Maine Senate: First of Two Votes on Same-Sex Marriage Bill Passes 20-15

See coverage here and here.

Note to our readers: We apologize for the lack of posts recently, both Karissa and I are in finals.

Maine Legislature Debates & Votes on Same-Sex Marriage TODAY! Includes Live Video

Check it out here!

Here's the live video feed...

First Hate Crime Conviction for Transgender Murder

CNN reports that Allen Andrade was convicted in Colorado of first-degree murder and a bias-motivated crime and sentenced to life in prison without parole for the brutal murder of Angie Zapata, an 18 year old transgender woman on July 17, 2008. Andrade's conviction marks the first time in the country that a state's hate crimes statute resulted in a conviction in the murder of a transgender person.

Zapata and Andrade first met online in the summer of 2008. After a short time, they made arrangements to meet in person and Zapata took Andrade to her apartment. The defense, which repeatedly referred to Zapata as 'he,' argued that the murder was committed in the heat of passion after Andrade discovered that Zapata was biologically male. The prosecution argued that Andrade's attack was an "all-out blitz" and (correctly) referred to Zapata as 'she.' The jury returend the guilty verdicts after two hours of deliberation on Wednesday afternoon. A story from CBS4 Denver contains more details regarding the trial.

Currently, eleven states and the District of Columbia have gender identity and expression inclusive hate crimes laws.

For more information about Angie Zapata, visit www.angiezapata.com.

New York Gender Non-Discrimination Act Moves Forward

The Advocate reports that yesterday afternoon the New York State Assembly voted 97-38 in approval of a bill that would prohibit discrimination in the state based on gender identity and expression, known as GENDA. About a year ago, the Assembly passed the bill last year, but it was killed by the Republican-controlled Senate. The Senate is now controlled by Democrats with a narrow majority of 32-30, but the bill still faces an uncertain future as it heads to the State Senate, reports Gay City News. According to The Advocate, a March 2008 poll by Global Strategy showed that 78% of registered New York voters support a bill protecting transgender rights.

Live Stream: Maine Same-Sex Marriage Hearings

Check them out here:



Thanks Towleload!

Social Conservatives Losing (Already Lost?) Gay Marriage Fight

The New York Times has a great Op-Ed article on the US's shifting social attitudes toward same-sex marriage and on, what the author believes to be, the signs of social conservative desperation.

The most recent evidence, the author believes, is a video produced by the National Organization for Marriage ("gathering the storm"), which has been endlessly ridiculed on-line and which spurred numerous parodies (my favorite here).

This article came out just before the latest polling data on gay marriage in New York State. According to the Siena Research Institute (report here):

By a 53-39 percent margin, voters support the Senate passing a bill to legalize same sex marriages that would virtually ensure its becoming law. Democrats, independent and young voters, and women strongly support Senate passage. Republicans strongly oppose passage, with men, older voters, African Americans, and Protestants also opposed. Support is strongest in New York City. Every region of the state supports passage.

Although this is the first time a clear majority has favored same-sex marriage, the trends in New York have been changing rather quickly. According to Towleroad (quoting Empire State Pride Agenda):

In the past three years, Siena polling has shown support for marriage equality growing from 43% in 2007 to 46% last year to 53% this year and opposition dropping from 47% in 2007 to 40% last year to just 39% now...

Washington Post Omits Critical Facts in Article About Religion and Gay Anti-Discrimination Laws

The Washington Post has an article that discusses how "faith groups" are losing discrimination legal challenges when they discriminate based on sexual orientation. The article title is a bit misleading, because most of the article deals with organizations offering services to the general public. Religious groups engaging in the exercise of their religious beliefs are exempt from such laws.

I'm very concerned, and disappointed, that the Post left out really important facts from some of these situations. Here are a few examples

A Christian student group was not recognized at a University of California law school because it denies membership to anyone practicing sex outside of traditional marriage.

