Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Equality news round-up: News on religious exemptions in Mississippi, an old conversion therapy case back in the Ninth Circuit, and more

Conversion therapy cases Discrimination Transgender Rights

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit– One of the challenges to California’s ban on so-called LGBT “conversion therapy” was back in the Ninth Circuit yesterday. A three-judge panel heard arguments in the case. At the link you’ll find the briefs, the argument video, and a link to the background of the case so far.

– Art Leonard has a discussion of current federal law involving employment discrimination claims based on sexual orientation.

– On Monday, a federal judge in Mississippi heard arguments in Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant the former marriage equality case, over whether to reopen the judgment in that case and grant an injunction barring officials from relying on HB 1523, a “religious liberty” law designed to allow clerks to refuse marriage licenses if they have religious objections.

– A Republican Congressperson is writing a bill purporting to bar discrimination against LGBT people, but the proposal will include some form of exceptions for religious people.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. VIRick  |  June 23, 2016 at 2:42 pm

    Orders of Compliance Issued in Virginia Transgender Case

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 23 June 2016, in "G.G. v. Gloucester County Public School Board," the case involving the right of transgender students to use the appropriate bathroom, District Court Judge Doumar issued his order to comply with the judgment from the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

    "Based on the evidence submitted through declarations previously proffered for the purpose of the hearing on the Preliminary Injunction, this Court, pursuant to Title IX, hereby ORDERS that Gloucester County School Board permit the plaintiff, G.G., to use the boys' restroom at Gloucester High School until further order of this Court." The order specifically notes, "this injunction is limited to restroom access and does not cover access to any other facilities."

    The District Court Order is here:

    Note to North Carolina: You can tear up HB 2, at least as it pertains to the entire transgender bathroom access issue, as it, too, is in violation of the same mandate from the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. In fact, besides Virginia and North Carolina, all public educational facilities anywhere in Maryland, West Virginia, and South Carolina must also be in compliance.

  • 2. VIRick  |  June 23, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    Up-Date on the Numerous Cases Challenging Mississippi HB 1523

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 22 June 2016, in "Alford v. Moulder," the ACLU case, the Judge has denied the ACLU's motion for reconsideration of his previous denial of a preliminary injunction. The Order is linked here:

    In "CSE III," the Defendants filed their opposition to a preliminary injunction. You can read those briefs, in addition to filings in all four cases here:

    There is a hearing today, 23 June 2016, and tomorrow, 24 June 2016, on the motions for preliminary injunctions in "CSE III" and in "Barber v. Bryant." There are no electronics allowed in the courtroom, but CSE is reporting during breaks. Kathleen recommends their twitter feed:

  • 3. VIRick  |  June 23, 2016 at 4:04 pm

    Pittsburgh Schools Adopt Transgender Non-Discrimination Plan

    Pittsburgh — Pittsburgh Public Schools have enacted a non-discrimination policy that outlines the rights, protections, and support systems schools must provide for transgender students. The city’s school board unanimously approved the district policy on Wednesday, 22 June 2016, and officials called it the right thing to do for some of their “most vulnerable” children.

    “We’re moving forward on the right side of law and history,” said board member Moira Kaleida, who urged the district to consider the guidelines last fall after principals and legal experts told her of the need for them. The guidelines allow students to use bathrooms and to participate in physical education classes and intramural sports that align with their gender identity. It also lets students be addressed by their preferred name and gender pronoun.

    Under the policy, students may request alternative accommodations, including a private office restroom, curtain partition, or a separate changing space if they feel uncomfortable. Each school will also form teams that will receive specialized training to serve as a “visible resource” for students who have questions. “Under no circumstance should any student be required to use sex-segregated faculties that are inconsistent with their gender identity,” according to the policy.

  • 4. VIRick  |  June 23, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    Mexico: Michoacán Legalizes Marriage Equality from 23 June 2016

    Mexico: Michoacán Legalizará Matrimonio Igualitario de 23 de Junio 2016

    En Michoacán, se reformó el Código Familiar a favor de los matrimonios igualitarios y la sociedad de convivencia, figuras que a partir de este jueves, 23 de Junio 2016, podrán disfrutar las personas del mismo sexo con diversos derechos y obligaciones que son reconocidas ante la sociedad y la ley.

    Mediante la publicación en el Periódico Oficial del Estado de Michoacán, se reformaron los artículos 23, 101, 127, 133, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 301, 302, 303, 304 y 307; y se derogan los artículos 128 y 308, todos dentro del Código Familiar, donde se especifica los cambios que tendrá que hacer el Registro Civil respecto a las actas del estado civil en cuanto a matrimonio y defunción, entre otras acciones.

    Tan solo en el artículo 127 se especifica que el matrimonio es la unión legítima de dos personas para realizar una comunidad de vida permanente, en la que se procuren respeto, igualdad, y ayuda mutua.

    Mientras que en el artículo 295 indica que la sociedad de convivencia es el acto jurídico que se constituye, cuando dos personas físicas, mayores de edad y con capacidad jurídica plena, establecen un hogar común, con voluntad de permanencia, colaboración, asistencia y ayuda mutua.

    En esta figura, se señala en el artículo 296 que no podrán constituir una sociedad de convivencia las personas unidas en matrimonio, concubinato y aquellas que mantengan vigente otra sociedad de convivencia; mientras que en el artículo 297 obliga a los convivientes, en razón de la voluntad de permanencia, colaboración, asistencia, ayuda mutua y el establecimiento del hogar común, la cual surte efecto frente a terceros cuando la sociedad es registrada ante el Registro Civil.

    In Michoacán, the Family Code was amended in favor of marriage equality and civil partnership equality, benefits which from Thursday, 23 June 2016, will be enjoyed by same-sex couples with various rights and obligations, as recognized before society and by law.

    By publication in the Official Gazette of the State of Michoacán, Articles 23, 101, 127, 133, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 301, 302, 303, 304 and 307 were amended; and Articles 128 and 308 were repealed, all within the Family Code, where specific changes will have to be made by the Civil Registry regarding vital records pertaining to marriages and deaths, among other actions.

    Only Article 127 specifies that marriage is the lawful union of two persons to realize a permanent communal life in which respect, equality, and mutual assistance are obtained.

    Article 295 states that a civil partnership is the legal act constituted when two individuals of legal age, and with full legal capacity, establish a common home, voluntarily and permanently, with co-operation, and mutual assistance.

    It is stated in Article 296 that a civil partnership cannot be constituted by persons already living together in marriage, concubinage, nor those that maintain another civil partnership; while Article 297 requires that said cohabitation, due to the desire for permanence, collaboration, assistance, mutual aid, and the establishment of the common home, be effective against third parties when the partnership is registered with the Civil Registry.

    Note: By the enactment of these legal changes, effective from 23 June 2016, Michoacán will be allowing both hetero couples and same-sex couples equality to enter into either marriage or (sociedad de convivencia) civil partnership.

  • 5. Fortguy  |  June 23, 2016 at 7:07 pm

    In early Bermuda returns, the situation looks very ugly for both marriage and civil unions.

    Bermuda government: Election Results

  • 6. theperchybird  |  June 23, 2016 at 7:28 pm


    The vote is already non-binding but just writing to say that 50% participation would be needed if it was.

  • 7. allan120102  |  June 23, 2016 at 8:02 pm

    Well I thought civil unions would fare better but it looks like people in Bermuda dont support either every new count looks uglier, we are not winning any region of Bermuda. So sad that the majority votes on our rights.

  • 8. Fortguy  |  June 23, 2016 at 7:16 pm

    Also in early returns, the UK Brexit vote is a nail-biter. The trend so far seems to be Northern Ireland and Scotland voters preferring to remain in the EU while voters in both England and Wales support leaving. Gibraltar also participated in the referendum and overwhelmingly voted in favor of the EU.

    BBC News: EU Referendum Results

    Wikimedia Commons has a map of election results by locality that is being constantly updated tonight.

  • 9. VIRick  |  June 23, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    Chicago Ordinance Gives Transgender People Bathroom Rights

    Chicago — Transgender people in Chicago will be able to use a public bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity under an ordinance passed by the city’s aldermen. Aldermen approved the change in Chicago’s human rights ordinance on Wednesday, 22 June 2016.

    Mayor Rahm Emanuel says it closes a legal loophole that could “inadvertently” allow restaurants, hotels, and other “public accommodations” to discriminate against transgender people. Before Wednesday’s action, the ordinance, among the first in the nation that included gender identity as a protected class, exempted bathrooms. It required people to use the bathroom matching the sex on their government-issued identification.

  • 10. SethInMaryland  |  June 23, 2016 at 8:19 pm

    Leave will win in the UK.

