certificates.

    The Defendants are:
    – Pennsylvania Division of Vital Records
    – Director of Vital Records Debra Romberger, in her official capacity
    – Secretary of Health Karen Murphy, in her official capacity

    The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages in addition to declaratory and injunctive relief.
    Count I: Equal Protection under 14th Amendment of US Constitution
    Count II: Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act

    The Complaint is here:

  • 13. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 5:20 pm

    Florida: State Claims Compliance with Listing Same-Sex Couples on Birth Certificates

    Per Equality Case Files:

    In "Chin v. Armstrong," the challenge in federal court to Florida's refusal to list both same-sex parents on children's birth certificates, the state Defendants tell the court that the order issued on 30 March 2016 in "Brenner v. Scott," an order they say they are now complying with, makes the present case moot, and they ask the court to dismiss this case.

    Per the court filing itself:

    "The Department has initiated rulemaking pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, to modify the Florida birth record form to allow the designation of mother, father, or parent on the birth record. See, Exhibit A, Notice of Development of Rulemaking (published on April 19, 2016 in the Florida Administrative Register, Vol. 42176).

    "Same-sex couples may obtain a birth record listing both spouses on the current form immediately. The Department will replace that birth record with the new form at no charge as soon as the new form is promulgated pursuant to the statutorily required rulemaking process. See, Exhibit B, Memorandum Concerning Recent Communications Regarding Filing of Birth Records.

    "The Department has instructed all birthing hospitals, birthing centers, midwives and others in Florida filing birth records to record the name of both same-sex spouses on the birth record using the existing form. If a same-sex couple prefers to wait for the new form, the Department has taken the name and telephone number of these individuals and will contact them once the new form is available.

    "The Department has further instructed all Deputy Registrars to accept birth records listing both same-sex couples on the existing form and to replace that birth record at no charge once the new form becomes available."

    The state Defendants' Suggestion of Mootness is here:

    This news article from Pensacola has more on the developments outside of court:

    "Florida Now Issuing Birth Certificates Listing Same-Sex Parents"

  • 14. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 6:08 pm

    Latest on the Non-Binding Bermuda Referendum

    Premier Gives Civil Unions the Thumbs-Up

    Today, 18 May 2016, Premier Michael Dunkley urged voters today to make sure they are on the “right side of history” when they vote in the same-sex marriage/civil union referendum next month.

    The Premier told a press conference: “I intend to vote yes for civil unions on 23 June.” He said: “I ask all people to come out, to think about the subject, to discuss it with their colleagues and to realize that you need to be on the right side of history on this one because our lives are evolving.”

    Mr Dunkley noted that today was the last day for Bermudians to make sure their name appears on the parliamentary register before the referendum next month. He has previously stated he believes marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

  • 15. Insurance Plans  |  May 23, 2016 at 11:14 pm

    Agree mate. Premier Gives Civil Unions the Thumbs-Up

  • 16. F_Young  |  May 18, 2016 at 6:43 pm

    Trump's LGBT-Unfriendly Supreme Court Picks

    …..All 11 of Trump’s potential picks, announced today, have solidly conservative judicial records. Not all have ruled in LGBT rights cases, but those who have are largely unsympathetic, and some have the backing of anti-LGBT activists.

    Here’s a look at some of Trump’s favorite jurists.

    Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett: He’s definitely one of the more colorful possibilities, as he’s known for his frequent use of Twitter to comment on legal and political matters. In 2015, as the nation was abuzz over the marriage equality case before the U.S. Supreme Court, Willett tweeted the following:

    "I could support recognizing a constitutional right to marry bacon."

    …..On Texas’s high court, Willett has not been inclined to recognize same-sex marriage. Last year a Texas judge allowed two women, one with ovarian cancer, to marry before the state’s ban on such unions struck down, and the state Supreme Court dismissed Attorney General Ken Paxton’s challenge to the marriage; Willett dissented. He also dissented from the Texas court’s decision not to take up a case on the validity of a same-sex divorce.

    …..Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Diane Sykes: Sykes was on a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit that in 2006 affirmed a student group’s right to discriminate against those who engage in “homosexual conduct” but still be recognized as an official campus group and receive public funding.

    …..Eleventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Judge William H. Pryor Jr.: LGBT activists have been wary of Pryor because he filed a friend of the court brief supporting sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas, and he “also cast the deciding vote to oppose hearing a challenge to Florida’s law that banned gay people from adopting,” ThinkProgress reports. He has also derided LGBT rights as “political correctness.” But Pryor made a surprisingly inclusive decision in Georgia state employee Vandy Beth Glenn’s discrimination suit in which she claimed she was fired because of her gender transition.

    Read more;

  • 17. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 7:38 pm

    Governor of Queretaro may act to legalize ssm by his own instead of waiting deputies to legalize it.!/noticias/queretaro-

  • 18. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 1:05 am

    Querétaro podría modificar ley para reconocer matrimonio igualitario sin discusión legislativa: gobernador.

    El gobernador, Francisco Domínguez, indicó que en caso de que los diputados no discutan el tema, el poder ejecutivo podría hacerse cargo de la iniciativa.!/noticias/queretaro-

    The law in Querétaro could be modified to legalize marriage equality without legislative debate: governor.

    The governor, Francisco Domínguez, indicated that if the deputies did not discuss the issue, the executive power could take charge of the initiative.

  • 19. allan120102  |  May 18, 2016 at 7:39 pm

    Mexico conservative movement using the same tactics oppponents of ssm in Usa use to fight marriage equality.

  • 20. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    Santa Fe’s Gay Mayor Advances Progressive Agenda

    Meet Javier Gonzáles, a New Mexico native, and the first openly gay person to be elected mayor of Santa Fe NM.

    – See more at:

  • 21. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 8:36 pm

    Nation's Largest Latino Civil Rights Group Joins LGBTs in North Carolina Boycott

    Today, 18 May 2016, the National Council de La Raza (NCLR), the nation's largest Latino civil rights and advocacy organization, announced it has moved its 2016 Northeast/Southeast Affiliate Leadership Convention, scheduled for October, from Raleigh NC, to Miami, in protest of the state's anti-LGBT law, HB2.

  • 22. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 9:10 pm

    Former Mr Gay UK Becomes Lord Mayor of Manchester

    Today, 18 May 2016, a former winner of the Mr Gay UK competition was sworn in as the new Lord Mayor of Manchester. Carl Austin-Behan, now 44, had taken the coveted Mr Gay UK crown back in 2001 while working as an events manager, well before deciding to enter politics.

    The former pageant winner later built a career as a Labour councillor on Manchester City Council, and was named earlier this year as the Labour group’s choice to be the city’s new ceremonial Lord Mayor. Mr Austin-Behan, who was forced out of the RAF in 1997 because he is openly gay just years before the military ban was lifted, will be the first openly gay person to take on the role once sworn in. Mr Austin-Behan stated he will be bringing his own flamboyant (and stunningly hot) twist to the once-staid role.

    The new Lord Mayor tied the knot with his partner Simon last year, after 12 years together.

  • 23. VIRick  |  May 18, 2016 at 11:36 pm

    Seychelles Repeals Colonial-Era Law Banning Gay Sex

    Popular holiday destination, Seychelles, is opening its arms to LGBT people, passing a law to legalize gay sex. Section 151 of the country’s Penal Code states that a man who has sex with a man “against the order of nature” can be jailed for up to fourteen years. The law is a hold-over from British colonial rule, and convictions are already very rare, but the Seychelles has pushed to scrap the law entirely.

    On 17 May 2016, the country’s Parliament passed the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, 2016. Out of 28 members present for the vote, 14 voted in favor while the other half abstained. Four members were not present for the vote.

    It says: “This Bill seeks to amend Section 151 of the Penal Code in order to decriminalize unnatural offences specified. The President, James Michel, has in his State of the Nation Address highlighted the need to abolish the provisions in our laws that criminalize homosexuality between consenting adults in view of the United Nations Human Rights obligation of the Seychelles. In 2011, Seychelles accepted to implement the recommendation of the Universal Periodic Review towards the decriminalization of same-sex relationships. To fulfill said obligation, it is necessary to repeal the aforesaid provisions.”

    The amendment will come into force on the day it is gazetted as an act by the Attorney-General’s Office. For this to happen, the bill needs the prior assent of the president.

  • 24. Fortguy  |  May 19, 2016 at 12:45 am

    Just be mindful regarding privacy and public decency. In other words, don't be having same sex in the Seychelles while she sells seashells by the seashore.

  • 25. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 2:29 am

    OMG! And here I was, all poised to present an extended dissertation on how to correctly pronounce the letter "X" when it appears in Indigenous place names in Mexico, like Xochitepec, Taxco, Ixtapa, and Tlaxcala, this latter being a double-challenge, as it also incorporates the clicking sound found twice in Tlalnapantla.

  • 26. F_Young  |  May 19, 2016 at 2:55 am

    Actually, Rick, I would appreciate a short dissertation on how to pronounce the X letter.

