Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Prop 8 proponents take dispute over trial tapes to Ninth Circuit

Prop 8

Last week, a federal district court judge said that the trial tapes from the Prop 8 trial, California’s former same-sex marriage ban, will not stay sealed past August 12. The court didn’t stay the order, instead telling the proponents they would have to ask the Ninth Circuit to do that.

Now the proponents are appealing that decision. As EQCF points out at the link, the judge first ordered the tapes unsealed by August 2020 in 2018, and at the time, the proponents sought a stay at the Ninth Circuit, which was dismissed without prejudice, so they could refile in the future.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings


  • 1. JayJonson  |  July 14, 2020 at 9:49 am

    I hope that Trump's appointments have not so altered the balance on the Ninth Circuit that this reasonable decision can be appealed successfully.

  • 2. VIRick  |  July 14, 2020 at 2:26 pm

    Baja California Congress: Advance Notice on Marriage Equality Vote

    Per Congreso BC:

    Por Mandato Constitucional y Legal, BC Reconocerá Matrimonios Igualitarios

    Mexicali, BC, lunes 13 de julio de 2020

    Las personas del mismo sexo podrán contraer matrimonio libremente en Baja California, con el propósito de avanzar en la igualdad y la no discriminación.

    By Constitutional and Legal Mandate, BC Will Recognize Marriage Equality

    Mexicali, BC, Monday, 13 July 2020

    Persons of the same sex may freely marry in Baja California, with the purpose of advancing in equality and non-discrimination.

    Note: The actual vote on the marriage equality measure is to occur tomorrow, 15 July 2020, yet the congress itself is reassuring everyone in advance that it will pass.

    Up-date: The vote has been re-scheduled for Thursday, 16 July 2020.

  • 3. guitaristbl  |  July 14, 2020 at 4:33 pm

    Justice Ginsburg hospitalized with an infection and resting. Fingers crossed once again. We absolutely cannot lose her this close to the election. Just 6 more months RGB. Please.

  • 4. bayareajohn  |  July 14, 2020 at 4:48 pm

    At least the Senate is on record of refusing to consider seating a new SCOTUS Justice in an election year. Oh wait, that was when the president was a Democrat.

    Get well soon, RBG. We love you.

  • 5. guitaristbl  |  July 14, 2020 at 4:58 pm

    *RBG sorry

  • 6. ianbirmingham  |  July 14, 2020 at 7:07 pm

    RBG's infection is bacterial (it's NOT a virus!)

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was admitted Tuesday morning to a Baltimore hospital “for treatment of a possible infection” and will remain there for a few days so that she can receive intravenous antibiotic treatment, the Supreme Court’s Public Information Office announced this afternoon.

  • 7. scream4ever  |  July 14, 2020 at 10:03 pm

    Exactly, and thus easily treatable with antibiotics.

  • 8. scream4ever  |  July 15, 2020 at 2:20 pm

    She has already been released and is doing well:

  • 9. VIRick  |  July 14, 2020 at 7:21 pm

    Colorado: 4 Pro-LGBT Bills Signed into Law

    On 13 July 2020, in a bill-signing at the LGBTQ Community Center of Colorado, Gov. Jared Polis, the country's first openly gay governor, signed into law four bills tied to LGBTQ issues, including Senate Bill 221, one that will make Colorado the 11th state to ban the gay and transgender panic defense legal strategy.

    Another bill signed by Polis allows pharmacists to prescribe and dispense pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, which are medications taken to prevent the spread of HIV. The bill also requires insurers to pay for PrEP and allows patients to seek PrEP without prior authorization from their insurers. A third bill signed yesterday would create a fund using rebates the state receives from HIV/AIDS medical assistance programs.

    Last, Polis signed a bill that makes it easier for minors to correct the gender markers on their state documents, including birth certificates and driver’s licenses. In the past, minors needed to show proof of “medical transition.” Now, a statement from a medical or a mental health professional stating that the person identifies as a different gender is sufficient.