  • 11. Fortguy  |  June 23, 2016 at 9:16 pm

    Yes, the BBC, CNN, and others have now projected just that. Tabulations are complete everywhere outside England. Scotland, NI, and Gibraltar have voted to remain while Wales has voted to leave. Much of the English vote is still out, but the trend for the EU does not look good there.

    Both the euro and pound sterling are taking a pounding on currency markets, and East Asian/Pacific stock markets are not at all happy. Expect Wall Street to have a rough day tomorrow.

    Commentators on CNN are predicting another Scottish independence vote sooner rather than later. If the UK goes into recession because of this, then it looks like the United Kingdom may very well actually face disunion.

  • 12. Fortguy  |  June 23, 2016 at 11:13 pm

    In England, the results are now final. The English have voted against the EU, and therefore the total vote throughout the UK and Gibraltar is 51.89% for Brexit. 72.2% of the UK electorate participated in the referendum. Singularly, no Scottish electoral district voted to leave the EU.

    The pound is now at $1.36 which is the lowest level against the dollar since 1985. The Tokyo Nikkei stock index is down -8.23%.

  • 13. VIRick  |  June 25, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    Already, there's fall-out from the Brexit vote from 3 different directions:

    1. Gibraltar voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU. As a result, Spain has proffered an offer to incorporate Gibraltar into Spain (as per several previous offers), but this time, would allow residents of Gibraltar to carry dual Spanish/British citizenship.

    2. Overall, 62% of voters in Scotland voted to remain in the EU. As a direct result, Nicola Sturgeon has already begun to push for a second Scottish referendum to split Scotland from Britain. In the recent previous referendum, by a very narrow margin, Scotland barely voted to remain in Britain. On the Brexit vote, without exception, every last district in Scotland voted to remain in the EU, many by a 2:1 margin. Now, if they were to again vote to split from Britain (and it would not take much of a shift in sentiment in a second referendum to cause this to happen), Scotland could still remain in the EU. This maneuvering has everything to do with Scotland guarding its North Sea oil and gas reserves (which lie mostly off-shore of Scotland, not England).

    3. A majority in Northern Ireland (almost 56%) also voted to remain in the EU. Over the years, since the original Irish partition, a number of districts have become majority Catholic, particularly the entire western half of Northern Ireland, as well as the several districts along the southern border with the Republic, all of which voted to remain in the EU. The blue ring around Belfast is the Protestant stronghold, which voted (as England) to leave the EU. Belfast itself voted to remain. This map illustrates the split very graphically:

    As a result of this vote, and due to the majority-Catholic districts all voting heavily in favor of remaining in the EU, Sinn Fein has already called for the reunification of Ireland, given that the Republic continues to remain in the EU (and to use the Euro as its currency). Thus, by joining the Republic, the majority's desire in Northern Ireland to remain in the EU would be satisfied.

    For our purposes, if Northern Ireland were to join the Republic, marriage equality, as currently existing in the Republic, would become the law in Northern Ireland.

  • 14. allan120102  |  June 23, 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Well 10 municipalities in morelos have vote for marriage. There is still a week ahead for the remaining municipalities to vote. Btw Joujutla and Zacatapec have vote against ssm today.

  • 15. theperchybird  |  June 23, 2016 at 9:42 pm

    Tlaltizapan voted against too:

  • 16. Phoenix_12  |  June 24, 2016 at 7:33 am

    Puente de Ixtla voted in favor today. Tetecala, Mazatepec and Coatlán del Río are going to vote today as well. In Coatlan, the vote is expected to be very close. Today is the last day of the municipalities to vote.

  • 17. Fortguy  |  June 23, 2016 at 11:57 pm

    Bermuda: Before I go to bed for the night, I'll report that the votes are total for 11 of the island's 12 electoral regions with the incomplete region having partial returns. Marriage equality is losing everywhere and is losing by a more than two-to-one margin throughout.

    Civil union equality is polling only marginally better. However, 2 of the 12 regions supported same-sex civil unions while in two other regions the margin against was four votes or fewer. The one outstanding region with only partial counts doesn't look promising.

    This is why majorities should never vote on the rights of minorities regarding the respect of citizenship.

  • 18. Fortguy  |  June 24, 2016 at 12:14 am

    Votes are now final. Only 47% of the electorate voted.

    Same-sex marriage:
    Yes: 6,514 (31.46%)
    No: 14,192 (68.54%)

    Same-sex civil unions:
    Yes: 7,626 (36.97%)
    No: 13,003 (63.03%)

  • 19. allan120102  |  June 24, 2016 at 12:20 am

    That is why I dont follow polls after the decision of slovenia to roll back marriage equality. Many polls show at least civil unions passing when we clearly see that Bermudians dont even like that. I feel bad for my brothers and sisters in Bermuda.

  • 20. theperchybird  |  June 24, 2016 at 3:56 am

    It peaked at 46% turnout so it's doubly-nonbinding 🙂

    The Parliamentary Registrar, Tenia Woolridge, announced the result of the Referendum on Same Sex Relationships 2016.

    44,367 people are registered to vote. 20,804 people or 46.89% turned out to vote in this referendum.
    The overall turnout for the referendum was less than 50 per cent. Based on the Referendum Act 2012, a referendum question shall be taken to be unanswered if less than 50 per cent of the persons registered in the parliamentary register vote at the referendum.

    A notice will be published in the official gazette early next week.

  • 21. Fortguy  |  June 24, 2016 at 12:27 am

    Breaking News: UK PM David Cameron resigning.

  • 22. theperchybird  |  June 24, 2016 at 3:38 am

    The British pound is PLUNGING and affecting other places.

    The UKIP promises of the 350 million given to EU stopping and the money being sent to the UK National Health Service instead is a lie, Nigel Farage even backtracked. The UKIP promise of curbing migration was a lie as someone from the leave camp said there was no guarantee that could happen. They fooled people.

    Scotland already drafting legislation for a second independence referendum and NI eyeing a reunification with Ireland. Spain enticing Gibraltar with a proposal of dual observation to let them in easier.

    UGH. Italy is constitutionally blocked from referendums on international treaties, but don't be surprised if France or Austria are next. Le Pen already wants a referendum in France and the ruling Socialist party is in decline…

  • 23. allan120102  |  June 24, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    14 municipalities have vote against same sex marriage and 10 in favor with 3 more agaisnt same sex marriage the law in Morelos will not come into effect.

  • 24. theperchybird  |  June 24, 2016 at 10:35 pm

    Social Democratic Party's position is in favor and urged all regidores to vote yes (a shame it's too late for Zapatepec and Jojutla). That's PRD, SDP pushing their members to vote in favor.

    Most of the municipalities that have voted against were PRI or more conservative parties, the exception were the two SDP who sadly voted before the party really put its foot down and one from the Humanist Party.

    The ones left:

    Movimiento Ciudadano has 2, PRD still has 1, SDP still has the capital that they keep postponing (for the best).

    PRI has 2, PAN has 1, PVEM has 1.

    PAN will surely go against, the ones to watch are PVEM and PRI who have been hit and miss.

  • 25. VIRick  |  June 24, 2016 at 4:20 pm

    New York: Stonewall Inn Becomes a National Monument

    President Obama kicked off Pride celebrations in the nation’s largest city with a declaration naming the birthplace of the gay rights movement, New York City‘s Stonewall Inn, a national monument. The announcement, made at noon on Friday, 24 June 2016, concluded years of efforts to recognize the historic legacy of the still-operating bar, where on 28 June 1969, eight New York City police officers executed a raid on the gay hangout.

    “The designation will create the first official National Park Service unit dedicated to telling the story of LGBT Americans, just days before the one year anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision guaranteeing marriage equality in all 50 states,” the White House said in a statement.

    “The new Stonewall National Monument will permanently protect Christopher Park, an historic community park at the intersection of Christopher Street, West 4th Street, and Grove Street, directly across from the Stonewall Inn in Manhattan’s Greenwich Village. The monument’s boundary encompasses approximately 7.7 acres of land, including Christopher Park, the Stonewall Inn, and the surrounding streets and sidewalks that were the site of the 1969 Stonewall Uprising.”

    Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who spearheaded the campaign to dedicate Stonewall as a national monument, issued a statement applauding the president’s announcement. He was joined by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer, Governor Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bill de Blasio, NYS Senator Brad Hoylman, NYS Assembly member Deborah Glick, Councilmember Corey Johnson, NYC Comptroller Scott Stringer, NYC Public Advocate Letitia James, and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, among others.