We blogged about this here. First, this is a public law school. Both the state of California and the law school have laws and policies that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Second, "outside of traditional marriage," is a euphemism for individuals who engage in “unrepentant homosexual conduct” (read the blog for supporting information). The Christian Legal Society barred anyone from becoming a member based on conduct arising from their attractions to people of the same sex, otherwise known as sexual orientation. As a sanctioned student organization, they would receive free services from the public law school (so from the state of California) -- that means that the citizens of California are supporting an organization that discriminates in a way that violates California law. Nothing stops this group of students from meeting and conducting activities without tax payers subsidies.

The Post again omitted critical details when it stated:

the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, which lost a property tax exemption after it declined to allow its beachside pavilion to be used for a same-sex union ceremony.

The Post neglected to mention that the space in question is a public area for which the organization got a special tax exemption on the condition it was open to all members of the public. This is completely unrelated to their tax status as a religious organization. The article also failed to mention that the organization allowed other activities and weddings, regardless of whether they were religious or secular and regardless of the religion of the organizers to use the space. See the New York Times article here.

This is poor reporting from a venerable news paper.

IL Legislature Considers Civil Union Bill

Illinois House Bill 2234, if passed, would create civil unions available for same-sex partners with the same rights and responsibilities of marriage. It also provides that same-sex marriages and civil unions performed in other jurisdictions would be recognized as civil unions in Illinois.

The Chicago Tribune has an interesting article about why civil unions are preferred for at least some citizens of Illinois.

Full text of the bill available here. Bill was originally sponsored by Rep. Greg Harris (D- Chicago).
[Thanks to Pam's House Blend for the heads up.]

NY Governor Paterson Unveils Same-Sex Marriage Bill [UPDATED with Video]

The New York Times article begins:

Gov. David A. Paterson on Thursday announced he would introduce a bill to legalize same-sex marriage, drawing on the soaring oratory of the civil rights movement to call on the Legislature to add New York to the four states that have already authorized such unions.

The article goes into great depth over the political realities of the democratically controlled state assembly and senate, including responses and analysis from state law makers. Although same-sex couples cannot get married in New York, the state recognizes marriages conducted in other states and foreign nations.

Here is Governor Paterson's Speech, courtesy of NBC New York



Check out our past post here. Also Newsday's coverage here.

NY Judge Permits Same-Sex Adoption to Protect Federal and Other State Rights

According to Sexual Orientation and the Law, a NY judge has granted a second-parent adoption to the genetic mother of a child. It did so despite that NY law recognizes their Dutch marriage, which would automatically make both mothers the child's parents. The adoption was appropriate, however, because it protects the child-parent relationship under federal law and in states that do not recognize gay marriage.

New York Governor Plans to Introduce Same-Sex Marriage Legislation

CNN reports that New York Governor David Paterson will announce on Thursday his plans to introduce same-sex marriage legislation in the state Assembly. Though the governor's office would not confirm details of his Thursday announcement, but Assemblyman Micah Kellner informed CNN that he was asked by the governor's office to stand with the governor for his announcement. Paterson has, however, expressed his support for same-sex marriage in the past. When similar legislation was introduced by Former Gov. Eliot Spitzer in 2007 it passed the Assembly 85-61, but died in the Senate.

Counseling Student Sues University for Wrongful Dismissal When She Refused to Accept a Client's Homosexuality

According to the Ypsilanti Courier, an EMU counseling student, Julea Ward, is suing the university for wrongful dismissal in US District Court. During the winter 2009 semester Ward was acting as a counselor as a part of her master's program at the university when she was assigned a gay student. Ward informed her professor that she could not advise the student with regard to his relationship or sexual behavior because she refused to affirm homosexuality as morally acceptable.

University policy affirms a commitment to preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation. Additionally, the counseling department is bound by the American Counseling Association's code of ethics, which states that counselors cannot discriminate on any basis, including gender identity and sexual orientation, and prohibits counselors from imposing their own values on clients.

Ward's attorneys argue that she was wrongfully dismissed from the program based on her religious beliefs that sexual relationships should occur between a man and a woman and that individuals are capable of refraining from homosexual conduct.

NY Times Week in Review: SCOTUS Steers Clear of Gay Marriage

The New York Times has an article that discusses why the United States Supreme Court is likely to avoid gay marriage questions as long as possible. It basically posits that because of the severe backlash from Roe v. Wade justices are now weary of forcing gay marriage.