  • 10. VIRick  |  July 15, 2020 at 3:55 pm

    Alabama: Jeff Sessions Loses in Republican Primary for US Senate

    Yesterday, 14 July 2020, the notoriously anti-LGBTQ politician Jeff Sessions (R) lost his primary for US Senator from Alabama, likely ending the 73-year-old’s career in politics. Former college football coach Tommy Tuberville won the election and will be the Republican nominee in the general election this November. However, Tuberville is not any better on LGBTQ issues, given that he approaches family and sexuality issues from the far-right.

    Sessions was a US Senator for 20 years until Trump made him Attorney-General in 2017. A year and a half after serving as Attorney-General, though, Trump asked Sessions for his resignation and then blasted Sessions on social media, after Sessions recused himself from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    Tuberville will now face off against Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) in the November general election. Current polling shows Tuberville ahead in the race.

  • 11. VIRick  |  July 15, 2020 at 4:15 pm

    West Virginia and Louisiana: Transgender Women Win Elections for First Time

    Two women who won elections this past month just became the first transgender elected officials in their respective states.

    Peyton Rose Michelle won a seat on Louisiana’s Democratic State Central Committee and is the first out transgender woman elected to a political position in the state, according to Big Easy Magazine. She received over twice as many votes as her opponent.

    In West Virginia, Rosemary Ketchum won a seat on the Wheeling City Council, making her one of only 4 LGBT elected officials in the entire state, according to the Victory Fund.

  • 12. VIRick  |  July 15, 2020 at 4:42 pm

    Maine Adds "Non-Binary" Gender Marker on Birth Certificates

    In the state of Maine, parents now have the option to designate “nonbinary” as a gender option on the birth certificate of their minor children. Nonbinary people over the age of 18 may also request forms to receive a new birth certificate to reflect their true gender identity.

    Both parents of the minor must sign a worksheet to show that they consent to the change, as well as submit a notarized document to that effect.

  • 13. VIRick  |  July 15, 2020 at 4:56 pm

    Oklahoma: Governor Tests Positive for COVID-19

    Oklahoma has seen a continued uptick in the number of virus cases ever since the Trump rally in Tulsa on 20 June, one which Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) attended.

    Last week, a top health official in Tulsa County said that Trump's rally in Tulsa, and the protests associated with the event, "more than likely" contributed to the surge in coronavirus cases there. Stitt attended the rally and was pictured not wearing a mask. Despite his own diagnosis, he still refuses to require the mandatory wearing of masks when one is in public spaces in Oklahoma.

    Several others who attended the Tulsa rally have since tested positive, including Kimberly Guilfoyle, junior's girlfriend, and former Republican presidential hopeful Herman Cain.

  • 14. VIRick  |  July 15, 2020 at 10:18 pm

    Oregon Appeals Court Approves Right to Change Gender Marker to Nonbinary

    Per Equality Case Files:

    On Wednesday, 8 July 2020, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a person's right to legally change their gender to nonbinary. In a case on appeal from the Lane County Circuit Court that was reversed and remanded, the ruling now requires circuit court judges to grant nonbinary as a gender marker if a person has legally followed the process to make that gender change.

    The Decision is here:

    The ACLU of Oregon's press release is here:

  • 15. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 10:20 am

    Sudan Modifies and Lessens Punishment for Sodomy Offenses

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    On 9 July 2020, the Sovereign Council of Sudan passed a law removing the death penalty and the corporal punishment clause of flogging from Article 148 of the 1991 Penal Code (Sodomy Law) for anyone found guilty of committing sodomy. Instead, the modified punishment is now a jail sentence of not more than 7 years on the third offense.

    The definition of "sodomy" in Sudanese law is also quite descriptively explicit, without any hint of the Victorian-era euphemism regarding "crimes against nature," as is still found in the laws of many ex-British colonial possessions:
    "There shall be deemed to commit sodomy, every man who penetrates his glans or the equivalent thereof, in the anus of a woman or another man’s, or permits another man to penetrate his glans or its equivalent in his anus."

    In addition, this package of amendments reforming the justice system in Sudan voided; 1) the penalty of apostasy, 2) crimes of freedom of belief and thought, 3) the practice of repentance for apostates, 4) the authority of the National Security to summon and inspection, 5) the death penalty against children and persons over the age of 70, and 6) articles that undermine the human dignity of women.