  • 26. VIRick  |  June 24, 2016 at 4:39 pm

    Texas: Elderly Dallas Man Dies Days before First Wedding Anniversary

    Jack Evans married his longtime partner George Harris on 26 June 2015, the day the US Supreme Court issued its "Obergefell" ruling. Evans passed away Friday morning, 24 June 2016, two days before his first wedding anniversary.

    Gay Dallas advocate Jack Evans, who made national headlines when he and his partner of 56 years became the first same-sex couple to legally marry in Dallas County TX, passed away today after a battle with lung cancer. He was 86.

    When Evans came out in 1956, there was no gay rights movement to speak of. But by the time he passed away Friday morning, just days before his first wedding anniversary with husband George Harris, he had witnessed a half century of dramatic changes for LGBTQ Americans.

    Evans and his husband Harris, who met in 1961, founded the North Texas GLBT Chamber of Commerce, were involved with The Dallas GLBT History Project, and gained national attention when they became the first same-sex couple to legally marry in Dallas County.

    But those victories were hard fought. While LGBTQ communities now enjoy public block parties in cities across the country, the couple told D Magazine in 2014 that they saw people get arrested at house parties in the 1960s.

    “Our real focus has been our legacy for the community, that our whole lives have been trying to improve, to encourage the young people to make a difference,” Harris said. “They think they can walk down Cedar Springs holding hands, and it’s just automatically come to that, but there was a lot of struggle to get there.”

  • 27. VIRick  |  June 24, 2016 at 6:19 pm

    Colombia: Agreement to End Civil War Acknowledges LGBT Victims

    The cease-fire agreement that representatives of the Colombian government and a rebel group signed on Thursday, 23 June 2016, to end a decades-long war acknowledges its LGBT victims. “The end of the conflict constitutes the best opportunity to guarantee the victims’ rights to truth, justice, recovery, and to ensure the full guarantee of human rights for everyone,” reads the agreement; which specifically lists the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex community among the groups impacted by the conflict.

    Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and Rodrigo Londoño, commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) who uses the nickname Timoshenko, shook hands after their respective lead negotiators signed the agreement during a ceremony in Havana over which Cuban President Raúl Castro presided. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, Dominican President Danilo Medina, and officials from the US, Norway, and other countries were also in attendance.

    The agreement, among other things, would create a truth and reconciliation commission with representatives of the Colombian government and FARC. It also calls for the inclusion of the LGBT community, farmers, indigenous people, Colombians of African descent, and other “vulnerable” groups in the country’s political process. “It is the duty of the Colombian state to promote, protect, respect and guarantee human rights, including economic, social, cultural and environmental rights, with a differential and gendered approach based on the principles of equality and progressive thought and to guarantee the right to peace, especially in the areas most affected by the conflict,” reads the deal.

    “For its part, the FARC-EP (Popular Army) reiterated its unqualified commitment to human rights,” it adds. “Its members, and as an organization, commit to promoting and respecting the individual freedoms and human rights of everyone and a peaceful coexistence in its territories as it transitions to a legal political life.”

    The AP reported that Santos said the peace agreement could be finalized as early as next month. More than 200,000 people have died in the war that began in 1962.

    Members of the FARC, paramilitaries, and the Colombian army frequently targeted, displaced, or even killed LGBT people during the decades-long conflict. A 2011 law that Santos signed as a way to compensate landowners in the South American country who lost their land during the war specifically acknowledges LGBT victims. Peace talks between the Colombian government and FARC began in Havana in 2012.

    Wilson Castañeda, director of Caribe Afirmativo, a Colombian LGBT group, was among the six human rights activists who participated in a meeting between representatives of the Colombian government and FARC that took place in 2015.

    Angélica Lozano, a former member of the Bogotá City Council who is the first openly LGBT person elected to the Colombian Congress, was among those who attended the signing ceremony in Havana. The lawmaker once advised Íngrid Betancourt, who was kidnapped by FARC members in 2002 during her presidential campaign. Lozano told the Blade during a 2013 interview in the Colombian capital of Bogotá that any peace agreement between her country’s government and the rebel group should hold those responsible for “atrocities” and recognize people who were forcibly displaced from their homes or tortured.

  • 28. theperchybird  |  June 25, 2016 at 11:37 am

    It's at 16 against marriage in Morelos (two more were mentioned in another article by the same site), 1 more and it's over…
    In a few hours Congress will count all the answers sent to them and if it's 17 nos then the bill fails.
    1 of the remaining regions is ruled by a PAN member…ay Dios, please let everyone else stay quiet if they won't vote in favor…

  • 29. allan120102  |  June 25, 2016 at 12:04 pm

    I knew it would had been hard after conservative and religious groups mobilize to every municipality and demand them to vote against. This is why since the start I mention that the bill would probably failed as Morelos is conservative and with religious groups demanding munis to vote against and the lgbt groups not doing a big mobilization it was doom. I am hoping that the remaining municipalites dont vote and stay quiet. if not marriage equality will not come to Morelos.

  • 30. theperchybird  |  June 25, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    One paper suggested that cabildos can't work this weekend so if it stayed at 16 we are safe. If they are mistaken about no weekends or haven't reported all municipalities that voted against then Morelos is doomed.

    All we can do is wait…

  • 31. allan120102  |  June 25, 2016 at 12:31 pm

    In here it says they can. 14 against and 12 in favor. 7 more to vote.

  • 32. theperchybird  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:02 pm

    Ayala and another voted against.

  • 33. allan120102  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    Jonatapec was the other.

  • 34. VIRick  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    MEXICO » On Monday, 27 June 2016, by Default, Morelos Becomes the 10th of Mexico's 31 States with Marriage Equality

    MEXICO » Morelos » Aprobarán por Default los Matrimonios Igualitarios, y en 27 de Junio 2016, Será Estado #10 con Matrimonio Igualitario

    Per Rex Wockner:

    Este lunes, 27 de junio 2016, se vence el plazo para que los 33 ayuntamientos definan si aprueban o no el tema del matrimonio igualitario en Morelos, informó el diputado Edwin Brito Brito quien confirmó que sólo faltan nueve municipios por votar, pero el escenario es que se hará efectiva la figura de afirmativa ficta para hacer realidad este derecho en el estado.

    Hasta ayer, 24 de junio 2016, 12 municipios habían votado a favor, 13 en contra, y faltaban ocho por votar, mismos que lo podrían hacer este fin de semana, porque de no ser así se hará efectiva la afirmativa ficta (por default) con lo que en el estado se hará realidad el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo.

    On Monday, 27 June 2016, the deadline for the 33 municipalities to decide whether or not to approve the issue of equal marriage in Morelos expires, said deputy Edwin Brito Brito who confirmed that they are only missing nine municipalities from voting, but the scenario is to be made effective figure reported of constructive approval to realize this law in the state.

    Through yesterday, 24 June 2016, 12 municipalities had voted in favor, 13 against, with 8 not voting, but they could do so this weekend, because otherwise, their constructive assent (by default) will become effective, and by this, the state will gain the reality of marriage between persons of the same sex.

  • 35. theperchybird  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    The tally is behind, it's 16 against (two more voted yesterday) according to reports and the government-confirmed number might be higher (hopefully not). Nothing official yet.

  • 36. allan120102  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:25 pm

    Agree. The taly is behind. I thought Ayala would had voted in favor. I just really hope that none vote today or tomorrow. I really think though we lost. Adoption make it harder to win as some municipalities vote against because of the provision in adoption.

  • 37. allan120102  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    Even deputies dont think it will pass after Ayala and Jonatapec voted against. Its 16 against 12 and today its the last day to vote.

  • 38. VIRick  |  June 25, 2016 at 1:37 pm

    Ooooh, you caught me before I was finished editing into English, as that concept of "afirmativa ficta," which is where we are at this moment, is difficult to re-state in correct English. Still, the numbers are very close, but voting was effectively over at the close of business yesterday, 24 June 2016, as municipal councils normally do not meet on Saturdays or Sundays. As of Monday morning, first thing, 27 June 2016, "afirmativa ficta" automatically kicks in, whereby any/all remaining municipalities which have not voted will be deemed to have voted "Yes" in favor.

    Let me try the translation again:

    On Monday, 27 June 2016, the deadline for the 33 municipalities to decide whether or not to approve the issue of equal marriage in Morelos expires, said deputy Edwin Brito Brito who confirmed that they are only missing nine municipalities from voting, but the scenario is to be made effective (and complete) by the measure of afirmativa ficta (the default constructive approval) to realize this as the law in the state.

    Through yesterday, 24 June 2016, 12 municipalities had voted in favor, 13 against, with 8 not voting, but they could do so this weekend, because otherwise, their constructive assent (by default) will become effective, and by this, the state will gain the reality of marriage between persons of the same sex.