Also checkout Sexual Orientation and the Law's Post here. Thanks to How Appealing.

Lambda Legal Represents H.S. Students in Suit Against NY H.S.

Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit on behalf of Charlie Pratt and his sister, Ashley Petranchuk, on April 8, 2009. According to a press statement, Charlie "endured years of antigay harassment during his time at Indian River High School," and his sister was prohibited from starting a gay–straight alliance at the same school.

The action was filed in the Northern District of NY, Docket No. 7:09-CV-00411, and has been assigned to Judge Suddaby.

News Ten Now has a story on it here; thanks to Pam's House Blend for the lead.

Wis. Appelate Court Certifies Question on State's Same-Sex Marriage Constitutional Amendment

In McConkey v. Van Hollen, No. 2008AP1868, 2009 WL 943047 (Wis. Ct. App. Apr. 9, 2009), the Wisconsin Court of Appeals certified an appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court to consider the validity of the state's constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

The certified appeal requires resolution of two issues:

• First, "whether Article XIII, Section 13 of the Wisconsin Constitution, commonly known as the marriage amendment, was enacted in violation of the single-subject rule set forth in Article XII, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution."
  
  The constitutional referendum stated:
  

  Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.
  

  The Wisconsin Constitution provides that an amendment that has been approved by a majority of both legislative houses in two consecutive sessions and then by a majority of votes in a general election, shall become law, provided that:
  

  if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately.
  
  

• Second is a standing issue, specifically "whether a voter who would have voted the same way on each of two propositions included in a single-ballot referendum can claim to have personally suffered a direct injury by an alleged violation of the single-subject rule."

The Northwestern covered the story here.

NV Domestic Partnership Bill Passes Key Hurdle

Nevada State Senate Bill 283 creates domestic partnerships for same-sex and opposite-sex couples that give the same rights, protections, and privileges of marriage. It was voted out of the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee by a 4-2 vote and will now be considered by the full Senate, where democrats have a slim majority of 12-9.

The bill contains a provision prohibiting private and state public institutions from discriminating between married and partnered couples, sec. 6, § 7. The sponsor of the bill, however, reportedly amended it in committee to exempt local and state governments from being required to pay benefits to domestic partners, according to the Las Vegas Sun. The Nevada State Legislature website has not yet posted the text of the amendment.

As of 2002, the Nevada Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples in an article ironically labeled "Declaration of Rights."

NH House Passes Transgender Anti-discrimination Bill

WMUR, a local station in Vermont, has an article that begins:

The New Hampshire House reversed itself Wednesday and passed a bill extending anti-discrimination protections to transgender individuals by a single vote.

Next, the bill goes to the Senate for consideration.

You can see the status and full text of the bill here.

[Thanks Towleroad.]

Push for Transgender Protections in New England

A recent Associated Press article discusses the push for protection for transgendered individuals in several states and the impact that this legislation can have on many individuals living in those states. The Massachusetts legislature is currently considering a bill that would add "gender identity and expression" to the state's non-discrimination and hate crimes laws. A similar Connecticut measure was killed in a legislative committee last week, but supporters are attempting to add it as an amendment to other legislation.

New Hampshire recently voted down similar legislation because of the fear that transgender people could use any bathroom. However, after being reconsidered yesterday, the New Hampshire House passed the bill by a vote of 188-187, according to Ms. Magazine. If enacted, the bill would add "gender identity and expression" to the state's already existing non-discrimination law.

Case Note: Res Adjudicata Barred Later Attack of Same-Sex Co-parenting Agreement

In Morris v. Hawk, No. 2008CA0009, 2009 WL 350915 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2009) the Ohio Court of Appeals of Richmond County considered a child custody case where a same-sex custodian couple later separated. One of the women in the relationship gave birth to their son, but soon there after both had sought and obtained joint custody. At both women's consent and request, custody was granted pursuant to an "entry" that was accepted by an Ohio court. In part, it stated that both parties agreed to share parental responsibilities.