  • 27. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 1:28 pm

    Fortguy took the wind out of my sails with his tongue-twister on Seychelles and seashells, but the "X" sound is about half-way between. It's a softer slurred "S" sound, less harsh than the hissing "S" at the beginning of those two words, but not as soft as the "SH" sound found in the middle of them. In fact, even the pronunciation of the word, "Mexico" is subject to endless debate. Is it "México," "Méjico," "Méssico," or what? It is NOT "Meksico," as is regularly said in English. Quite ironically, the slurred speech of the 'Murkins who can't stand the Messikins get it closer.

    As for the clicking "TL" sound, just keep repeating the word "bottle" in English until you get it. Some claim that practicing while drinking a bottle of tequila also helps keep one's focus on the task at hand.

  • 28. Fortguy  |  May 20, 2016 at 12:36 am

    The problem is that the letter x has been used in Spanish as some sort of catch-all for sounds in Native American languages not shared in Spanish phonology. Although the pronunciation of x in words organic to the Latin-derived language is logical, such as extra or excelente, the letter is technically redundant in Spanish phonology with cs.

    Hence, the letter has been used to represent sounds in Native American languages that are not precisely phonetic to anything in Spanish. Most Spanish first-language speakers in Mexico pronounce x like s in Nahuatl (the language spoken by the Aztecs) words such as Texcoco or Tlaxcala, while pronouncing the letter more similarly to an English sh in words like Uxmal from Mayan dialects.

    Similarly, the Aztecs referred to themselves as the Mexica in which the x also sounds closer to sh. This, of course, is the origin of the name Mexico, and a demonstration of how the letter has also been used to represent native sounds that approximate the Spanish letter j.

    The state of Texas, often spelled Tejas in Spanish especially in the 19th Century, is another example of this. The state is named after a native Caddo word meaning roughly friends or allies.

    The confusion is similar to how the media could never agree on how to spell the name of former Libyan leader Khaddafi/Ghaddafi/Qaddafi (with single or double ds or fs). None of the spellings is exact per se, because Arabic, as a Semetic language, relies on phonologies alien to those in Western Indo-European languages such as English and Spanish. Thus, the more accurate spelling is subjective to the ear of the beholder.

  • 29. JayJonson  |  May 23, 2016 at 7:03 am

    Thanks for this interesting and informative disquisition, Fortguy. One reason I love this site is that I nearly always learn something unexpected when I come here.

  • 30. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 4:57 am

    Here's a map of the current governors in Mexico. PRD (Left) only has one state pending without a law passed (Tabasco).

    Here's a rundown of recent comments made by Governors and what party they are from:

    Mexico State – Submitted same-sex marriage bill (PRI)
    Nuevo Leon – Says he supports same-sex marriage both by local and federal bills (Independent)
    Hidalgo – Same as NL, but punts by saying many discussions in the state are needed beforehand (PRI)
    Queretaro – Says if state takes too long he may issue an executive order (PRI)
    Sonora – In a catfight with the Civil Registry and activists since she pulled the plug on licenses (PRI)
    Sinaloa – Hinted that if state Congress does nothing then they will just wait for the Supreme Court to knock down the ban (PAN)

  • 31. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 5:00 am

    First couple to receive an injunction in Zacatecas will marry soon. This leaves Hidalgo (who had a local get a successful injunction, but the plaintiff chose to marry somewhere else) as the only state where a wedding hasn't happened.

  • 32. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 11:49 pm

    Contraerá Matrimonio Primera Pareja del Mismo Sexo en el Estado de Zacatecas

    First Same-Sex Couple in Zacatecas State to Marry

    Después de nueve meses de retraso, Rodolfo Eduardo Flores Nava y Francisco Domínguez Galindo se convertirán en la primera pareja del mismo sexo que ejerza su derecho al matrimonio igualitario en el estado de Zacatecas, luego de que el congreso estatal no impugnó el amparo que les fue concedido en días pasados.

    Su abogado les informó de esto ayer, 18 de mayo 2016, por lo que se encuentran a la expectativa de la manera en que la Dirección de Registro Civil dará trámite a lo mandatado por la justicia federal.

    After nine months of delay, Rodolfo Eduardo Flores Nava and Francisco Domínguez Galindo will become the first same-sex couple to exercise their right to equal marriage in the state of Zacatecas, after the state congress did not challenge the amparo which was granted quite recently (because the state can no longer appeal such a judicial decision).

    Their lawyer informed them of this decision yesterday, 18 May 2016, so they are now waiting in expectation of how the Director of the Civil Registry will process it, as mandated by the federal judiciary.

  • 33. Sagesse  |  May 19, 2016 at 8:18 am

    I'm a big fan of facts in any discussion of human rights, and reliable demographics are important facts. The Williams Institute has always been a rich source of LGBT demographic information, and now the federal government is getting into the act.

    How Many Americans are Gay? [TIME]

  • 34. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    Mexican parties and their stances on the President's move on marriage below. Remember, 2/3 of Congress and a majority of the 31 states must approve a constitutional change.

    Mexico's Congress has 628 seats total, 128 Senators and 500 Deputies.

    PRI – (19 state Governors/52 in Senate/207 in Chamber of Deputies) President's party so in FAVOR
    PRD – (4 state Governors/22 in Senate/60 in Chamber of Deputies) Submitted the most bills nationwide so in FAVOR
    MC – (1 state Governor/1 in Senate/25 in Chamber of Deputies) in FAVOR
    Non-partisan/Independent – (1 state Governor/2 in Chamber of Deputies) in FAVOR

    PAN – (6 state Governors/38 in Senate/109 in Chamber of Deputies) On a state level, hit or miss – usually against their will – but as a whole prefer no changes
    Encuentro Social (8 in Chamber of Deputies) – talks about family being man-woman

    Still waiting on official releases from Morena who is Left and has submitted bills in some states, but apparently there are rumors that bigotry is still rife; that's the party where two members said very homophobic things and the leader's past includes not wanting to sign a partnership law as governor of Mexico DF some years back.

    If Morena joins, and I think they will unless they want to look like fake Leftists, that will add 35 in the Chamber of Deputies.

    Green Party (PVEM) has 1 state Governor, 9 in the Senate and 42 in the Senate. Despite the name they are center-right.

    Nueva Alianza is 1 in the Senate and 11 in the Chamber of Deputies. They're hit or miss on a state level.

    PT – 5 in the Senate, Left.

  • 35. theperched  |  May 20, 2016 at 1:49 pm

    Even though the leader is still mum on the subject, Morena says they will join in voting in FAVOR.

    There you go, 329/333 in the Chamber of Deputies so far going by public statements.

    Both chambers of Congress could get 2/3 if some of the silent ones join or if some of the members in the against parties break the party line.

    The Senate has 75/85 with public statements. Add PT that could be 80.

  • 36. theperched  |  May 20, 2016 at 2:01 pm

    Having state Governors on board is the easiest part since most are PRI.

    Total of who may favor the initiative: 25/31 state Governors (plus Mexico City who's in favor).

  • 37. Fortguy  |  May 20, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    Be careful making broad generalizations about PRI politicians. Although Mexico is effectively a three-party nation due to the hegemony of the PRI, PAN, and PRD compared to their much smaller competitors, many states generally have only two of the three parties competing locally with only the PRI being a national force.

    As a result, a dichotomy appears in the PRI. In wealthier states such as in the north that have large middle classes, the PAN is strong due to its popular free-market message. The PRD is very weak, and the PRI essentially serves as the only counterweight to the PAN from the left. In the poorer states of the west and south, the PAN's message has no resonance. In these states, the PRD is very popular among the rural peasants and urban workers, and the PRI politicians campaign from the right appealing to religious and socially conservative voters. Politicians from these states often break from PRI orthodoxy in both the federal Congress and state legislatures.

  • 38. theperched  |  May 22, 2016 at 8:19 am

    I know, but I'm still hopeful. Should be more cautious though, even leftist parties drag their feet.

    A prime example is Tabasco, who just by looking at the party name in charge (PRD Governor), you'd think they'd have a law through executive order by now.

  • 39. allan120102  |  May 22, 2016 at 10:32 am

    Another example is the governor of Sonora that being of Pri she should be more open about marrige equality and she isnt. The same for Durango and other states. Pri is a wild card in here. If they vote by councious and not by party then it will be tough to get marriagr equality because for sure some of pri going to vote against. Look at Morena in Campeche they are suppose for equality and one of their deputies vote against.

  • 40. theperched  |  May 22, 2016 at 7:50 pm

    It doesn't help that Lopez Obrador is STILL evading questions on marriage…ay…

  • 41. F_Young  |  May 19, 2016 at 12:44 pm

    USA: Public Is Divided Over Transgender Bathroom Issue, Poll Shows

    The public is sharply divided along age, party and education lines over whether transgender people should be allowed to use public bathrooms that match their gender identity rather than their gender at birth, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

    While less than a majority, 46 percent of Americans say they think that transgender people should be allowed to use only public restrooms corresponding to their gender at birth. A smaller number, 41 percent, think transgender people should be allowed to use the restroom that matches the gender they identify with.