  • 39. VIRick  |  June 25, 2016 at 2:22 pm

    Mississippi: State Admits HB 1523 Does Not Go Both Ways to Protect All

    Per Equality Case Files:

    US District Judge Carlton Reeves asked lawyers for the state in court on Friday, 24 June 2016, if its controversial "religious freedom law" would protect Mississippians with sincerely-held religious beliefs against straight marriage, just as it protects those with sincerely-held religious beliefs against same-sex marriage.

    A beat of silence followed. Paul Barnes, who is defending the attorney-general and the registrar of vital records in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of House Bill 1523, cleared his throat. Judge Reeves looked at him. "I'm trying to parse it out," Barnes said.

    Almost a minute of silence followed. The other attorneys for the defense, Douglas Miracle and Tommy Goodwin, checked their notes. Someone coughed. Finally, Barnes leaned into his microphone. "No, your honor. Based on the text it does not," he said. "But I have not fully analyzed that question."

    The admission came near the end of two days of testimony about the lawsuits, "Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant," and "Barber v Bryant," claiming that Mississippi's House Bill 1523 violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Both lawsuits are asking Reeves to grant a preliminary injunction against the law to keep it from taking effect on 1 July 2016.

    The Establishment Clause prohibits government from favoring one religion over another, while the Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from favoring one group of citizens over another.

    Gov. Phil Bryant signed HB 1523 into law in April. It singles out three "sincerely-held" religious beliefs as worthy of protection: that marriage is between one man and one woman; that people should not have sex outside such marriages; and that a person’s gender is set at birth. The law protects from litigation anyone who refuses services to gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals because of these beliefs. It does not protect anyone who refuses service to someone based on other "sincerely-held" religious beliefs.

    The discrepancy is the crux of the plaintiff's argument that the state passed HB 1523 not to protect the free expression of religion but to erode the rights that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Mississippians had recently won in Supreme Court decisions like "Obergefell v. Hodges" and "United States v. Windsor."

  • 40. guitaristbl  |  June 26, 2016 at 8:28 am

    Nobody has mentioned it yet surprisingly enough but happy marriage equality one year anniversary (and not only) !

    On this day in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas in an opinion by justice Anthony Kennedy the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional all remaining sodomy bans in US states. All of these states with the exception of Montana still have these laws in the books.

    On this day in 2013 the Supreme Court ruled in Windsor v. United States in an opinion written by justice Anthony Kennedy that section 3 of the so called Defense of Marriage Act is uncostitutional based on the due process guarantee of the 5th amendment.
    On the same day in Hollingsworth v. Perry in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts the Supreme Court vacated a 9th CA judgment in favour of plaintiffs challenging California's voted in by voters ban on same sex marriage and said the judgement of the district court (also in favour of plaintiffs) should stand as the proponents of the law had no standing to defend it in court.

    Finally on this day in 2015 the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell et al. v. Hodges et al. in an opinion by justice Anthony Kennedy that state bans on same sex marriage are unconstitutional as they violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment of the US constitution effectively legalizing same sex marriage nationwide.

    These facts are well known to everyone here but it's always good to remember and pay tribute to all those who stood in the frontlines like Eddie Windsor and Jim Obergefell among many others.

  • 41. scream4ever  |  June 26, 2016 at 1:24 pm

    Couldn't have said it better myself! Also of note, NOM had their Marriage March yesterday and it was a total bomb. Only 200 attendees and five speakers LOL

  • 42. VIRick  |  June 26, 2016 at 8:45 pm

    From what I've seen/heard, NOM has truly descended into the icky category of being die-hard, fringe, nut-jobs, the type that pollutes the Mall in DC on a constant basis, right up there with JW and Falun Gong. According to the report posted on Joe.My.God, there were precisely 237 warm bodies sort-of in attendance, as that number included journalists, infants in strollers, odd on-lookers, stray tourists, a couple of red-caped loons, and a few lost dogs. They had more flags and red banners than warm bodies. And although not mentioned in most reports, they also got several good cussings-out and quite a few jeers from a fair number of passing pro-equality on-lookers/tourists who simultaneously happened to be in the same vicinity of the US Capitol/Mall at the same time. Also, my friend's dog howled and barked at them at inappropriate times.

  • 43. davepCA  |  June 26, 2016 at 10:23 pm

    … you sure your friend's dog wasn't howling and barking at them at all the APPROPRIATE times? : )

  • 44. VIRick  |  June 26, 2016 at 10:48 pm

    Dave, indeed, true enough. That dog has the strangest habit of howling and barking at any/all mental cases, homeless or otherwise, and went totally off at the very sight of the red-caped loons. And given that it is a beagle, it can really howl when it senses serious mental instability.

    It pulled the same performance in front of the US Supreme Court on the day of oral arguments in the "Obergefell" case when it encountered all those sign-encrusted whackos parading round.

    I encouraged my friend to take the dog to Scalia's funeral, but he managed to back out of that challenge, so the beagle has yet to encounter the WBC. Still, the dog did out-do itself the day it unexpectedly ran into Louie Gohmert. Plus, the homocon, Aaron Schock, recently got a close-up earful, too, while cruising Upper Senate Park.

  • 45. davepCA  |  June 26, 2016 at 6:47 pm

    I just got back from the San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade, and I took the opportunity to talk to lots of visiting straight folks who were attending their first pride parade and made sure to fill them all in on the significance of the date. It was a really good day!

  • 46. Phoenix_12  |  June 28, 2016 at 1:40 am

    "All of these states with the exception of Montana still have these laws in the books."

    If I'm not mistaken Arkansas, Missouri and Virginia also changed their laws.

  • 47. allan120102  |  June 26, 2016 at 6:05 pm

    Puebla´s congress said they will not legalize ssm and will not change their civil code until the supreme court invalidate their ban like they did with Jalisco.
    Morelos municipalities have until tomorrow to legalize ssm. Officially they are 13 against and 12 in favor. 8 municipalities have not send how it was vote or if they vote on the issue.

  • 48. VIRick  |  June 26, 2016 at 9:03 pm

    And to summarize, we need 17 municipalities to vote in favor, that being the majority of 33. Tomorrow, first thing, 27 June 2016, the 8 (or whatever number still remains) which have not yet voted, by the default legal process known as "afirmativa ficta," will have their votes cast for them by the state as a "Yes" in the affirmative.

    According to Allan's latest numbers, that will then jump the number voting in favor to 20, sufficient to pass the Morelos state constitutional amendment legalizing same-sex marriage, making Morelos state #10 (of 31) in the never-ending same-sex marriage saga currently under way in Mexico.

    Note: This legal process, of the state certifying these 8 remaining non-votes, and turning them into "Yes" votes, may take a few days, after which, too, it may take them more time before they can then proclaim that the amendment has duly passed.

  • 49. theperchybird  |  June 26, 2016 at 11:38 pm

    I still think it'll be 17-16 if it does pass. I hope I'm wrong.

    Chiapas and Puebla know that the clock is ticking and I bet neither will lift a finger. Let them have it.

  • 50. VIRick  |  June 26, 2016 at 10:04 pm

    Ohio Democrats Renew Focus on LGBT Protections

    Columbus — Several Democratic state lawmakers plan to host forums around Ohio this summer highlighting three bills addressing gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues. One bill would ban therapy aimed at changing the sexual orientation of minors. Another would include sexual orientation and gender identity under “biased-motivated crime.” A third sets out to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations.

    The renewed focus on the legislation follows the killings of 49 people in a gay nightclub in Florida, and today’s anniversary of the court ruling that effectively legalized same-sex marriage. The lawmakers want the Republican-controlled Ohio House to act on the bills. A spokeswoman for the House GOP caucus says members will have a chance to discuss the bills after summer break.

  • 51. VIRick  |  June 26, 2016 at 10:27 pm

    New York Federal Case Could Be Key for Establishing Legal Protections for Gay People

    Members of Congress and LGBT advocates are expected to file briefs this week, urging a federal appeals court to provide protections against sexual orientation-based discrimination under existing civil rights law. The Obama administration has yet to take a position on the issue.

    Over the past four years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has extensively and repeatedly pressed the case for expanding the interpretation of existing civil rights protections to cover discrimination against LGBT people. The Obama administration has supported the broad goals of the EEOC. It has, however, been slower to adopt the independent agency’s specific means of doing so.

    The EEOC decided back in 2012 that the sex discrimination ban in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars anti-transgender discrimination. The Obama administration eventually agreed with that position in late 2014, a position that has been applied to other laws, including federal education nondiscrimination law, and in recent months, has received heavy media coverage.