After separation, the birth mother requested a declaratory judgment that the custodian entry was unenforceable, which the trial court granted. The Appeals Court remanded the trial court's determination and reasoned that the doctrine of res adjudicata applied. Under Ohio law, the doctrine provides that “[a] valid, final judgment rendered upon the merits bars all subsequent actions based upon any claim arising out of the transaction or occurrence that was the subject matter of the previous action.” (internal quotations omitted).

In a concurring opinion, Judge Edwards would have remanded on different grounds, which would be "dismiss the motion for declaratory judgment as a procedural nullity."

Washington State Legislature Amends Hate-Crime Law to Include Gender Expression and Identity

The Olympian has an article that begins:

Attacks against transgender people could be prosecuted as hate crimes under a bill approved Wednesday by Washington's Legislature.

Senate Bill 5952 changes the definition of "sexual orientation" to reference Washing Statute 49.60.040, which provides:

"Sexual orientation"means heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender expression or identity. As used in this definition, "gender expression or identity" means having or being perceived as having a gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior, or expression, whether or not that gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior, or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth[.]

The old definition, located in the current hate crime statute, defined sexual orientation as "heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality." Governor Chris Gregoire is expected to sign it into law.

In related news, Massachusetts is considering and Rhode Island is reconsidering "T-inclusive" non-discrimination bills.

Talks of Amending Iowa Constitution Shot Down

Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D-Council Bluffs) clearly stated that any effort to amend Iowa's constitution in order to overturn the state supreme court's decision legalizing same-sex marriage will not be taken up by the Senate. ABC News also reports that House Speaker Pat Murphy (D-Dubuque) praised the court's decision, though House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (D-Des Moines) has refrained from taking a stance at this point.

Andrew Sullivan reported in The Atlantic that Iowa's governor, Chet Culver, is also opposed to an amendment to the Iowa constitution, despite his own personal religious belief that same-sex marriages are not valid.

NY Times: Dueling Law Professors Over Iowa Same-Sex Marriage Decision

New York Times has a great blog post that features an analysis of the Varnum decision. Speaking for the pro-same-sex marriage side is Kenji Yoshino, a constitutional law professor at NYU Law school. And, speaking against same-sex marriage is Robert Nagel, a professor from University Colorado School of Law.

[Thanks to Sexual Orientation and the Law]

Russian Pride Activist Convicted of "Popularizing Homosexuality"

Interfax has a story that begins:

A court in Ryazan has found the organizers of two public events protesting homophobia guilty of popularizing homosexuality and ruled they be fined 1,500 rubles each.

Nikolay Bayev and Irina Fet were reportedly found guilty for carrying signs saying "Homosexuality is normal" and "I am proud of my homosexuality."

Ryazan is a city about three hours from Moscow. There are currently several appeals to the European Court of Human Rights regarding Moscow's refusal to permit gay pride parades, although a parade recently occured without the city's permission, according to an article in the UK Gay News.

[Thanks Towleroad!]

Washington, D.C. Council Votes Unanimously to Recognize Out of State Gay Marriages

On the same day as the historic passage of Vermont's gay marriage legislation, the D.C. Council voted 12-0 to approve a measure that will provide for the recognition in D.C. of same-sex marriages performed by other states. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) stated to the Washington Post that the amendment is simply a matter of "basic fairness," a notion that was apparently echoed this afternoon by his fellow Council members.

According to CNN, the Council plans to hold a final vote on May 5. The measure would then go to Mayor Adrian Fenty, who supports gay marriage. The final step, and a major hurdle, would then be review and vote by the US Congress, which has the final say on any DC legislation.

Vermont Legislature Overrides Governor's Veto!

The Senate voted 23-5 to override the governor's veto of the state's same-sex marriage bill. Vermont Freedom to Marry just issued a press release stating that the House voted 100-49 to override the veto.

Congratulations to Vermont Freedom to Marry and all others who worked tirelessly for this victory.

Update: See the coverage at the NY Times (AP Article) and Burlington Free Press (includes Video).

Same-sex Marriage Map

NPR has a great interactive map that describes the status of gay marriage, civil unions, and legislation or amendments banning gay marriage in every state.