  • 16. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 1:54 pm

    Salta, Argentina: Marriage Equality Up-Date, First 10 Years

    Per Radio Salta:

    En 10 años, en Salta hubo 143 matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo. Así lo informó el Registro del Estado Civil y Capacidad de las Personas. Los datos registrados corresponden desde el 15 de julio de 2010, cuando fue sancionada la ley, hasta la fecha, en todo el territorio provincial.

    In 10 years, in Salta there have been 143 marriages between persons of the same sex. This was as reported by the Registry of Civil Status. Throughout the province, the registered data correspond from 15 July 2010, when the law was passed, to the current date.

    Included within these numbers are quite a few same-sex couples from Bolivia, as Salta is the closest city and province in Argentina to have welcomed same-sex couples from that nation who wish to marry. For some unexplained reason, Jujuy and its surrounding province have not been amenable.

  • 17. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 2:44 pm

    Baja California: Marriage Equality Was Not Approved

    Per Berenice Díaz, J. Eduardo Talamante, y "Periodismo Negro:"

    El Dictamen 48 de la Comisión de Legislación, Gobernación, y Puntos Constitucional, con 15 votos a favor, 3 en contra, y 7 abstenciones, y por NO alcanzar mayoría calificada (una mayoría de 17 votos a favor), NO se aprueba el matrimonio igualitario en Baja California. El dictamen fue devuelto a la comisión de LGyPC.

    The Draft Bill 48 of the Legislation, Governance, and Constitutional Points Committee, with 15 votes in favor, 3 against, and 7 abstentions, and for NOT reaching a qualified majority (a 2/3 majority, or 17 votes in favor), marriage equality was NOT approved in Baja California. The draft was returned to said committee.

    The 7 abstentions were: Juan Melendréz (Morena), Víctor Navarro (Morena), Carmén Hernández (Morena), y Víctor Morán (Morena), junto con Claudia Agatón (PT), David Ruvalcaba (PRI), y Miguel Ángel Bujanda (sin partido, ex-PAN).

    Per Gonzalo Kinich:

    Los 4 votos en abstención de Morena, que se negaron a pesar de que la dirigencia nacional del partido pidió respaldar matrimonio igualitario, ya se tenían contemplados. Los 2 votos que faltaron para su aprobación fueron del PT y PRI que habían dicho votar a favor y se abstuvieron.

    Con 15 votos a favor (Morena, PT, PRD, MC, PBC, Verde, e Independiente), 3 en contra (1 PES, 2 PAN), y 7 abstenciones (Morena, PT, PRI, e independiente) se rechaza la reforma constitucional para matrimonio igualitario en Baja California al no alcanzar los 17 votos. Se regresa a comisiones.

    The 4 abstentions from Morena, which were rejections given the fact that the national leadership of the party asked them to endorse marriage equality, were already contemplated. The 2 votes that were missing for approval were from PT and PRI who were said to be voting in favor and abstained.

    With 15 votes in favor (Morena, PT, PRD, MC, PBC, Verde, and Independiente), 3 against (1 PES, 2 PAN), and 7 abstentions (Morena, PT, PRI, and Independiente), the constitutional reform for marriage equality was rejected in Baja California by not reaching 17 votes. It returns to committee.

  • 18. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 6:07 pm

    Poland: Two Courts Strike Down "LGBT-Free Zones" as Unconstitutional

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    On 14-15 July 2020, Polish courts have annulled two of the “zones free from LGBT ideology” that have been declared by many local authorities around Poland. Judges found that they violate the constitution, which bans discrimination and requires equal treatment. The office of Poland’s commissioner for human rights, Adam Bodnar, which filed the complaints, hailed the rulings as unprecedented.

    On 14 July 2020, the provincial administrative court in Gliwice ruled on such a resolution passed by the council in Istebna, southwestern Poland. Bodnar’s office had lodged a complaint against it, arguing that it violated various articles of Poland’s constitution. The court found that the phrase “LGBT ideology” in fact refers to LGBT people and has a discriminatory effect on them by excluding them from the community due to their sexual preferences and gender identity, reports Polsat News.