    The question that remains is whether the Obama administration will take the final step previously taken by the EEOC: arguing that sexual orientation-based discrimination also should be barred under existing civil rights laws that ban sex discrimination.

    On Tuesday, 28 June 2016, amicus — friend of the court — briefs are due in a key case pending in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. In his case against Omnicom Group, Inc., Matthew Christiansen argues that the appeals court should follow the EEOC’s interpretation, and hold that “sexual orientation is inherently a ‘sex-based’ consideration that deserves Title VII protection.” The EEOC reached that decision a little less than a year ago, in July 2015, although it had signaled before then that it was headed in that direction.

    The trial court judge in Christiansen’s case ruled against him on this point, but US District Court Judge Katherine Polk Failla also wrote that she was bound by a prior decision from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that sexual orientation-based claims are not a type of sex-based discrimination. She did not, however, think that ruling was correct, and urged the appeals court to “erase” the line between the two types of discrimination that was previously drawn by that court. Noting the EEOC’s ruling in the matter and what Failla called the “impracticability” of treating sexual orientation discrimination as a “categorically” different thing than sex discrimination, she wrote that “one might reasonably ask — and, lest there be any doubt, this Court is asking — whether that line should be erased.”

    Christiansen appealed the decision and asked that the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals to do just that, filing his brief on 21 June 2016. A win in the appeal would allow him to return to the trial court and argue that Omnicom discriminated against him because he is gay. Under the appeals court’s rules, briefs supporting his appeal are due on Tuesday, 28 June 2016.

  • 52. FredDorner  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:06 pm

    I think this could boil down to how the Price Waterhouse v Hopkins precedent is interpreted, because that does cover gender expression, gender roles and gender nonconformity. Anti-gay bias could be viewed as sex-based discrimination because it's bias rooted in an assumption about gender roles.

  • 53. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 7:35 am

    It's too close in Morelos! 16 against-15 in favor, but several things may happen because 4 of the Nos didn't formally send their answer to Congress; failure to do so will result in them being put in the Yes pile.

    As for the 2 remaining, 1 is up in the air because it didn't have enough voters to count as an approval or rejection and they're looking into the legal answers on what to do.

    1 still has until July 3rd to vote as it wasn't informed it had to until June 3 which gives it 1 month (the required amount of time) to decide.

  • 54. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 7:57 am

    Today is the last day for most of them with the exception of one. We need two more votes to win. I just hope we win today if not we would need to wait the supreme court to invalidate their ban or the federal congress to legalize it.

  • 55. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 8:11 am

    Well it says here that we got the 17 we need but I am waiting for other sources before we count it as a win.Thank God it says the lgbt community mobilize to the remaining municipalities to vote.

  • 56. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 8:18 am

    The numbers are all over the place. All these articles were written today and this one says activists have the tally at 14 against-13. They differ on what happened with Ocuituco, whether a vote happened or not.

    I think yours may be the final count, hopefully.

  • 57. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 12:18 pm

    Base on consultations the majority of the people in Sinaloa are in favor of ssm but against ss adoption.

  • 58. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 12:51 pm

    Even After Orlando Killings, Florida Still Fighting Marriage Equality

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 17 June 2016, in "Birchfield v. Philip," (formerly "Birchfield v. Armstrong"), the Florida federal class-action suit for retroactive recognition of spouses on death certificates, the Plaintiffs have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. In addition, on the same date, a Memorandum in Support of the Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment has also been filed. This extended memorandum is particularly telling, detailing, as it does, Florida's continuing, bitter, intransigent obfuscation.

    – Motion is here:
    – Memorandum in support is here:

    Given the large number of retirees in Florida, this matter of issuing retroactive death certificates is not a small issue, and further, becomes excessively nasty as it involves a whole collection of rather elderly survivors, all attempting to handle the settlement of the estates of the deceased, while still not being recognized as spouses. In addition, by Florida law, anyone who dies in Florida, even if non-resident, must have their estate settled in Florida, as the state of Florida, without a state income tax, is particularly greedy about collecting estate taxes from all and sundry.

  • 59. TheVirginian722  |  June 27, 2016 at 11:22 pm

    " … anyone who dies in Florida, even if non-resident, must have their estate settled in Florida, as the state of Florida, without a state income tax, is particularly greedy about collecting estate taxes from all and sundry."

    Not sure what you are referring to, as Florida has not had any estate tax or inheritance tax in many years. And a decedent's will is probated in the state of legal residence regardless of the jurisdiction in which they died. If a legal resident of Maryland died in an automobile accident while on vacation in Florida, neither their estate nor any beneficiary of such estate would pay any tax whatsoever to the state of Florida. Am I missing something?

  • 60. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 1:39 pm

    Kentucky: Supporting Kim Davis Just Cost Huckabee $25K

    When then-presidential candidate Mike Huckabee staged a triumphant release for Kim Davis, the lawbreaking anti-LGBT Kentucky county clerk jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, he probably didn’t expect to pay out the nose for the privilege. Huckabee escorted Davis out of lockup and straight into a press conference, complete with Survivor’s anthem “Eye Of The Tiger” blasting over loudspeakers, but without permission from the band to use the song.

    The group then sued the far-right evangelical’s campaign for copyright infringement. Huckabee’s lawyers tried to argue that he didn’t use the song at a political rally, stating instead that he used it during a "religious rally, signifying joy and praise at the release of Mrs. Davis.” This would have allowed the politician to claim he used it for a “non-commercial” purpose which would then allow him to use the song royalty-free under the “fair use” clause in the copyright law.

    However, when his lawyer’s excuses ultimately didn’t work, Huckabee settled out-of-court for $25,000, apparently giving up the thrill of the fight, unable to rise up to the challenge. According to just-released campaign report filings, he paid the band in May.

  • 61. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 2:42 pm

    Morelos legalize ssm 18 vs 15. Twitter is going crazy right now.

  • 62. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    Indeed, as the site, Matrimonio Igualitario, is a-buzz!

    From Pepe Montes, 4 minutes ago:

    Pepe Montes, Zacatepec de Hidalgo, Morelos

    Con 18 Municipios a favor y 15 en contra en Morelos, se aprueba el matrimonio igualitario.
    (With 18 municipalities in favor, and 15 against in Morelos, marriage equality is approved.)

    And from DHIA, A.C., 24 minutes ago

    Celebramos en Morelos, con 18 municipios que votaron a favor, es una realidad el matrimonio igualitario.
    (We celebrate in Morelos, with 18 municipalities voting in favor, as marriage equality is a reality.)

    And this tweet, from Eduardo Iniesta, I will untranslated:

    Eduardo Iniesta ‏55 minutes ago


  • 63. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:11 pm

    Gracias, amigos, un besote.

    Time to update wikipedia! Also to write an article since this involves a constitution of some kind 😉

  • 64. F_Young  |  June 28, 2016 at 3:35 am

    I see Chiapas has been downgraded to tan, finally. However, Veracruz is still tan instead of gold on the Wikipedia map. I don't understand why Chiapas was corrected, but not Veracruz.

  • 65. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    Yes, Morelos state has now officially revised and amended its state constitution to guarantee marriage equality. I assume this change will be effective from today's date, given that a majority has apparently definitely voted in favor, thus eliminating the need to invoke the default provision of "afirmativa ficta."

  • 66. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:31 pm

    It has to be published in a gazette first, no?

  • 67. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:43 pm

    True. The revision will actually become effective from the date of the official publication in the state's gazette.

    Also, in the state list, Wikipedia incorrectly claims that the method invoked by which the measure was legalized was by legislative statute. Not quite. It was legalized by passing a state constitutional amendment, first approved by the Congress of Morelos on 18 May 2016, and then ratified by a majority of the state's municipalities on 27 June 2016.

  • 68. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 3:56 pm

    Yes. This was different than other states. The cardenal of the state is piss but he can suck it. We won Morelos. Need to say a special thanks to all the lgbt activist that fight for it. They did great not even I thought it was possible.

  • 69. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    Rex Wockner will also have to revise his excellent compendium to now include yet another method by which states in Mexico can approve marriage equality, i.e., by state constitutional amendment.

    He currently lists 3 methods. As of today, he will need a add a fourth.….

  • 70. allan120102  |  June 27, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    Yeah but I am not sure if only Morelos might apply that method or other states might do it. Looks like the pastor of Cuernavaca have been sue for discrimination against the lgbt communty. Thank God Mexico prohibits at federal level discrimination against sexual orientation.

  • 71. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 5:39 pm

    Whether or not any other states in Mexico opt to revise and amend their state's constitution to legalize same-sex marriage, it is an option, albeit a complicated, drawn-out one, which is currently available to any/all of them, even to those which have already passed the measure legislatively.