    Democrats, college graduates and those under the age of 45 are more supportive of allowing for gender identity in bathroom choice, while their counterparts take the opposite stance.

    …..Nearly six in 10 Americans say they think decisions about which bathroom transgender students can use in public schools should be left to individual state or local governments to decide.

    Read more;

  • 42. F_Young  |  May 19, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    USA: House Passes Bill That Lets Government Contractors Fire People For Being LGBT

    WASHINGTON — The House passed a massive National Defense Authorization Act late Wednesday, and tucked inside of it, a provision that would allow federal contractors to fire employees for being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

    The language, slipped into the bill by Rep. Steve Russell (R-Okla.), would dismantle President Barack Obama’s 2014 executive action that makes it illegal for government contractors to fire or harass employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. In its place, Russell’s provision applies a broad exemption that would open the door to contractors discriminating against LGBT people based on that contractor’s religious beliefs

    …..Russell’s measure would affect every grant, contract and purchase order made by every federal agency, including contracts with hospitals, homeless shelters, colleges, schools, domestic violence shelters, and adoption agencies.

    …..“The way this amendment is written, it doesn’t matter if you’re a religious organization,” Smith responded. “Basically, you can be a private contractor, and this basically gives you the right to discriminate if you just decide that you don’t want to do business with gay people."

    …..The bill now heads to the Senate, which has its own ideas about what belongs — and what doesn’t — in an annual defense bill. Senators will hash out differences with the House later in a conference committee.

    Obama has already threatened to veto the House bill and gave a long list of reasons why, including problems ranging from misuse of funds and operating the prison at Guantanamo Bay, to military pay raises and base closures. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday that he couldn’t single out any one item, such as the anti-LGBT provision, as grounds for a veto.

    Read more;

  • 43. F_Young  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    USA: Vote on House Floor Over LGBT Rights Turns Ugly

    It was a chaotic scene on the House floor Thursday morning after an amendment to help protect LGBT people from discrimination failed by just one vote as Republicans succeeded in convincing a few members of their own party to switch their votes to help ensure the measure would not pass.

    …..The amendment — sponsored by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, D-New York, — would have prevented federal contractors from receiving government work if they discriminate against members of the LGBT community.

    …..Twenty nine Republicans kept their votes and remained supportive of the amendment along with every voting House Democrat.

    Read more:

  • 44. Sagesse  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:34 pm

    The Hill has this piece, as well. What is truly amazing is that the amendment came soooo close to passing in this House at all. Does this mean it could be changed in the Senate?

    Chaos in House after GOP votes down LGBT measure [The Hill]

  • 45. scream4ever  |  May 19, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    Most likely it will not be included in the Senate version, and will be stripped out in conference committee. Obama has already threatened to veto the bill for numerous reasons including this one.

  • 46. allan120102  |  May 19, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    Tabasco to legalize ssm in the 2nd session as there is now consensus for that to happen. If approve that will leave Yucatan as the only holdout touching the peninsula.

  • 47. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    Yucatan will have court action soon enough so consider the peninsula complete 🙂

  • 48. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:47 pm

    No, do not rush to count Yucatán. The way they have "fixed" their state constitution by specifically banning same-sex marriage on a 24-1 vote in their state congress in 2009, and the way their own state Supreme Court has subsequently interpreted said constitution by steadfastly upholding these discriminatory provisions, a massive dis-assembly operation will be required (even after Mexico's Supreme Court finally rules that the entire mess is unconstitutional) which will be quite slow and dragged out, a process which has not even begun.

    Never mind that a boat-load of amparos have been granted by the federal courts in Yucatán, as that does not appear to have any effect on the state court system nor on the thinking of the local congress and governor. Given all the serious legal impediments and lack of local action, Yucatán will be at or very near the end of the list in legalizing same-sex marriage in Mexico.

  • 49. Randolph_Finder  |  May 20, 2016 at 10:16 am

    I've always wondered what state(s) would be the Alabama and Mississippi of Mexico.

  • 50. DevilWearsZrada  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:21 pm

    Belarus: Gay Activists Hold First Public Protest In 3 Years, Have No Repercussions (Yet)
    MINSK – Five activists broke the silence over LGBT rights in Belarus on May 17, The International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHO), by handing out leaflets in support of equality and tolerance on the central streets of the nation’s capital and picketing a US embassy over marriage equality legalization last year.

    One of the participants, Aleksa Klimenka, told that he came with his de facto husband with whom he lives together for seven years. Also the event was officially supported by MSD-MH, a Belarusian social democratic youth organization, whose members also participated in it.

    The activists were followed by six journalists and two observers from human rights organizations. Almost all of the passers who were willing to take leaflets reacted peacefully though the participants had a heated debate with an old lady who argued that “it is illogical to be gay”.

    Aleksa Klimenka responded: “In 2012 my husband had to quit university just before graduating because of the distribution [In Belarus many university graduates are distributed for compulsory work for two years, often at remote destinations]. If he were my wife we could be distributed together, but we are nobodies in the eyes of the state so we could be separated for several years. He had to quit. As a result he has neither a higher education nor a job, that’s a big issue for us both”.

    After handing out the leaflets three activists held a solidarity picket in front of US embassy in support of marriage equality achieved there nationwide last year. One of them stood with a rainbow flag, the second one held a placard with drawn US flag and inscription that reads “You lit the Soviet darkness for me and my husband”. The third protestor held a placard with a photo and a quote of a US federal judge John Heyburn who ruled Kentucky’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.

    Both actions were not permitted by the authorities and the exact time of the latter one was not published, though immediately after protestors came to US embassy they were surrounded by near ten plain-clothed men who were watching and filming the picket. Surprisingly, neither they nor police officers approached the activists. Maybe the presence of the journalists and rights defenders and the fact that at the same day the US Department of State representatives visited Minsk to talk about democracy and human rights helped the protestors. Though recent developments in Belarus indicate that street protestors can be later fined up to $600 without being approached by the police, up to 15 days of jail time were also frequently used until last summer.

    These actions in support of LGBT rights are the first ones in Belarus since 2013, when the local LGBT activists experienced crackdown from the government, some of them fled the country to seek asylum in the West. Protestors said that the previous picket in front of US embassy in Minsk was held in 2003 but now, at the time of so-called liberalization when Belarusian government relaxed repressions in order to please the West and make it lift the sanctions, they wanted to use such an opportunity to express their opinion.

    More reports, with photos:
    In Russian
    In Belarusian

    And some surprise for you guys 🙂….

  • 51. F_Young  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:44 pm

    DevilWearsZrada: "And some surprise for you guys :)"

    It's very courageous of you to speak out publicly in Belarus to support marriage equality in the USA. I hope things turn out okay for you. Keep safe.

  • 52. DevilWearsZrada  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:57 pm

    Thank you F_Young, I will. I will be reporting the developments of this story because it seems to be just the beginning. Unfortunately just some local LGBT media reported this event though it got significant attention by mainstream ones.

  • 53. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 9:14 pm

    I tipped off an-ex reporter friend and one big blog owner 🙂 That blog got one of my posts to get hundreds of views in just one day.

  • 54. allan120102  |  May 19, 2016 at 3:55 pm

    Can someone update the map in wiki to show the changes in Morelos , Zacatecas and Sonora. Is confusing seeing Sonora as blue as marriages have stop. Zacatecas already won an amparo the links are in comments above are up so thanks you very much.

  • 55. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    Allan, on the Wiki map, Morelos should be gold (reflecting 5 amparos granted), and should have been re-colored gold months ago. However, if you're suggesting it should already be dark blue because of the positive vote in the state congress yesterday, then your suggestion is pre-mature, as there's another step yet to go in the ratification process before same-sex marriages can freely proceed there without impediment. Please re-read my bi-lingual post from yesterday on the subject up near the beginning of this thread.

    Sonora should remain dark blue, as it is debatable as to whether Gobernadora Popovich has the authority to override a policy decision and the directive of 11 May 2016 issued by the Director of the Sonora State Civil Registry. According to my understanding of the Judicial Reforms of 2011, the state director has the correct interpretation, once 5 amparos have been granted in a state, while Popovich is simply suffering from acute butt-hurt from being out-maneuvered (and which is why the state director made the actual change in policy on 2 May 2016, but did not go public with it until 11 May 2016).

    But, yes, Zacatecas should be re-colored tan to reflect the fact that one amparo has finally been granted there in that state. The text on Zacatecas should also verify this fact.

    But Wikipedia has lots of other catching-up to do on a very fluid situation, both in the text, as well as in the lists. For example, in the text and on the map, it correctly asserts that at the state level Guerrero has marriage equality. Yet in the list of states with marriage equality, Guerrero is missing. There are three categories: map, list, and text. A change (or addition) in one should (and does) require a change in all three. And for text, there is state text and summary text. Both should be in accord.

    Another example: Michoacán is now colored dark blue on the map, and has a newly-added sentence in the state text explaining why. But neither the summary text nor the list of states with marriage equality has yet been up-dated to include Michoacán.

  • 56. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 9:07 pm

    There are inconsistencies that I'll ask a friend to fix. He knows how to do maps – I'm a flop so I can't do it, won't even try 🙂 so I'll tell him what to update.