    On 15 July 2020, Anna Błaszczak-Banasiak, from Bodnar’s office, posted an image of a new ruling by the provincial administrative court in Radom. This annulled a resolution against “LGBT ideology” adopted in Klwów, central Poland, she said. Details of this ruling are not yet available.

    Meanwhile, there are growing signals that the European Union could seek to restrict funding for regions in Poland that have adopted anti-LGBT resolutions. Today, 15 July 2020, "Rzeczpospolita" reported that there are proposals on the table to make EU funds conditional on compliance not only with the rule of law, but also with respect for minority rights. This, writes the Polish newspaper, could be used to cut off money to places in Poland that have issued anti-LGBT resolutions.

    Kraśnik, another Polish town that passed the resolution, now wants to revoke it, with the head of the council, Dorota Posyniak, saying that “if it were to have an impact on the funds we were hoping to invest in developing the city, it would make our functioning very difficult.”

  • 19. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 6:28 pm

    Pakistan: A Same-Sex Marriage in Rawalpindi, or Transgender Man Marrying a Woman?

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    Note: This report on a court case in Pakistan, as reported from India, appears to be rather gender-biased in its misgendering, but has been transcribed as-is:

    A Pakistani court has ordered a gender test in an alleged same-sex marriage by ordering the formation of a medical board to test a person who is known to be a woman but claims to have changed her gender in order to marry a teenage girl.

    The single-member bench of the Rawalpindi registry of the Lahore High Court (LHC) issued the order on Wednesday, 15 July 2020, "The Express Tribune" report said. The bench directed the District Headquarters (DHQ) Hospital Medical Superintendent (MS) to present a report of the medical examination by 21 July. The MS was authorized to have Aasma Bibi, who now claims to be Ali Akash, tested for her gender from a private laboratory under his supervision if the facility is unavailable in a public hospital.

    The court told the couple that they were charged with contracting the same-sex marriage, a very serious allegation.

    However, Akash, also known as Aasma, maintained that he had converted into a man now and has the medical reports to prove it. He also presented the new computerized national identity card (CNIC) he had acquired after undergoing a sex-change operation. Akash asserted that the couple had solemnized a free-will marriage and that his wife's family was completely aware of the matter. When asked by the court, the girl said she was happy with her marriage and wanted to live with Akash, reports "The Express Tribune."

    Note: Pakistan has one of the world's most progressive set of laws regarding gender identity (while simultaneously offering absolutely no protections for LGBs). Traditionally, throughout the entire Indian sub-continent, including Pakistan, third gender transgender women, known as hijra, have been accepted as part of the cultural reality of the region since time immemorial. Most attention has been focused upon said transgender women, the hijra.

    At the same time, as the present case seems to indicate, little or no attention has been paid to the possible existence of transgender men. Still, the individual in question, Ali Akash, appears to be fully cognizant of the new gender identity laws, and appears to have all of his documentation in order.

  • 20. VIRick  |  July 16, 2020 at 7:45 pm

    Baja California Going Forward: Same-Sex Marriages Definitely Continue

    Per "Cadena Noticias:"

    Los matrimonios igualitarios no se detienen: la CEDHBC seguirá interviniendo para facilitar la realización de matrimonios igualitarios en todas las oficinas de registro civil en la entidad.

    El ombudsperson, Miguel Ángel Mora Marrufo, manifestó que los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo son una realidad en Baja California en la que el Organismo ha tenido una participación activa para la realización, a partir de 2017 y sin necesidad de un amparo, de 358 trámites, tres de ellos por la vía de la Recomendación y 355 por medio de la Conciliación.

    Equal marriages do not stop: the CEDHBC will continue to intervene to facilitate the performance of equal marriages in all civil registry offices in the state.

    The ombudsperson, Miguel Ángel Mora Marrufo, stated that marriages between same sex couples are a reality in Baja California, one in which the Agency has been an active participant for said realization, as from 2017 and without the need for an amparo, of 358 procedures, three of them by Recommendation and 355 through Conciliation.