    So far, Morelos is the first (and only) state to enshrine marriage equality in its state constitution.

  • 72. JayJonson  |  June 27, 2016 at 4:11 pm

    Judge Carlton Reeves has gutted Mississippi's "religious liberty" bill, HB 1523, by ruling that county clerks may not use "religious liberty" as an excuse for denying marriage license to same-sex couples. Ruling on a motion filed by Roberta Kaplan to extend his earlier marriage decision to cover the new bill that was scheduled to go into effect on July 1, Judge Reeves cautioned that opposite-sex and same-sex couples must be treated the same. He said that the marriage question cannot be readjudicated after every legislative session.

    Other aspects of the "religious liberty" bill will be considered later in response to two other lawsuits that have challenged its constitutionality on the grounds that it favors some religious views over others.

  • 73. davepCA  |  June 27, 2016 at 4:47 pm

    Wow, lots of very good news today, just one day after the 'triple anniversary' (Lawrence, DOMA, and Obergefell). Nice!

  • 74. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    Mississippi: Federal Court Strikes Down Law That Allows Clerks To Refuse Marriage Licenses

    On Monday, 27 June 2016, in "CSE v. Bryant I," a federal judge ruled that Mississippi’s recently-passed law that allows county clerks to recuse themselves from issuing marriage licenses based on their religious beliefs was, effectively, an impermissible attempt to get around the Supreme Court’s marriage decision. “The Supreme Court’s ruling will be enforced,” US District Court Judge Carlton Reeves wrote of the year-old decision in "Obergefell v. Hodges."

    There was already a court order that stopped Mississippi from enforcing its ban on same-sex couples’ marriages. On Monday, the judge agreed to expand that order to address the so-called “recusal” provision of HB 1523, which was passed earlier this year and which would have gone into effect on 1 July. “Having reviewed the relevant section of HB 1523, the parties’ arguments, and the scope of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell, the Court finds that [the recusal provision] may in fact amend Mississippi’s marriage licensing regime in such a way as to conflict with Obergefell,” the judge wrote.

    Reeves has not yet ruled in two other lawsuits seeking to block all of the religious objections law, HB 1523, including provisions that could affect schools’ bathroom policies for transgender students.

  • 75. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 5:52 pm

    More Specific Detail on Today's Ruling in "CSE I"

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On 27 June 2016, in "Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant," ("CSE I"), the original Mississippi marriage case, with its Motion to Reopen Judgment, File Supplemental Pleading, and Modify the Permanent Injunction to challenge "recusal" section of Mississippi HB 1523, we now have an ORDER – Motion granted in part and denied in part.

    Simply, same-sex couples can not be denied licenses. Technically, the order is a bit more nuanced:

    "The motion is granted in part and denied in part. The case is reopened for the parties to confer about how to provide clerks with actual notice of the Permanent Injunction. The parties shall also confer on appropriate language to include in an Amended Permanent Injunction. A status conference will be set in the coming weeks to discuss the results of those discussions and hear how the parties wish to proceed. No other relief is granted at this time."

    But note, in particular:
    "The point of adding Obergefell’s language is simple: the Supreme Court’s ruling will be enforced. Obergefell “is the law of the land and, consequently, the law of this circuit.” CSE II, 791 F.3d at 627. Mississippi’s elected officials may disagree with Obergefell, of course, and may express that disagreement as they see fit – by advocating for a constitutional amendment to overturn the decision, for example. But the marriage license issue will not be adjudicated anew after every legislative session. And the judiciary will remain vigilant whenever a named party to an injunction is accused of circumventing that injunction, directly or indirectly. See Hutto, 437 U.S. at 690-91."

    "The Permanent Injunction [in this case] was entered the same evening the Fifth Circuit (Court of Appeals) issued the mandate in CSE II. No one has argued that the Permanent Injunction is invalid, but the briefing now suggests that it lacks all necessary parties. Judicial economy may be served by an Amended Permanent Injunction which enjoins § 263A of the Mississippi Constitution and Mississippi Code § 93-1-1(2), incorporates appropriate language from Rule 65, and clarifies that the persons it binds must issue marriage licenses “on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples.” Obergefell, 135 S. Ct. at 2605; see Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000) (“[T]he purpose of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is to secure every person within the State’s jurisdiction against intentional and arbitrary discrimination, whether occasioned by express terms of a statute or by its improper execution through duly constituted agents.”); New York City Transit Auth. v. Beazer, 440 U.S. 568, 587 (1979) (“The Clause announces a fundamental principle: the State must govern impartially.”). Clerks and their deputies are, after all, “public officials elected and paid by the county to serve the public and all of its citizens.” United States v. Duke, 332 F.2d 759, 766 (5th Cir. 1964)

  • 76. sfbob  |  June 27, 2016 at 9:56 pm

    Just in case any elaboration is needed, the relevant part of the "Obergefell language" is the phrase "on the same terms and conditions." HB1523 creates a class of married couples and couples seeking marriage licenses for the purpose of treating them differently from other similarly situated couples. That's the specific violation of the "Obergefell language."

  • 77. 1grod  |  June 28, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    Rick -The same could be said for the wayward dozen Alabama Probate Judges. I continue to hope some couple [straight or non straight] take on one of the judges such as lawyer trained Alfred Booth.

  • 78. VIRick  |  June 27, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    Well, Bless His Ever-Loving Heart

    Following today's court ruling, Mississippi Lt. Governor Tate Reeves [no relation] issued the following statement on the decision:

    “If this opinion by the federal court denies even one Mississippian of their fundamental right to practice their religion, then all Mississippians are denied their 1st Amendment rights,” Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves said. “I hope the state’s attorneys will quickly appeal this decision to the 5th Circuit (Court of Appeals) to protect the deeply-held religious beliefs of all Mississippians.”

  • 79. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 8:13 pm

    Here we go, an article on Morelos (finally). It says the Congress President announced 18 votes in favor, but the Secretary said 17 (strange). Whoever's right doesn't matter – well maybe it will a little later on Wikipedia 🙂 – because everyone agrees that it passed. Done deal, they did it guys! 😀 One of the municipalities was entitled to vote until next week, but even without a vote from them in either direction, the constitutional change passes and marriage arrives to the state.

  • 80. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    Morelos was all abuzz today and I was waiting and waiting for the other piece of news on the 27th, Belize's Supreme Court ruling on sodomy yet it turns out it was the 27th of July! D'oh!

    One month of waiting *sigh* Pray that it's struck down. Other countries may try as well if it is.

  • 81. theperchybird  |  June 27, 2016 at 11:52 pm

    VIRick, you always do a great job at explaining, I found this. It seems for the hundredth time the Mexican Supreme Court ruled against Chihuahua, they're still refusing to register some couples. It also mentions monetary compensation – that it can't always be granted?

  • 82. allan120102  |  June 28, 2016 at 12:00 am

    Yeah. Looks like some municipalities in Chihuahua are not abiding and will probably not abide until their civil code is change.

  • 83. VIRick  |  June 28, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    This is an advisory re-iteration of the Supreme Court's already-established doctrine, previously pronounced against the state of Chihuahua on 1 June 2016, and citing, as an example, the fact that they have already declared Articles 134 and 135 of the Civil Code of Chihuahua unconstitutional multiple times, ordering the authorities of said state to register the marriage of the petitioners. As a further advisory, judges can (but are not automatically required) to order monetary damages, payable to the petitioners.

    According to my count, as of 1 June 2016, at least 34 amparos have been granted in Chihuahua state, the most in any single state. Michoacán had at least 26 against it, before they finally gave up, while Baja California is fast approaching 20.

  • 84. theperchybird  |  June 28, 2016 at 5:42 pm

    Chihuahua needs to suck it up already.

  • 85. F_Young  |  June 28, 2016 at 6:09 am

    Off-topic: Justin Trudeau joins Canadian superheroes for Marvel Comics cover

    Trudeau will grace the variant cover of issue No. 5 of Marvel's "Civil War II: Choosing Sides," due out Aug. 31.

    ….The variant cover featuring Trudeau will be an alternative to the main cover in circulation showcasing Aurora, Puck, Sasquatch and Nick Fury.

    Read more:

    Also, check out:

  • 86. theperchybird  |  June 28, 2016 at 7:27 am

    Italy's Government still has to issue legislative actions to get the ball rolling with applications for civil unions, but one couple went ahead anyway and got one in Lugo on Sunday 🙂 The Mayor performed their ceremony, they are the first.

  • 87. VIRick  |  June 28, 2016 at 1:24 pm

    Pakistani Muslim Clerics Show Support for Transgender Marriages

    Currently, it is illegal for transgender Pakistanis to get married—to anyone. But change may be on its way for the Muslim country’s transgender community. A group of 50 Pakistani clerics recently released a fatwa saying that some transgender people should be able to marry, and that abuse and denial of inheritance are unacceptable, the Telegraph reports.