    There are also the continental/global map that needs to be updated with the right colors.

  • 57. Randolph_Finder  |  May 20, 2016 at 8:08 am

    Updated map for Moreles and Zacatecas.

    Just to check, does this mean that Hidalgo is the only remaining state with zero amparos?

  • 58. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 8:36 am

    Yes. But its about to get one.

  • 59. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 10:01 pm

    OK, and the butt-hurt governor of Sonora state is Claudia Pavlovich. I mis-spelled her "foreign-sounding" name up above.

  • 60. allan120102  |  May 19, 2016 at 10:39 pm

    Rick Sonora should be taken out of the dark blue color because like other governors have the power to ensure marriage equality like the states of Chihuahua and Guerrero they also have the power to stop it if its not written in the constitution.
    And its not only the governor its also the secretary of the state that have issue that the civil register should abide by the civil code that says only one man and one women. Miguel Pompa is the the secretary of state here is his declaration in the link I am presenting to you. That is why I am happy when states legalize ssm by the changing of their civil codes instead of governor actions.

    I concede the point in Morelos,but not in Guerrero as imo the state should be only dark blue when all municipalities allow ssm. Not just some it should be stripe like Kansas or NM were in the US case. EX Acapulco may have as 30% of the population or more and its not issuing. That is why in my point it should not be add. That is why Jalisco have May 12 in Wiki as statewide.

  • 61. Fortguy  |  May 19, 2016 at 11:50 pm

    The Sonora state civil registrar is acting, correctly, under the direction of the federal courts. The licenses issued are duly recognized by the federal government and all other state authorities, should any couple move or travel, and are thus valid. The only option available to the governor or secretary of state is to sue, but they will never find a judge that won't spank them and force them into a corner for a time-out for their temper tantrum.

  • 62. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 9:26 pm

    Last week, Chiapas news reported that an act of constitutionality had been filed against the state and this article says that the Supremes have officially accepted the case 🙂 How long did it take Jalisco's from acceptance to ruling? Anyone know?

  • 63. VIRick  |  May 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm

    Short answer: many months, probably at least a year or more.

    As an Action of Unconstitutionality, it is now case #1 in the list of 95. They take the cases in reverse order, oldest first. So, there are 94 cases ahead of it.

    For our purposes, an old Action of Unconstitutionality case (#89) from Jalisco is soon, then the major one (#46) from Michoacán of 30 September 2015, then (#4) Puebla, then (#1) Chiapas. I recently did a whole "long story" treatise on this, which should be found in the previous thread. Look for the all-caps entries in Spanish, quoted verbatim from the Supreme Court's own website.

    The Michoacán case was filed 7 1/2 months ago, and is half-way along on the waiting list. So, all told? Probably 15 months from filing date to hearing date. And then allow more time for the ruling.

  • 64. theperched  |  May 19, 2016 at 10:38 pm

    How did Baja California escape the accion again?

    I hope Chiapas/Puebla don't get any ideas.

  • 65. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 1:25 am

    There are two, perhaps three, different tiers of cases. The Actions of Unconstitutionality (challenges filed by plaintiffs or rights groups within 30 days of a change in the family/marriage code which still does not include marriage equality) are automatically heard by the Full Court (Plena). The Full Court can (and will) instantly strike down the non-compliant measure (after the case has been heard), as they did with Jalisco, and will do similarly with Michoacán, Puebla, and Chiapas, quickly ushering in statewide marriage equality in each, once they've made their separate rulings.

    Baja California escaped because they made two changes in quick succession. The Action of Unconstitutionality was filed against their first change. It should have been amended to also include a challenge against the second change, as well, but the CNDH failed to do so, and let the 30-day time limit lapse.

    The First Chamber is scheduled to hear appeals from Hidalgo and Durango, as well as the legal mess from Yucatán wherein which the Yucatán state Supreme Court upheld the discriminatory provisions embedded in the Yucatán state constitution. (This is why Yucatán will not be easy.)

    They also have a string of reviews of all the remaining state appeals from both Baja California and Sinaloa. Currently, both states (literally) have three strikes against them. Five strikes and their marriage bans are instantly and permanently overturned statewide. This will happen soon, probably first with Sinaloa (as that state appealed everything, when they still could, and did so a bit earlier than Baja California).

  • 66. allan120102  |  May 19, 2016 at 11:00 pm

    The perched I believe BC was sued when the time had pass to have its ban struck down, so that is why its ban was saved and didnt have the same fate as Jalisco. That is just my idea.

  • 67. Christian0811  |  May 19, 2016 at 11:33 pm

    I realized that the CA sodomy law is still on the books and its application is ambiguous, so I wrote a letter to my senator to repeal it entirely 😛 It was more nuanced than just that but I thought the subject matter was interesting.

    However, he's letting his term expire so I suspect it won't go anywhere even if he is sympathetic (I wrote the letter and sent it before I knew that little fact).

  • 68. JayJonson  |  May 20, 2016 at 6:20 am

    While the California sodomy law may remain on the books (and, no doubt, should be removed entirely), its application to consenting adults was excluded in 1975 in a major victory for the gay rights movement.

    After a six-year battle, the law repealing the criminalization of acts committed by adults in private was finally brought before the legislature. It passed in the House, where it was championed by Assemblyman Willy Brown, who would later become Mayor of San Francisco.

    The vote in the Senate was more dramatic. It initially ended in a 20-20 tie. However, Majority leader George Moscone kept the vote open and the Senate in session (by locking the door and having bailiffs prevent senators from leaving) while a private plane was dispatched to bring back Lt. Governor Mervyn Dymally from Nevada, where he was attending a conference. He cast the tie breaking vote. The bill was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown. An effort at a referendum on the law was made, but opponents failed to get enough signatures to place it on the ballot.

    Like Willy Brown, Moscone was also later elected Mayor of San Francisco. He was assassinated in 1978 along with Harvey Milk.

    The repeal of the law criminalizing private sexual conduct in California was one of the most important achievements of the post-Stonewall gay rights movement and demonstrated how the growing power of the movement in San Francisco could be leveraged into results at the state level.

  • 69. Christian0811  |  May 20, 2016 at 9:10 am

    I actually helped write the wiki article on AB 489 (1975) 😛 like the British 1967 Act it didn't technically repeal anything, its application was simply abrogated to criminal acts (although from a plain reading of the law, it doesn't seem that way). In fact the actual page on the Consenting Adult Sex Bill was mostly written by me a few years back haha

    I only could find the original legislative digest to the law, but not the text of it, so I thought it had repealed the sodomy law when in fact it was more nuanced than that.

    Just now I went back to Wikipedia and clarified that bit of minutia

  • 70. F_Young  |  May 20, 2016 at 1:01 am

    China: Only 5% of China’s LGBT citizens have come out of the closet

    …..The United Nation Development Program survey published Tuesday (May 17) on China’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex (LGBTI) citizens found only 5% have disclosed their sexual orientation or gender identity outside their families, and only 15% have the courage to tell their families.

    China's LGBTI people have come out to…
    Family: 14.6 %
    Workplace: 5.4%
    School: 5.1%
    Religious community: 4.3%

    By comparison, 59% of the US’s LGBT adults have told one or both of their parents their orientation, a 2013 survey from Pew Research shows

    More than 18,000 Chinese LGBTI people across the country responded to the UN survey, the largest ever on the topic in China. Over half of them reported discriminated or abuse at school, work, and most commonly, within their own families.

    Discrimination against China's LGBTI people:
    Family: 56.1 %
    School: 39.6%
    Workplace: 21%
    Religious Community: 13.9

    Nearly two thirds of the LGBTI people say they feel under great pressure from their families to get married and have children. Of those that are married, more than 84% are married to heterosexuals who don’t know about their orientation, and 13% are in a “cooperation marriage” in which a gay man and a lesbian woman (or vice-versa) agree to marry to appease their parents. Less than 3% are in same-sex marriages that were performed in foreign countries.

    China doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage and lacks policies or laws to protect LGBT rights. Chinese censors have recently cracked down on documentaries, online dramas, and other media that depict or imply same-sex love. Homosexuality has recently been banned entirely on TV as it is deemed “abnormal sexual relations.”

    Read more: <a href="” target=”_blank”>

  • 71. theperched  |  May 20, 2016 at 11:57 am

    Italian President signs Civil Unions bill. Locals expect to get 'unioned' in 30 days.

    Italian President Sergio Mattarella on Friday promulgated a civil-unions law, the president's office said. The law, which won final approval on May 11, extends to committed gay couples some of the same rights and protections currently enjoyed by heterosexual married couples, such as the right to receive a deceased partners' pension.

    The centre right is gearing for a referendum to abrogate the law despite its having been watered down to remove stepchild adoption.

    The referendum will flop and not even come to fruition for the following reasons:

    1. Public support for marriage/adoption may be iffy depending on poll, but support for civil unions is HUGE
    2. It was the Courts themselves that kept pressuring Italy to give couples something
    3. There's no way they'll meet the quorum of 51% participation.