  • 21. VIRick  |  July 17, 2020 at 11:37 am

    Tennessee: Gay Man Files Federal Suit Alleging Employment Discrimination

    A gay Tennessee man is suing the company that fired him on 19 June 2020, just four days after the Supreme Court’s historic ruling in "Bostock" that anti-LGBTQ job discrimination is illegal.

    Jacob Brashier of Blount County “was summarily subjected to disparagement, ridicule, and humiliation in the course of his employment” with a nursing home operated by Manorhouse Management in neighboring Knox County, according to a lawsuit he filed on 30 June 2020 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee.

    Brashier has also filed a complaint with the EEOC over the same matter.

  • 22. guitaristbl  |  July 17, 2020 at 1:26 pm

    RBG undergoing chemotherapy again for recurring liver cancer, said to be going well and will continue to work on court :

  • 23. ianbirmingham  |  July 18, 2020 at 6:43 pm

    Let's give RBG the 2 gifts she's been waiting for: a Democratic Senate + a Democratic Presidency!

  • 24. scream4ever  |  July 18, 2020 at 6:57 pm


  • 25. ianbirmingham  |  July 19, 2020 at 11:59 am

    Defense Secretary Mark Esper bans the Pride flag from all Pentagon property,

    After the Washington Blade reported that Esper’s new policy does in fact ban the LGBTQ flag, the Modern Military Association of America (MMAA) called on the Pentagon to “immediately reconsider.”

    "It's absolutely outrageous that Defense Secretary Mark Esper would ban the Pride flag — the very symbol of inclusion and diversity," Jennifer Dane, MMAA interim executive director, said in a statement Friday. "In what universe is it ok to turn an opportunity to ban a racist symbol like the Confederate flag into an opportunity to ban the symbol of diversity? This decision sends an alarming message to LGBTQ service members, their families, and future recruits.”

  • 26. Randolph_Finder  |  July 20, 2020 at 6:03 am

    "In what universe?" In a universe where a hard line is needed banning all flags that aren't the official flag of a political entity is needed as a policy to keep a Racist president from interfering with a policy banning a racist flag.

    Yes, the Pride flag is, to use a military term, collateral damage. But in this case, I'm going to hold off and see how the Biden administration handles it.

  • 27. JayJonson  |  July 20, 2020 at 6:28 am

    Biden has already announced that he is going to reverse the order insofar as it bans the pride flag.

    On July 19, he tweeted: "Banning the Confederate flag from military installations was long overdue.

    Banning the LGBTQ Pride flag — the very symbol of diversity and inclusion — is undeniably wrong. The Pentagon should ensure it is authorized, or as President, I will."

  • 28. Randolph_Finder  |  July 20, 2020 at 7:09 am

    (Putting on Libertarian hat) That can get tricky. Esper's policy has nice sharp edges to it. Trying to specify out of the universe of non political entity flags which ones are and are not allowed on bases doesn't have nice sharp edges.

    I'm curious as to what the policy would have been a month ago on flying the Nazi flag on a base would be. What I want back is *that* policy, which the flags of the confederacy moved into that category. Unfortunately, that leads into the thicket of issues as to whether the graves of confederate soldiers who fell in battle should be entitled to the same protection as the union soldiers on the other side.

  • 29. JayJonson  |  July 20, 2020 at 8:33 am

    I do not see how this is tricky. Biden's secretary of Defense simply issues an order that the Pride flag is permitted. Anti-gay activists may sue, but courts have traditionally given a lot of deference to the military (as we learned in the fight against DADT,) I would be surprised if a court would second-guess an order from the Secretary of Defense as to what flags are allowed to be flown on a military base.