    That right to marry is still limited to heterosexual relationships (same-gender marriage is still punishable by life in prison) and is effectively only extended to transgender people who don’t appear transgender.

    Despite the marriage limitations, the fatwa makes clear that acts intended to “humiliate, insult or tease” transgender people is “haraam,” or sinful, and that rights to family inheritance and Muslim burial should be extended to transgender Pakistanis. To deny inheritance, the group said, is “inviting the wrath of God.”

    In other words, the group said that if someone appears to be a woman, she should be treated as one, and vice versa. While the fatwa issued by the Tanzeem Ittehad-i-Ummat religious law organization are not legally binding, the group has considerable influence over its tens of thousands of followers in the country.

    “This is the first time in history that Muslim clerics have raised their voices in support of the rights of transgender persons,” Qamar Naseem, a transgender community activist, told The Telegraph. “But we have to go further for transgender people and the country needs to introduce legislation on it.”

    Pakistani transgender people face violent attacks and discrimination. Last month, one transgender woman was shot in her home and another died after being shot and allegedly denied medical treatment.

    Though the fatwa is not legally binding, it also recommended that people consider harassment of transgender people a crime under Islam. “Making noises at transgender people, making fun of them, teasing them, or thinking of them as inferior is against sharia law. Such an act amounts to objecting to one of Allah’s creations, which is not correct,” the document added.

    Also see more detail here:

    This semi-acceptance of transgenders in Muslim Pakistan is an historical carry-over within the Indian sub-continent (and South-East Asia) wherein which the Hijra (male-to-female) are regarded and accepted as a third gender, with full legal recognition as such in both India and Nepal. There now appears to be some growing recognition of the same in Pakistan.

  • 88. allan120102  |  June 28, 2016 at 1:46 pm

    Same sex marriage is stopped in Morelos after two municipalities who were count in favor actually vote against. Making the final tally 17-16. That means that Morelos will not have ssm sadly.

  • 89. theperchybird  |  June 28, 2016 at 2:53 pm

    All the major newspaper written in the last hour contradict each other. This one says that 2 more did indeed vote and make it 17 Nos, but they were not reported within the time limit and PAN is fighting for their votes to be counted as against rather than being counted as two silent YESES (which equals a victory for gay couples).

    We'll finally know 100% whether the law passed or not at the Congress meeting tonight.

  • 90. VIRick  |  June 28, 2016 at 2:29 pm

    India: Gay Celebrities Cite Right to Life, Move Supreme Court Against Section 377

    From the "Times of India:"

    New Delhi – In what could lend more heft to the fight for their rights, leading lights of the LGBT community have moved the Supreme Court seeking quashing of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code to protect their sexual preferences, saying these are part and parcel of the right to life.
    The petition by dancer N S Johar, journalist Sunil Mehra, chef Ritu Dalmia, hotelier Aman Nath, and business executive Ayesha Kapur will come up for hearing before a bench of Justices S A Bobde and Ashok Bhushan on 29 June 2016, when the Supreme Court resumes business after a 45-day vacation. Leading lawyers Kapil Sibal and Arvind Datar will argue for the petitioners.
    Their writ plea will give fresh impetus to the pending petitions by the Naz Foundation and gay rights sympathizers like film-maker Shyam Benegal. After refusing twice to entertain pleas against Section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality, the Supreme Court had on 2 February referred the issue to to a 5-judge bench, saying "important constitutional issues" have been raised in the curative petitions.
    The present petition changes the contours of a decade-and-a-half old legal fight on two counts. One, well-known LGBT personalities who have until now lived in fear of social persecution have overcome the fear of public humiliation to assert their sexual preference. Second, this is the first time people who are directly aggrieved by Section 377 have challenged its constitutional validity.
    Their petition's first paragraph is a bold declaration: "The petitioners are lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGBT) citizens of India whose rights to sexuality, sexual autonomy, choice of sexual partner, life, privacy, dignity and equality, along with the other fundamental rights guaranteed under Part-III of Constitution, are violated by Section 377.…?

  • 91. F_Young  |  June 28, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    Off-topic: How Liquor Licenses Sparked the Stonewall Riots

    Gay bars were crucial in the fight for equal rights, which is why they kept getting shut down by the government.

    …..As Yale historian George Chauncey argued in his Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940, liquor licensure "expanded the reach of state surveillance into every establishment serving liquor in the state," transforming bar owners into "deputy enforcement agents."

    …..Amid this new wave of police harassment, José Sarria ran for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1961, becoming the first openly gay candidate for public office. Sarria lost, but earned some 7,000 votes and inspired new forms of political activism. After his historic race, Sarria, along with other gay-bar employees and owners, formed the Tavern Guild of San Francisco, the nation's first association of gay businesses. During the 1960s, the Guild devoted its efforts to challenging police raids and ABC crackdowns, though it was unable to stop the ABC from permanently shutting down the Black Cat in 1963.

    …..Facing newfound political and legal pressure from an increasingly assertive LGBT community, state liquor authorities began to back down. "The key variable became how much of its resources a liquor board was actually willing to invest in vendettas to close down particular bars," noted Yale Law Professor William Eskridge. Less regulatory hostility fostered unprecedented growth for gay bars. Between the mid-1960s and mid-1970s, the number of gay bars doubled in New York City and quintupled in Chicago. By 1976, there were some 2,500 nationwide.

    But Stonewall wasn't one of them. With boycotts over its Mafia ties and an inability to sell liquor (a stint as a juice bar was unsuccessful), the inn closed a mere three months after the riots.

    This is an excellent history of the fight for the right to patronize gay bars in the US.

  • 92. theperchybird  |  June 28, 2016 at 6:59 pm

    It's complete chaos in Morelos' capital where Congress is supposed to read out the official vote tally to see if the marriage bill passes or not. PAN-led activists pushed security and workers around, caused a ruckus and even made the Legislature consider moving to a hotel to finalize everything.


  • 93. VIRick  |  June 28, 2016 at 8:43 pm

    EEOC: Landmark Sex Discrimination Lawsuit Settled

    A landmark lawsuit alleging sex discrimination based on sexual orientation has been settled for more than $200,000, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced on Tuesday, 28 June 2016. The EEOC said in a statement that Pallet Companies, doing business as IFCO Systems, will pay just over $182,000 to Yolanda Boone, who alleged she was fired after complaining that her supervisor made comments regarding her sexual orientation and appearance. The EEOC said in its lawsuit filed earlier this year in Baltimore that Boone's supervisor made comments including "I want to turn you back into a woman" and "You would look good in a dress."

    The EEOC says IFCO Systems, which supplies and recycles wood pallets, will also donate $20,000 to a foundation set up by the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT advocacy group. The EEOC says IFCO Systems, which has its North America headquarters in Tampa, Florida, has agreed to hire someone to develop a training program on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender workplace issues.

    In a court document explaining the settlement, IFCO Systems denies that it discriminated against Boone but agrees to the settlement terms. In a statement released through a lawyer, the company noted it did not admit to any discrimination, harassment, or retaliation. The statement says that the company's core values and corporate code of conduct have "long recognized the value of preventing sexual orientation discrimination and the benefit of ensuring diversity in the workplace."

    EEOC General Counsel David Lopez said in a statement that the settlement was the first resolution of a lawsuit challenging discrimination based on sexual orientation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC's lawsuit says IFCO Systems hired Boone as a forklift operator in 2013 and fired her in 2014.

  • 94. FredDorner  |  June 29, 2016 at 10:09 am

    All companies with 15 or more employees should take note of this case.

  • 95. theperchybird  |  June 29, 2016 at 12:38 am

    It PASSED in Morelos. After midnight, Congress declared the motion approved 17-15. It was 12 upfront Yeses and 5 silences that became Yeses 🙂 Phew! Glad that's over with.

    The session had to be moved away from the PAN-orama 🙂 Following publication in the state gazette, the law will come into effect and the local adoption agency says that all married couples will be able to jointly adopt.

    The Morelos Govt tweet confirms that it was passed 17-15, the municipality that still has an extra week to vote won't make a difference even if it against in the future so mission complete

    PAN is fuming at the tally since they say it was really 17 against, claiming that two municipalities did send a no in time to be counted as No. They're taking it to court. Whatever.