  • 72. Randolph_Finder  |  May 20, 2016 at 12:02 pm

    The referenda that have a participation always get tricky. If you have 30% of the population in favor and voting, then if 20-30% of the population votes no then the referendum passes, OTOH if 0-20% vote no or 30-70% vote no, then it fails…

  • 73. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 12:14 pm

    If adoptions will have go with the bill then it probably will have fail. A majority of Italians are against ss adoptions. Though support for civil unions is huge.

  • 74. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 5:20 pm

    Italy’s President Signs Same-Sex Civil Unions Bill into Law

    Today, 20 May 2016, Italy’s President has signed the same-sex civil unions bill into law. Last week, Italy’s Parliament passed a bill creating same-sex civil unions, in the face of strong opposition from the powerful Catholic church, sparking rebellions from Catholic lawmakers.

    The law, which came about after the European Court of Human Rights found the country breached human rights laws, was passed after Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi called a confidence vote in himself to force it through, amid stalling from rebels. LGBT activists across Italy were jubilant as the bill passed by a vote of 369-193.

    Italy was the last country in Western Europe without legal recognition for same-sex partnerships. The bill was today signed into law by President Sergio Mattarella, according to Italian news agencies, ending a period of uncertainty.

  • 75. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 12:38 pm

    IN an interview Made Alex Mendez the lawyer who have succesfully challenge most state bans clarified the 9 entities where ss couples can get married. I trust him as he is the lawyer who guide most ss couples to get married and the one who challenge state bans. I trust him more than what other says. So I am quite happy I could find this interview so we can get a better count on which entities are issuing without the needing of an amparo.

  • 76. F_Young  |  May 20, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    Allan, for those of us who don't read Spanish, would you please list the nine entities mentioned by Mendez.

  • 77. Randolph_Finder  |  May 20, 2016 at 5:49 pm

    The article doesn't say… And at this rate the answer on how many will change by next week…

  • 78. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 6:38 pm

    Well I am trying to translate the article in google but the page doesnt let me, it says its prohibit anyways if you open the article you can see before the paragraph that mention Baja California that the 9 entities are Mexico City, Coahuila ,Nayarit, Michoacan, Morelos , Campeche, Jalisco, Quintana Roo and Chihuahua. If you check the text they list the entities in the 4th paragraph before the end.

    Will try to look other article where it let me translate the info so all of you can verify by your own.

  • 79. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 7:02 pm

    I did it. you may read the full article in English like this. If there is any problem tell me about it .;…

  • 80. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 10:42 pm

    Allan, I am quite doubtful that that list is a direct quote from Alex Alí Méndez Díaz, but rather, is a list made up by the author of the Milenio article, Alejandra Arteaga, and incorrectly attributed to him. Here is her list of 9 states (nueve estados del país) with marriage equality, as quoted from that article:

    Quintana Roo
    Ciudad de Mexico

    And here are several obvious reasons why it must be her list and not his:

    1. Quite basically, the Federal District is NOT a state. Almost no one in Mexico (and certainly not Alex) would make that elementary blunder.

    2. I am certain that Alex (like most everyone else with a good legal understanding) realizes that Morelos has one more step to go in its ratification process before same-sex marriage there becomes law. As a result, it is simply premature to list it. I am certain Alex would agree.

    Instead, please read, and then re-read again, Rex Wockner's Blog on this subject, as he is continuously making up-dates and changes, as events unfold:

    Here's the beginning portion of it:

    » Mexico's wild ride to marriage equality

    Mexico is the current hotspot of the marriage-equality movement and requires extensive treatment to wrap one's head around what's happening.

    As was the case in the U.S., Mexico's legalization of same-sex marriage is proceeding state by state but unlike in the U.S., there is no possibility for a single ruling from the highest court that will overturn same-sex marriage bans nationwide. Even the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) will have to go state by state.

    Mexico has 31 states and 1 federal district. Marriage equality has arrived in the federal district (Mexico City) and in nine states — via three different routes: Legislative legalization, a Supreme Court ruling, and state administrative decisions to stop enforcing their ban. Those 9 states (plus Federal District, plus one city) are:

    • Campeche (legislative)
    • Chihuahua (administrative)
    • Coahuila (legislative)
    • Guerrero (administrative)
    • Jalisco (SCJN ruling)
    • Michoacán (legislative)
    • Nayarit (legislative)
    • Sonora (administrative)
    • Quintana Roo (administrative)
    • Mexico City aka Distrito Federal (legislative)
    • Querétaro, the capital city of Querétaro state (administrative)

    And further down, notice the FOUR different legal methods by which marriage equality can come into force. Please stop dismissing the Administrative method, as it is as legitimate as any of the others.

    As included, notice specifically: Guerrero, Sonora, and Querétaro. And equally, notice that Morelos is not listed (not yet, but soon).

  • 81. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 11:25 pm

    Rick I am just showing you what I find in internet, Its the info found in google and twitter. If you go to twitter you can see that its being retweet a lot.

    Second this is from Milenio and I doubt a newspaper will put their dignity saying that its from someone (Alex) and it isn´t. You know how strict this newspaper with their info you cant even translate it normally, so I really doubt they will lie about it. They can even be sue if they say is from someone and it isnt. So I will go in this one with them so I believe them when they say its from Alex. I am not in Mexico so I can´t ask him personally.

    I havent seen nothing that Sonora is issuing ssm licences since the secretary of state and governor argue that the civil code being one man one women is still in effect so if you can find an article from yesterday, today or upcoming days after the governor clarified that marriage of ss will only happen if they get an amparo , then I will give it up. I have been looking since two days ago and cant find nothing.

    Rex Wockner might be as wrong as you or as me in the tally in how many states are really issuing and If I am quite frank I believe this might end if we ask Alex directly or by twitter. He have one so one of us may ask him so we can end this confusion. Mexico is a mess right now and with all info coming its making it messier.

    Again I am just posting of what I find . I am not lying or trying to change things that is why I provide links to support what I am saying.

  • 82. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 12:20 am

    Allan, no one is lying. It is just that events in Mexico are changing so rapidly that it is extremely difficult to keep up, and thus, not everyone agrees, particularly given the complexities, as Mexico's multi-level system is insanely arcane, even for reporters in Mexico. Just now, I ran into another article (which I will not quote, since I know it is incorrect) claiming that Colima has marriage equality, as well.

    Not exactly. Colima holds the current record for having had the largest number of amparos granted (several hundred of them, and increasing), as amparos are available for the asking from the judge in the municipality of Cuauhtémoc. Thus, given the large number of amparos granted in that small state, it is possible to make the claim that Colima has "de facto" marriage equality, but with this explanation added.

    But here's something concerning Campeche we need to find as a source. The state list in Wikipedia now indicates, following the publication of the new law, that marriage equality went into effect there in Campeche today, 20 May 2016. I am unable to verify this as a fact, although it very well may have happened.

  • 83. F_Young  |  May 21, 2016 at 4:29 am

    VIRick: "Instead, please read, and then re-read again, Rex Wockner's Blog on this subject, as he is continuously making up-dates and changes, as events unfold…"

    Thanks, Rick. The Wockner article is the best summary I have seen on the current situation in Mexico:

  • 84. DevilWearsZrada  |  May 20, 2016 at 1:40 pm

    Ukraine: Parliament’s Website Publishes Pro-LGBT Statement
    On the occasion of the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia Hryhoriy Nemyrya, a chairman of parliamentary human rights committee, made a statement where he urged everyone who can influence the situation to combat intolerance, discrimination and hate crime against LGBT Ukrainians. His statement was published at the parliaments’s site.

    “Today, May 17, is the International day against homophobia that is one more occasion for Ukraine to demonstrate its strong devotion to the idea of compliance to human rights and freedoms and nondiscrimination on the grounds of any characteristic”, said Nemyrya in his statement.

    He reminded that the Ukrainian society still has a high level of prejudice against LGBT people which is manifested in numerous cases of discrimination, disrespect to human dignity and freedom of speech and assembly. Besides, recently the country had a rise of crimes commited on the grounds of homophobia and transphobia.

    Source (in Ukrainian)

  • 85. Christian0811  |  May 20, 2016 at 3:10 pm

    First step to recovery is acknowledging the problem, I have high hopes for Ukraine!

  • 86. guitaristbl  |  May 20, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    Ukraine is currently under the spotlight as it will host the highly LGBT friendly eurovision song contest next year. If it wants to show a stark difference to Russia and at the same time make a step closer to western europe, now is its chance.

  • 87. theperched  |  May 20, 2016 at 1:47 pm

    Now a politician from Puebla is saying that the state will try to pass a marriage law before the year is over.

    They'd better hurry. Tick tock, the lawsuit's coming.

  • 88. F_Young  |  May 20, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    Oklahoma’s Plan To Impeach Obama And Keep Transgender Kids Out Of Bathrooms

    In the week since the Obama administration distributed guidance to schools about how to accommodate transgender students, Republican leaders across the country have lodged a variety of protests. On Thursday, lawmakers in Oklahoma took matters into their own hands, introducing a bill limiting bathroom access for transgender students and a resolution calling for Obama’s impeachment.