  • 30. VIRick  |  July 20, 2020 at 10:23 am

    The essential difficulty with the CSA (and its symbols) lies in the fact that they fought on the wrong side of history, in a vain attempt to retain slavery, as exemplified by Texas, at a time when slavery had already been abolished in most of the Americas. Throughout Hispanic America, slavery was either abolished immediately upon independence, or very shortly thereafter, and was followed by the European colonizing powers with Caribbean possessions doing the same. Only Spanish Cuba, Brasil, and Spanish Puerto Rico were later than the CSA. Here is a comparative time-line:

    1804 Saint-Domingue (Haiti)
    1811 Chile
    1813 New Spain (Mexico, including Coahuila y Tejas)
    1813 La Plata (Argentina)
    1814 La Plata (Uruguay)
    1821 Gran Colombia (Venezuela/Colombia/Ecuador/Panamá)
    1821 Perú
    1822 Haiti (Dominican Republic)
    1824 Centroamérica (Guatemala/El Salvador/Honduras/Nicaragua/Costa Rica)
    1830 Coahuila y Tejas – Dispute over slavery began
    1831 Bolivia
    1834 British Empire (All British Caribbean possessions, first European power)
    1836 Independent Texas – Slavery re-instituted
    1842 Paraguay (the last independent Hispanic nation to abolish slavery)
    1845 Texas becomes a slave state of USA
    1847 Swedish St-Barthélemy
    1848 France (All French Caribbean possessions)
    1848 Danish West Indies (US Virgin Islands)
    1863 Netherlands (All Dutch Caribbean possessions)
    1863 USA – Emancipation Proclamation
    1865 Juneteenth – Slavery abolished in Galveston, Texas (last locality in CSA)
    1866 Indian Territory (Oklahoma)
    1868 Cuba
    1869 Portugal (All Portuguese colonies worldwide)
    1870 Texas -13th Amendment ratified
    1871 Brasil
    1873 Puerto Rico

  • 31. Randolph_Finder  |  July 20, 2020 at 11:34 am

    I agree they were on the wrong side of history, And I'm not sure why Texas is on there, they, like the rest of the south were under the EP, and if not, then under the 13th like the rest of the south.

    Banning flags that were only valid duing times that slavery were allowed would be fairly tricky, for example, the number of people who know what the flag for United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, and the Algarves (1815–1822) would probably not include anyone outside the Military's Vexilogical team.

    (or for that matter any US flag with less than 33(?) stars)

  • 32. VIRick  |  July 20, 2020 at 12:02 pm

    Texas was highlighted because of its obstinate, multiple attempts to go against history over the issue of the abolition of slavery. It first split from Mexico over this matter, becoming a short-lived independent slave-holding republic, then joined the USA as a slave-holding state, provoking the Mexican-American War. It then switched allegiance by joining the CSA in order to preserve its slave-holding status, and at the conclusion of the Civil War, contained the very last slave-holding territory where slaves were effectively freed.

    The flag of the CSA continues to be a very well-known symbol for white supremacy/white nationalism, as exemplified by its incorporation into the state flags of an assortment of former CSA states. Its current recognition value within the USA, as the symbol for what it truly indicates, separates it from all other flags of other historical slave-holding entities.

  • 33. Randolph_Finder  |  July 20, 2020 at 2:30 pm

    OK, two comments. I'd describe the CSA, and the Republic of Texas as two of the three countries formed specifically to allow Slavery (with William Walker's Republic of Nicaragua from 1856 to 1857 being the third) And slaves in Delaware (and the other slave states that stayed in the union), which weren't covered by the EP were freed after those in Texas.

    The flag of the CSA is *not* the well-known flag that has caused all of the Issues. The well-known flag that has caused the issue is the second Confederate Navy Jack, which is the only one with the Saltire that is rectangular. Heck, 999 people out of a thousand wouldn't even recognize the first confederate flag as being that of the Confederacy.

    So we've got two or three countries formed for the purposes of slavery, two which are now within our borders and the flag that gets banned is one that was never anyone's national flag. The confederate Navy jack is the one that is banned *because* of its use in the 20th century and what it represents, not its use in the 19th. And *that* makes it problematic.

    (and until I looked it up on Wikipedia, I didn't even realize that Walker's Nicaragua had its own specific national flag.)

  • 34. VIRick  |  July 20, 2020 at 3:01 pm

    By state law, slavery was abolished in Maryland from 1 November 1864. It was similarly abolished in Missouri from 11 January 1865, and in West Virginia from 3 February 1865. Slavery was abolished in Delaware and in Kentucky only upon the ratification of the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution on 6 December 1865, the date upon which Georgia ratified it, thus providing the requisite number of states.