  • 96. VIRick  |  June 29, 2016 at 11:45 am

    From the Congress of Morelos itself, we have this tweet:

    H.Congreso de Morelos ‏@MorelosCongreso 5 hours ago

    Declaran válido el Matrimonio Igualitario en Morelos
    (Marriage equality is declared valid in Morelos)

  • 97. theperchybird  |  June 29, 2016 at 12:57 am

    Venezuela's opposition (that actually holds 2/3 majority in Congress) says that it will work on a civil union bill for couples. A very prominent committee member says that the new Registry Law will allow them to seek some benefits.

    Congress isn't taking marriage on yet because the coalition holding 2/3 (M.U.D.) is just a mixture of both leftists and the right that banded together to overtake Maduro's party so they're not all in agreement and one deputy said that it is awaiting the verdict of the Venezuelan Supreme Court case currently pending. Finally, it seems that M.U.D. will completely replace the judges in that Court since they say the 12 appointed by Maduro's team were done unconstitutionally. This should be interesting.

  • 98. allan120102  |  June 29, 2016 at 4:46 am

    Good news form Czech. I am sorry if someone alrready put this story.

  • 99. theperchybird  |  June 29, 2016 at 6:54 am

    Good start, but leaves much to be desired since it's not even stepchild adoption.

    Although, this has put more pressure on the Government:

    Following Tuesday's ruling, Czech human rights minister Jiri Dienstbier vowed to table an amendment to the civil partnerships law allowing adoptions by same-sex couples as well as the adoption of a partner's offspring.

  • 100. TheVirginian722  |  June 29, 2016 at 5:32 am

    GOP Primary Voters Give South Carolina "Bathroom Bill" Sponsor A Swirly (Part II)

    In Tuesday's South Carolina Republican primary runoff, State Senator Lee Bright faced off against challenger Scott Talley, runner-up in the four-candidate first primary on June 14. (South Carolina law requires a runoff when no candidate receives a majority of the vote in the first primary.) The oxymoronically-named Senator Bright was notorious as the sponsor of the state's anti-LGBT "Bathroom Bill," while ex-State Representative Talley denounced the legislation.

    Great news: Scott Talley emerged the winner by a vote of 4,861 (51.6%) to 4,562 (48.4%), carrying both of the district's two counties. Kudos to Governor Nikki Haley and eliminated first primary candidates David McCraw and Lisa Scott for their endorsements of Senator-elect Talley in the runoff.

    Ex-Senator Bright will now have the free time he deserves to serve as a volunteer restroom monitor and fly his Confederate flag (his big cause in 2015).

  • 101. allan120102  |  June 29, 2016 at 5:35 am

    Well Aguascalientes also need to be gold. Another state I think also but I forgot which one.

  • 102. Phoenix_12  |  June 29, 2016 at 10:50 am

    Sonora is the other state. I think.

  • 103. VIRick  |  June 29, 2016 at 11:28 am

    Yes, Veracruz (with 7 amparos granted), Aguascalientes (also with 7 amparos granted), and Sonora (with 5 amparos granted) all need to be re-colored gold to reflect their new status.

  • 104. TheVirginian722  |  June 29, 2016 at 11:46 am

    Colorado GOP Primary Voters Exorcise State Legislature of Hatemonger Gordon Klingenschmitt

    In Tuesday's primary, Colorado Springs Republicans pulled the plug on the embarrassing legislative career of America's most insane state legislator, first-term State Representative Gordon Klingenschmitt. The ravings of the freshman lawmaker have required GOP leaders to repeatedly disavow and distance themselves from his lunacy.

    Klingenschmitt, a former Navy chaplain, was tried in a court-martial and found guilty of repeatedly disobeying military chaplain policy. While unsuccessfully appealing his conviction, he developed a lucrative new gig as a cable TV preacher. In 2014 he decided to launch a political career as a candidate for the Colorado House of Representatives. After a narrow 350-vote primary win, he sailed to victory in the general election in heavily Republican Colorado Springs.

    During his eighteen months in office, he has become famous for outrageous statements which have been repudiated by his party leaders and colleagues: Caitlyn Jenner is in need of an exorcism … conversion therapy for gays (including minors) is essential to remove the demons controlling them … gay Colorado Congressman Jared Polis wants to execute Christians … and on and on. After a horrible incident in which a pregnant Colorado woman was assaulted and had her baby cut out of her womb, Klingenschmitt pronounced it God's judgment on the state for permitting abortion.

    This year, as his State Senator was ineligible to seek re-election due to term limits, Rep. Klingenschmitt decided to try for a promotion to the State Senate. He predictably, though inaccurately, labeled his primary opponent, Bob Gardner, as a "liberal" and a "RINO."

    But the voters had had enough. Bob Gardner exorcised the demon Klingenschmitt by a vote of 8,231 (61.8%) to 5,096 (38.2%). Just like the Navy before them, the voters found Klingenschmitt "unfit to serve."

  • 105. allan120102  |  June 29, 2016 at 2:09 pm

    Morelos congress sue by the fraction of PAN. Saying that the reform was affirm illegally.

  • 106. 1grod  |  June 29, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    Number of Same Gender Marriages in Alabama in the last year (June 15/16): 4% of all marriages. Given that the state's department of public health breaks out marriages by county, an indication of which counties were not issuing marriage licenses might be apparent.

  • 107. VIRick  |  June 29, 2016 at 8:42 pm

    Alabama Department of Public Health and Number of Same-Sex Marriages

    The Alabama Department of Public Health has released its preliminary count on the number of same-sex marriages performed in the state for the calendar year, 2015, the first year they were legal. According to their count, there were 1,391 same-sex marriages recorded last year in Alabama.

    According to the ADPH, the preliminary number of opposite-sex marriages in Alabama in 2015 was 34,333. That means same-sex marriages made up 3.9 percent of the total, according to these preliminary figures. The grand total number of marriages, 35,724, would be the lowest for any single year in Alabama since at least 1970, according to the ADPH.

    Given the fact that neighboring Florida legalized same-sex marriage prior to Alabama, and then, did not encounter the delay/chaos that was thrown into the works which brought marriage to a full stop in Alabama until the Supreme Court issued its ruling, it is very likely that quite a few Alabama couples chose to be married in Florida during that hiatus, given the fact, too, that Florida does not have a residency requirement. However, such out-of-state marriages would not be figured into the Alabama statistics.

    Graeme: Note carefully, as these figures are for the calendar year, 2015. I have edited the original article (and added some additional comment) to make that point clearer.

  • 108. allan120102  |  June 29, 2016 at 9:49 pm

    Where I can see which counties are issuing and how many have been issue by each of them?

  • 109. theperchybird  |  June 30, 2016 at 4:05 am

    So Croatia first and now Italy lost and has to pay thousands of Euros in compensation to a couple denied a reunification permit. Judgement from the European Court of Human Rights:

    Refusal to grant residence permit to gay couple on family grounds was unjustified discrimination In today’s Chamber judgment1 in the case of Taddeucci and McCall v. Italy (application no. 51362/09) the European Court of Human Rights held, by six votes to one, that there had been:

    a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken together with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

    The case concerned a refusal by the Italian authorities to grant a residence permit to a gay couple on family grounds.

    The Court found in particular that the situation of Mr Taddeucci and Mr McCall, a gay couple, could not be understood as comparable to that of an unmarried heterosexual couple. As they could not marry or, at the relevant time, obtain any other form of legal recognition of their situation in Italy, they could not be classified as “spouses” under national law. The restrictive interpretation of the notion of family member constituted, for homosexual couples, an insuperable obstacle to the granting of a residence permit on family grounds. That restrictive interpretation of the concept of family member, as applied to Mr McCall, did not take due account of the applicants’ personal situation and in particular their inability to obtain a form of legal recognition of their relationship in Italy.

    In deciding to treat homosexual couples in the same way as heterosexual couples without any
    spousal status, the State had breached the applicants’ right not to be subjected to discrimination based on sexual orientation in the enjoyment of their rights under Article 8 of the Convention. (Download of .PDF file)

  • 110. theperchybird  |  June 30, 2016 at 5:20 am

    Morelos' close call is revealed to have been even closer than imagined, with a simple municipality oversight ensuring the marriage bill's victory. Mazatepec's administration claims that its leaders voted unanimously against the bill, but two of them didn't sign it and that caused its delay which in turn caused the state's tally to tilt in the "approved" direction (17 Yeses out of 33) as Mazatepec's response to the bill was neither on time nor done correctly.

    PAN is pressed and suing because they lost, but if the courts, especially the Supreme Court, are going to do anything it's to make sure marriage arrives to Morelos, not stop it from spreading around the country.

  • 111. theperchybird  |  June 30, 2016 at 6:29 am

    Now PAN in Morelos and their protesters are being sued for initiating disorderly conduct as it was them who led people into the Congress building, roughhousing guards and staff.

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