    The bill, SB 1619, mirrors the effect of North Carolina’s HB2 in some ways, but has its own fresh approach for segregating transgender students. Technically, it doesn’t actually require schools to block trans students from accessing the bathrooms that match their gender identities — at least not directly.

    If a school grants such access, however, “a student enrolled in the school district or the parent or legal guardian of a student enrolled in the school district may request a religious accommodation.” The only way the bill allows for a school to accommodate a “student’s sincerely held religious beliefs” is to guarantee them access to a facility that does explicitly ban transgender students. If they aren’t provided such a restroom or changing facility, they can sue.

    And here’s the kicker: the bill forbids the accommodation from being a single-occupancy facility. If a student objects to there being a trans student in the restroom, that student has to be provided a comparable facility that is trans-free, but they can’t be forced to use a private one. It’s often transgender students who are segregated into these separate facilities, which adds to their ostracization and the stigma that hinders their education experience.

    Read more:

  • 89. guitaristbl  |  May 20, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    This Oklahoma bill takes the crown for most idiotic bill around honestly. It creates a costly and unworkable situation for schools – having trans inclusive and exclusive bathrooms for males and females AND private facilities – soon bathrooms in Oklahoma schools will take more space that classrooms.

    I hope someday conservatives realize that they created this mess for themselves. Till they start their crusade against trans people, 21 states (or 18 ? Not sure) and hundreds of municipalities had such laws in the books and nothing happened.

    People tend to fear what they think they are capable of themselves, thats what I make out of all that.

  • 90. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    Ireland: Up-Date on Same-Sex Marriages, 6 Months On

    In May 2015, by referendum, voters in the Irish Republic overwhelmingly voted to bring in equal marriage, with 62% of voters backing equality, and just 38% against, despite strong lobbying from the Catholic Church.

    Civil marriages for same-sex couples began in Ireland in November 2015, and six months on, the country’s Department of Social Protection has released figures indicating that 412 couples have gotten married there so far.

  • 91. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    20 Years Ago Today: "Romer V Evans"

    Today, 20 May 2016, Lambda Legal’s Jon Davidson put it in context of what’s currently happening:

    Today marks the 20th anniversary of the groundbreaking US Supreme Court ruling in "Romer v. Evans," Lambda Legal’s successful challenge, in partnership with the ACLU and some of Colorado’s top lawyers, to Colorado’s Amendment 2. The infamous Amendment 2 prohibited the state and its political subdivisions from providing lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals any legal protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It was a reaction to the efforts by several Colorado municipalities to enact anti-discrimination ordinances to protect their LGB residents.

    If that sounds familiar, it should. This past March, North Carolina legislators adopted HB 2, which, like Colorado’s Amendment 2, prohibits North Carolina municipalities from adopting ordinances banning discrimination against LGBT residents. HB 2 goes a step further and compels those in North Carolina who are transgender to use only those sex-segregated facilities at public schools and in public buildings that match the sex listed on their birth certificate (something that cannot be changed in some states and is difficult to change in others).

    HB 2, like Amendment 2, was a reaction to the effort by a municipality, in this case the City of Charlotte, to adopt an ordinance prohibiting discrimination against LGBT residents. Like Amendment 2, HB 2 is fatally grounded in animus — which includes not only ill will, but also want of careful, rational reflection, or an instinctive reaction to those perceived as different, and who might at first feel unsettling to others. North Carolina is but the latest state where conservative state legislators have moved to enshrine discrimination in reaction either to pro-LGBT judicial rulings or to the efforts by localities to adopt fair, reasonable, and long-overdue anti-discrimination ordinances protecting their LGBT residents.

    Such discriminatory measures date back to Amendment 2, through the federal so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the various discriminatory state marriage amendments, to the present-day efforts of states like Tennessee, Arkansas, and now North Carolina, among others, to preempt the inclusive and progressive efforts of cities and towns. But, for as long as retrograde state legislators and officials have moved to keep us down, so too have we and our sister organizations fought back successfully in court to ensure this country lives up to its promise of fair and equal treatment for all.

    It is a line we can trace back from "Obergefell v. Hodges," last year’s historic Supreme Court ruling striking down state marriage bans, through "Windsor v. the United States," the 2013 Court ruling that struck down a key provision of DOMA, to 2003’s "Lawrence v. Texas," which invalidated all remaining state anti-sodomy laws, to, 20 years ago today, "Romer v. Evans."

    When decided, "Romer v. Evans" was the single most positive Supreme Court ruling in the history of the gay rights movement. The Court’s ruling made clear that lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals have the same right to seek government protection against discrimination in the United States as any other group of people.

    The decision also marked a new level of legal respect for LGBT people and rejected the notion that it is legitimate for the government to discriminate against gay people based on moral objections to homosexuality. It is a precedent whose influence can be traced through every momentous subsequent decision, and it informs our work today as we fight back against continuing efforts to enshrine discrimination. Indeed, faithful application of the controlling principles enunciated in "Romer" requires that the preemption provisions contained in North Carolina’s HB2 likewise be found unconstitutional.

    Today, as we look at the challenges in front of us, we reflect on the 20 years of precedent at our back and take comfort. We’ve been here before, we handled it then, and we’re committed to continuing to protect LGBT people, now and in the future.

  • 92. VIRick  |  May 20, 2016 at 8:17 pm

    And here we have a portion of Scalia's sanctimonious dissent in "Romer v. Evans," the first in a long series of such anti-LGBT rants, which became ever-increasingly hostile, and for which he ultimately became infamous, as found in the "Comments" section at Joe.My.God:

    "Today's opinion has no foundation in American constitutional law, and barely pretends to. The people of Colorado have adopted an entirely reasonable provision which does not even disfavor homosexuals in any substantive sense, but merely denies them preferential treatment. Amendment 2 is designed to prevent piecemeal deterioration of the sexual morality favored by a majority of Coloradans, and is not only an appropriate means to that legitimate end, but a means that Americans have employed before. Striking it down is an act, not of judicial judgment, but of political will."

    Specifically, for the plaintiffs, "Romer v. Evans" was argued before the US Supreme court by Jean Dubovsky.

  • 93. allan120102  |  May 20, 2016 at 7:55 pm

    Queretaro Governor change course and says he will not send any initiative to queretaro´s congress, now he says he will wait until if the federal chamber approves ssm if they do.

  • 94. SethInMaryland  |  May 20, 2016 at 9:19 pm

    I really hope the Mexico congress will pass it because it can be a complete mess following Mexico at times. I get confused what states have equality , the ampros , the federal rulings on the states ,etc.

  • 95. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 12:55 am

    Texas State GOP Platform Declares That The Majority Of Texans Enjoy Making Homo Sexytime

    Via Reuters:

    A Texas-based LGBT advocacy outlet helped spark a grammar debate this week over whether an errant comma in the stridently anti-homosexual Republican Party of Texas platform can be read as saying the majority of Texans are gay.

    The plank that was approved by delegates at the party’s convention this month reads: “Homosexuality is a chosen behavior that is contrary to the fundamental unchanging truths that has been ordained by God in the Bible, recognized by our nations founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.”

    Lone Star Q, which describes itself as the state’s No. 1 source for LGBT news, asked on Twitter on Wednesday to have a “grammar debate” over the wording. In response, grammarians pointed out that placement of the final comma in the plank could lead to understanding it to mean that homosexuality is a chosen behavior shared by the majority of Texans. They also noted that “nations” should have an apostrophe and that by using “has been,” the plank gives the impression that homosexuality has been ordained by God.

    More from NPR:

    As Texas Monthly rightly points out, the sentence actually says that homosexual behavior “has been ordained by God in the Bible, recognized by our nations founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.” That’s probably not what Texas Republicans meant.

    The august magazine blames that Oxford comma there at the end for the confusion, but we asked our aforementioned (and heroic) copy editors where the real problem was and they zeroed in on the verb “has.” It’s singular, so the rest of the sentence ends up referring to the noun “behavior” instead of “truths.”

  • 96. theperched  |  May 21, 2016 at 2:59 am

    Add Guerrero to the list of punting. Their leader of the state Justice Committee gives bogus answers like "we should wait for the Federal law first so we don't have to make two laws in case the Fed bill clashes with the state bill". *Sigh* A bunch of blah, blah.

    PAN politicians are also coasting with this "we'll do it…but only if the Federal bill passes first" nonsense.

  • 97. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    Alabama Haters Rally for Anti-Gay Judge Roy Moore

    Montgomery AL — Today, Saturday, 21 May 2016, supporters of suspended Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore held a rally in Montgomery outside the Alabama Judicial Building. Speakers led prayers and urged those at the rally to sign an online petition supporting Moore, and called the ethics charges filed by the Judicial Inquiry Commission a “politically-motivated travesty,” reported.

    Moore’s wife, Kayla Moore, told the crowd that her husband did not attend the rally because he did not want the event to be solely focused on him, (despite the fact that it obviously was). “It’s about freedom,” Kayla Moore said. “It’s about religious freedom and our constitution.”