    The first 3 dates occurred prior to Juneteenth (19 June 1865), while ratification of the 13th Amendment occurred 5 1/2 months afterward. As a result, the Juneteenth reference only applies to those secessionist states that formed the CSA. Your comment regarding Delaware (and Kentucky) as being the very last is correct.

    It took Delaware until 12 February 1901 before that state ratified the 13th Amendment, while Kentucky held off until 18 March 1976. Mississippi finally ratified the 13th Amendment on 18 February 2013, over 147 years after it took effect.

  • 35. ianbirmingham  |  July 19, 2020 at 12:22 pm

    Democrats raise alarm: New US human rights priorities exclude LGBTQ rights

    At issue is a new report from the State Department's Commission on Unalienable Rights that was unveiled on Thursday. Pompeo said the report would place property rights and religious freedom at the forefront of American diplomacy.

    “By justifying the roll back of hard-won advances for the rights of women, girls, and LGBTQ persons, Secretary Pompeo detailed a report that does not call on the U.S. Government to champion greater protections for all human rights abroad,” Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement.

    The commission's nearly year-long project has come under scrutiny since its inception, with Democratic lawmakers and human rights organizations raising alarm that a majority of experts charged with writing the report had expressed anti-LGBTQ views.

    An analysis by GLAAD, one of the largest advocacy groups for LGBTQ rights, said that seven of the 10 members of the commission’s advisory panel – including chair of the commission, Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon – had “troubling, anti-LGBTQ history.”

    And five human rights organizations are in an ongoing lawsuit against the State Department to terminate the commission and its report, alleging it violated federal laws requiring such bodies to be "fairly balanced."

    The draft report is open for a two-week public comment period before it is finalized.

  • 36. ianbirmingham  |  July 19, 2020 at 12:25 pm

    How To File A Public Comment On Draft US Report Excluding LGBTQ Rights

    On July 16, 2020, the Commission released the draft report to the general public. … the release of this report initiates a two week public comment period. The Commission welcomes all submissions. Please route them to [email protected] and/or Designated Federal Officer Duncan Walker, who may be reached at [email protected].

  • 37. VIRick  |  July 19, 2020 at 8:05 pm

    Supreme Court of Mexico: In a Lesbian Divorce, Best Interests of Child Trump Biology

    Per Suprema Corte (SCJN) de 8 de julio 2020:

    El fallo en el divorcio de Lesly y Ana de Chihuahua:

    En casos de comaternidad el lazo biológico con una de las madres es insuficiente para determinar la guarda y custodia de un menor, pues en todos los casos se debe privilegiar el interés superior de la infancia. La voluntad procreacional determina la filiación con una de las madres.

    The decision in the divorce of Lesly and Ana from Chihuahua:

    In cases of co-maternity, the biological bond with one of the mothers is insufficient to determine the guardianship and custody of a minor, since in all cases the best interests of the child must be foremost. The will to procreate determines the filiation with one of the mothers.

  • 38. VIRick  |  July 19, 2020 at 8:54 pm

    Ketchikan AK Bans LGBT Discrimination in Employment, Housing, and Public Accommodations

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    On Thursday, 16 July 2020, an ordinance that prohibits discrimination against LGTBQ individuals within Ketchikan city limits was unanimously passed by the Ketchikan City Council over the objections of religious advocates. In addition to banning employment discrimination, Ketchikan’s ordinance also bans discrimination against LGBTQ individuals in housing and in public businesses.

    With passage of the ordinance, Ketchikan joins Sitka, Juneau, and Anchorage on the list of Alaska cities that bar discrimination against LGBTQ individuals. The ordinance takes effect in mid-August.

  • 39. VIRick  |  July 20, 2020 at 2:19 pm

    Canada: 15th Anniversary of Marriage Equality

    Per Colectivx LGBTI:

    Un día como hoy, pero de 2005, Canada se transformaba en el primer país de América en tener Ley de Matrimonio Igualitario.

    On 20 July 2005, 15 years ago today, Canada became the first country in the Americas to have a marriage equality law.

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