    On 6 May 2016, the Judicial Inquiry Committee filed an ethics complaint against Moore. The charges stem from a January 2016 order Moore sent to probate judges saying an Alabama court order banning same-sex marriages remained effective even though a US Supreme Court decision effectively legalized same-sex marriage.

    Moore’s attorney Mat Staver called the complaint a political witch hunt. Staver said Moore did nothing wrong and did not tell judges to refuse the licenses. Moore, 69, has been automatically suspended from the bench and could be removed from office.

    Speakers also denounced same-sex marriage and President Barack Obama’s directive that public schools allow students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity.

  • 98. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Ssm inminent in Sinaloa says deputy. It looks like the supreme court will strike down their ban soon.

  • 99. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 5:37 pm

    A PRI deputy of the Sinaloa state Congress, who is also a member of the Human Rights Commission of the state Congress, threw this political dig at the Sinaloa state administration, while giving us insight regarding the imminent overturning of the offending articles in Sinaloa's Civil Code by Mexico's Supreme Court:

    “Yo espero que con esto el congreso esté de una vez realizando las reformas legislativas para que se modifiquen los Artículos 40 y 165 del Código Familiar y que personas del mismo sexo puedan contraer matrimonio, además de que está en la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación una declaratoria general de inconstitucionalidad para dejar sin efecto los artículos de nuestra código."

    Dijo que la administración estatal no ocupa que se reformen los artículos al Código Civil para realizar los matrimonios igualitarios, basta con el ordenamiento de la Suprema Corte de Justicia que considera inconstitucional los artículos que estipulan que la unión sólo debe hacerse entre un hombre y una mujer.

    "I hope that this Congress will immediately be making the legislative reforms so as to change Articles 40 and 165 of the Family Code in order for same-sex couples to be able to marry, otherwise the Supreme Court of Justice will issue a general declaration of unconstitutionality to render without effect and annul the articles of our code."

    She said that the state administration does not worry that the articles in the Civil Code need to be reformed for egalitarian marriages, as it is enough with the order of the Supreme Court that it consider unconstitutional the articles stipulating that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

    So, yes, it will soon be Sinaloa's turn to follow behind Jalisco in having Mexico's Supreme Court overturn its same-sex marriage ban, after which it will finally be Baja California's turn to face the same fate.

  • 100. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 7:16 pm

    What number is Sinaloa? Because I dont remember Sinaloa being sue like Puebla, Jalisco or Chiapas. I know they are a lot of amparos against the state but not somethings as big declaring their civil code null.

  • 101. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 8:59 pm

    Allan, it wasn't. But remember, there are two tiers of cases that can come before Mexico's Supreme Court.

    We recently found the full list of the 95 challenges of Actions of Unconstitutionality which automatically go before the Full Court: old case from Jalisco regarding their separate civil unions, a "newly-old" case from Michoacán regarding the same point, plus the new challenge from Puebla, and ditto from Chiapas.

    Then, before the First Chamber, in the meantime, we will be having appeals from Hidalgo, Durango, and Yucatán, PLUS those multiple state appeals of every remaining amparo from both Sinaloa and Baja California. On three separate occasions, the Supreme Court has already ruled against both states. Two more such rulings against each (and the necessary additional cases have already been appealed to the Supreme Court) will cause a General Declaration of Unconstitutionality to become definitive, and same-sex marriage will be legalized by Supreme Court order.

    And that PRI deputy in the Sinaloa state Congress just re-affirmed this point, while admonishing the Sinaloa administration of doing nothing in the interim, other than waiting for the General Declaration of Unconstitutionality to be issued..

  • 102. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 7:20 pm

    Sorry it was Dolores Hidalgo of Guanajuato. Jeez so close.

  • 103. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 10:58 pm

    Mexico: Guanajuato State: Amparo #8 Granted, Couple Married

    Celebran el Primer Matrimonio Igualitario en Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato

    First Same-Sex Marriage Celebrated in Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato

    Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato – A Sergio y Óscar les llevó un año realizar los trámites para la union. Ayer, 20 de mayo 2016, se realizó en Dolores Hidalgo, el primer matrimonio civil entre dos personas del mismo sexo, Sergio Rubén Hernández Grimaldo y Óscar Zacarías Portillo Moncada unieron sus vidas de manera jurídica. La ceremonia civil se realizó en la oficialía 01 del Registro Civil, de Dolores Hidalgo a las 11 de la mañana, ante los medios de comunicación que fueron invitados por los propios interesados.

    Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato – It took Sergio and Oscar a year complete the formalities for marriage. Yesterday, 20 May 2016, the first civil marriage between two persons of the same sex, between Sergio Rubén Hernández Grimaldo and Óscar Zacarías Portillo Moncada, was held in Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato, when they joined their lives together legally. The civil ceremony was held at the Civil Registry Office 01, in Dolores Hidalgo, at 11 AM, before the media who had been invited by the interested parties.

    The city of Dolores Hidalgo is known as the cradle of Mexican Independence, as the "Grito de Dolores" was uttered by Miguel Hidalgo early on the morning of 16 September 1810 from the front steps of the parish church. In addition, the city's cemetery contains the final resting place of the legendary mariachi, José Jiménez.

  • 104. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 7:37 pm

    Looks like ssm will not come to Bolivia for a long time as the people in a referendum needs to approve it .

  • 105. VIRick  |  May 22, 2016 at 1:41 am

    Bolivia: Ley de Identidad de Género no Aprueba el Matrimonio Igualitario

    Bolivia: The Gender Identity Law Does Not Approve Marriage Equality

    La Paz, 21 de mayo 2016 – El presidente de la Cámara de Senadores, José Alberto Gonzales, aclaró ayer Viernes, 20 de mayo 2016, que la Ley de Identidad de Género, sancionada por esa instancia legislativa, no aprueba el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo.

    “Con esta norma los heterosexuales seguiremos siendo heterosexuales y los transgénero y transexuales seguirán siendo transgénero y transexual, está claro que esta Ley no viabiliza el matrimonio igualitario”, aclaró. Gonzales subrayó que, para permitir el matrimonio igualitario de dos personas del mismo sexo, se tendría que modificar la Constitución Política del Estado por medio de un referendo.

    La Paz, 21 May 2016 – The president of the Senate, José Alberto Gonzales, said Friday, 20 May 2016, that the Gender Identity Law, just enacted by the current legislative body, does not approve same-sex marriage.

    "With this standard, heterosexuals will continue being heterosexual, and transgender and transsexual remain transgender and transsexual. It is clear that this law does not give viability to marriage equality," he said. Gonzales stressed that, to allow for marriage equality for two people of the same sex, they would have to amend the State Constitution through a referendum.

    For now. But this is still an important step in the right direction. Let's make certain that this Gender Identity Law is actually signed into law, as it has been on their pending agenda for months.

    This law came into being because a set of Indigenous transgender women hound anti-gay President Evo Morales about it (he's quite in favor of Indigenous rights) at every public appearance he makes throughout Bolivia, keeping up the noise and pressure. It may seem backwards to some, but transgender and transsexual rights are coming to Bolivia first, ahead of gay rights.

  • 106. theperched  |  May 22, 2016 at 8:36 am

    The law was already signed by the Vice President since Evo is in Cuba.

    I predict the rest of South America to have a trans law way before marriage encompasses the entire continent. Same with some Asian countries.

  • 107. allan120102  |  May 22, 2016 at 10:26 am

    Paraguay, Bolivia and Peru are the three most conservative countries in SA. Its going to be tough getting them to have marriage equality or civil unions. Civil unions is a current debate topic among peruvian elections right now. I am not sure about Suriname havent hear about them in terms of equal rights.

  • 108. guitaristbl  |  May 22, 2016 at 2:58 pm

    And lets not forget about Guyana, the last SM country where homosexuality is still illegal.

  • 109. bythesea66  |  May 23, 2016 at 3:37 am

    In this context should we view Guyana as more likely on the timeframe of the Caribbean rather than the rest of SA?

  • 110. Randolph_Finder  |  May 23, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    Definitely. Makes *much* more sense when compared to Jamaica than Uruguay.

  • 111. davepCA  |  May 22, 2016 at 5:01 pm

    Interesting marriage trivia about Paraguay – in the 1800s, interracial marriage was not just allowed in Paraguay, but actually mandated. You could not legally marry someone of the same race, ALL marriages could ONLY be with someone of a different race (more specifically, the ruling Paraguayans of European descent could only marry Paraguayans of indigenous descent). This was mandated by the 'Supreme Dictator for Life' Francia, in an effort to rid the country of its race-based upper and lower class distinctions.

  • 112. Randolph_Finder  |  May 23, 2016 at 9:18 am

    And by some arguments not the nuttiest leader of Paraguay in the 19th century…

  • 113. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 7:42 pm

    They are 5 couples waiting to marry in Yucatan and last year the state celebrate 17 marriages of ss couples.

  • 114. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 9:52 pm

    Yucatán: A Boat-Load of Amparos Were Granted in 2015

    El Registro Civil de Yucatán tiene cinco solicitudes de matrimonio de personas del mismo sexo, sin que consumen su enlace, informó su directora Karla Franco Blanco. Recordó que el año pasado, el Registro Civil llevó a cabo 17 enlaces matrimoniales de personas del mismo sexo, pero todos ordenados por jueces federales. Franco Blanco sostuvo que la Constitución Política del Estado de Yucatán no contempla las bodas entre personas del mismo sexo.

    The Civil Registry of Yucatán has five requests for marriage from same-sex couples, all awaiting resolution, said its director Karla Franco Blanco. She recalled that in 2015, the Civil Registry conducted 17 marriages of same-sex couples, all ordered by federal judges. Franco Blanco said that the Constitution of the State of Yucatán does not allow marriage between persons of the same sex.

    According to Wikipedia, at least 4 amparos were granted in Yucatán in 2013, and at a minimum, the all-important #5 was granted in 2014. So now, we have an up-date of 17 more in 2015, plus 5 more waiting approval in 2016. Thus, at the moment, at least 22 amparos have already been granted in the state for same-sex couples to marry, with the distinct possibility that it will soon become 27 for Yucatán.

    I knew the grand total was more than 10, but I hadn't fully realized that it was, in fact, quite likely to be more than 22! And 5 should have been enough to have overturned the offending language in their State Code (except that the same ban is also written into their State Constitution, thus requiring much more legal effort before those provisions can be ruled unconstitutional).

  • 115. allan120102  |  May 21, 2016 at 10:58 pm

    I imagine Yucatan doesnt have marriage equality because of their constitution and because the governor does not want to act either because the minium requirement are 5 amparos and with 22 its 4 times the quantity.

  • 116. VIRick  |  May 21, 2016 at 11:44 pm

    I am not certain that the Governor of Yucatán can even act, given that the state Congress embedded the prohibition against same-sex marriage in their state's constitution. He could issue an Executive Order setting aside a provision in the Family Code or in the Civil Code, but not necessarily in the State Constitution. I believe only the courts can overturn an article in a state's constitution (unless the state Congress were to undertake the process of actually repealing it),– and at that, either method is a long, complicated, drawn-out process, as we're seeing.

  • 117. theperched  |  May 22, 2016 at 1:52 am

    Top dogs in Colombia's Notary Dept reiterate that those who give marriage licenses cannot use conscientious objection as a reason to deny them to same-sex couples when the time comes. They stress that all couples are to be treated equally.

  • 118. JayJonson  |  May 22, 2016 at 6:00 am

    The promoters of the event said that thousands and thousands would show up to support Moore. From the pictures I've seen, there were fewer than 100 people at the rally.

  • 119. 1grod  |  May 22, 2016 at 7:08 am

    Alabama rallies for suspended judge: No mention of dissent probate judges such as John Enslen being present in Montgomery at a May 21 gathering organized by Roy Moore's wife Kayla and others. Noted was the reply brief to the May 6 complaint by the Al Judicial Inquiry Commission will be filed soon.

  • 120. theperched  |  May 22, 2016 at 7:47 am

    Campeche's marriage law was printed in the gazette on the 16th, came into effect on Friday BUT the catch is that one of the applicants must be a resident of that state:

    The first application in a Civil Registry since the passage of the law was received by a couple who was seeking an injunction but then the law changed so they only need to pick a date to marry.

  • 121. allan120102  |  May 22, 2016 at 6:52 pm

    Rick you will like this news about Queretaro. I am not sure though how can the supreme court of Mexico can force a municipality to issue ssm licenses and not the whole state to do it. I am quite dazed about it. I hope you can explain it to me. The head of the civil registry say that only that municipality can marry ss couples without an amparo.

  • 122. VIRick  |  May 22, 2016 at 8:54 pm

    Querétaro: No Amparos Necessary

    Querétaro: Sin Necesidad de Amparos

    Querétaro, Querétaro, 18 de mayo 2016.- En el municipio de Querétaro, se han realizado 12 matrimonios igualitarios sin necesidad de presentar amparo, aseguró Guadalupe Yáñez Alanís, directora del Registro Civil.

    La funcionaria explicó que a pesar de que no se han modificado las leyes locales que contemplan los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo, los oficiales del registro civil están obligados a acatar la jurisprudencia que aprobó la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación que privilegió los derechos humanos de todas las personas.

    "A través del pronunciamiento de la Corte que ya causó jurisprudencia desde el año pasado, en el municipio de Querétaro por instrucciones del alcalde nos hemos apegado a la Ley y hemos respetado los derechos humanos entonces no pedimos amparos," dijo la oficial del Registro Civil.

    Querétaro, Querétaro, 18 May 2016.- In the municipality of Querétaro, there have been 12 egalitarian marriages without the necessity of filing for an amparo, said Guadalupe Yáñez Alanís, director of the Civil Registry.

    She explained that although they have not changed local laws to include marriages between same-sex couples, civil registry officials are obliged to abide by the law, as adopted by the Supreme Court of Justice, that respects the human rights of all people.

    "Since last year (2015), following the pronouncement of the Court which has already caused the jurisprudence, in the city of Querétaro, on instructions from the mayor, we have adhered to the law and have respected human rights, so we do not ask for injunctions," said the official of the Civil Registry.

    Allan, the Supreme Court has not issued any specific ruling directed against Querétaro (neither city nor state), and they couldn't, even if they wanted, as no case from Querétaro was ever appealed by anyone (and in any event, it is now too way late). Instead, the Civil Registrar for Querétaro is taking a progressive, forward-thinking, long term view that the Supreme Court has issued its jurisprudence, and that we, in Querétaro are abiding by it. The 5 amparos for Querétaro have been granted, and that was all that was needed.

    It is the same progressive, forward-thinking, long-term view expressed by the Director of the Sonora state Civil Registry, as well as by the Director of the Guerrero state Civil Registry. And, of course, it matches with the progressive, forward-thinking, long-term view expressed by Rex Wockner, Fortguy, and myself, among many others, that the change to allow same-sex couples to marry is inevitable, as Mexico's Supreme Court has already issued its jurisprudence on this entire matter, and everyone must abide by it sooner or later. So, Querétaro is doing it sooner, without argument, and without intransigence, and have the required amparos to back them up.

    Recall, too, that Querétaro fired one civil registry employee some months ago who insisted that a same-sex couple seeking to marry must present an amparo.

  • 123. allan120102  |  May 22, 2016 at 10:06 pm

    But why can all municipalities abide by it instead just one? Its frustrating. The head of the civil registry should force all the municipalities to comply and marry ss couples.

  • 124. VIRick  |  May 22, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    In a news article, dated 13 October 2015, I found this:

    En sesión de Cabildo se nombró a Humberto Servin Valdivia director del Registro Civil y a Guadalupe Yañez Alanis como directora del Registro Civil del Municipio de Querétaro.

    That is all it says. Thus, I have to assume that Humberto Servin Valdivia was appointed Civil Registrar at the state Level, while she, at the same session, was appointed Civil Registrar at the municipal level.

    She replaced Leonel Rojo Montes, who was appointed to the position on 15 December 2012, and who is the actual individual who eliminated the necessity for same-sex couples to seek an amparo before they can marry. She is continuing with the same policy.

    I have no information as to what the other 17 municipalities within Querétaro state are doing or not doing, nor do I have any information as to why, apparently, no directive has yet been issued from the Director of the Querétaro state Civil Registry.

    Besides, we should not be expecting there to be a same-sex couple seeking to marry in every last municipality in each and every state. Most of the rest of Querétaro state is quite rural (meaning that it is in a total time-warp from urban centers). Plus, for the past 6 years, same-sex couples from all over Mexico who wish to marry have been going to Mexico City to do so, or within the past 3 years, have been visiting the travelling judge in Colima, or for the last 10 months, their own state capital city, among other possibilities.

  • 125. Randolph_Finder  |  May 23, 2016 at 9:21 am

    Essentially the Mexicans *started* with the issue that the US after Obergefell, if you can go elsewhere and get married and have it fully recognized, forcing all of the little places to give in gets more difficult…

  • 126. VIRick  |  May 23, 2016 at 2:06 pm

    The whole process has been slowed down by any number of factors. For example, there are the amparos colectivos, granted to multiple parties. By my count, in Tamaulipas state, 4 amparos have been granted, but all 4 have been amparos colectivos, covering a grand total of 302 couples!

    Also, most states in Mexico do not have residency requirements. Coahuila and Quintana Roo (and Colima, with amparo in hand) definitely do not. And others that do, don't enforce it. In Mexico City one can successfully list the address of the hotel where one is temporarily staying (or use the address of a friend or relative). In Nayarit, one can list any address under the sun, and no one checks to see if it is actually in Nayarit.

    Plus, many couples go to get married where it is easiest, quickest, and with the least hassle and the least expense. Well over 6,000 marriages between same-sex couples have already occurred in Mexico City alone. And little Colima has had several hundred (all with amparo for the asking). One small town in Quintana Roo (Playa del Carmen) is regularly marrying an average of 6 same-sex couples per month. In all three instances, some may be marriages of residents, but the bulk are not.

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