[Thanks Towleroad]

Vermont Governor Douglas Vetoes Same-Sex Marriage Bill

Vermont Freedom to Marry issued a press release stating that the bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in Vermont was promptly vetoed late this afternoon by Gov. Douglas when it arrived on his desk. The override votes in both the Senate and House are expected to take place tomorrow, April 7th, sometime before lunch. In order for the Vermont legislature to override the governor's veto, the bill must have the support of at least 2/3rds of each house. The Senate had enough supporters as of the original vote on the bill two weeks ago. The House is less certain, as the initial vote last week was five shy of reaching the necessary 2/3rds. At least one house member who supports marriage equality was not present for last week's vote. Several other house members have stated that they will change their vote in an attempt to override the veto, citing discontent with what they see as the governor's lack of respect for legislators.

Burlington Free Press article on the veto, complete with PDF link to a statement from the governor.

As a side note, the head of Ben & Jerry's is among 17 Vermont CEOs to sign a petition urging the state legislature to override Gov. Douglas' veto.

North Dakota House Kills Antidiscrimination Amendment

The North Dakota House rejected Senate Bill 2278 that would amend the state's anti-discrimination law to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

Robin Weisz (R-Hurdsfield), the chairman of the House Human Services Committee, was quoted as saying, "[t]here’s a big difference between a behavior and a lifestyle and something you don’t have a choice in” and “I don’t think it’s needed. I believe it has consequences that aren’t in the best interests of this state, that do intrude on the rights of others who are also protected under this great constitution.”

See the North Dakota's tracking for Bill 2278 here and the full text here. For coverage of the rejection, see Bismark Tribune, KYFR-TV of North Dakota, and the Dickinson Press.

Rep. Conyers (D-MI) Introduces Bill That Includes Sexual Orientation for Federal Hate Crimes

On April 2, 2009 Rep. Conyers re-introduced H.R. 1913, "The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009," which was subsequently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, according to The Library of Congress.

Although the text of the bill is not yet available, the introductory remarks state that the bill will protect perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. The remarks cited some very disturbing FBI statistics...

Since 1991, the FBI has documented over 118,000 hate crimes. For the year 2007, the most current data available, the FBI compiled reports from law enforcement agencies across the country identifying 7,624 bias-motivated criminal incidents that were directed against an individual because of their personal characteristics. Law enforcement agencies identified 9,535 victims arising from 9,006 separate criminal offenses. As in the past, racially motivated bias accounted for approximately half (50.8 %) of all incidents. Religious bias accounted for 1,400 incidents (18.4 %) and sexual orientation bias accounted for 1,265 incidents--(16.6 %), followed by ethnicity/national origin bias with 1,007 incidents--(13.2%). While these numbers are disturbing, it is important to note that, for a variety of reasons, hate crimes are seriously under-reported.

Within the next few days, the full text of the legislation will be available here.

Initial Thoughts on Iowa Same-sex Marriage Case

In Varnum v. Brien, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously held the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional under the state constitution's equal protection clause. The Volokh Conspiracy Blog has a more detailed summary of the holdings of the case, but below are a few of my initial impressions.

• The opinion is very readable; Justice Cady wrote it so that everyone, lawyers and non-lawyers alike, can easily understand it.
  
  
• The Court held that discrimination based on sexual orientation requires at least intermediate scrutiny (court explicitly chose not to consider if it deserved strict scrutiny), which the statute failed to meet.
  
  
• Given the classic, but flawed, argument that children are best rasied by opposite-sex parents, I found the court's recognition that the argument lacks any support in science important. On page 55, in footnote 26 it said:
  

  The research appears to strongly support the conclusion that same-sex couples foster the same wholesome environment as opposite-sex couples and suggests that the traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.

  In responding to the experts that the state offered, the Court also noted:
  

  [W]e acknowledge the existence of reasoned opinions that dual-gender parenting is the optimal environment for children. These opinions, while thoughtful and sincere, were largely unsupported by reliable scientific studies.

You can find the full text of the opinion here and our previous coverage of the Iowa case here.

UPDATE: Iowa Supreme Court has issued an official summary.

". . . Does the Convention on the Rights of the Child Impose an Obligation on States to Allow Gay and Lesbian Couples to Adopt?"

International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family has an article entitled "Public International Law and the Regulation of Private Spaces: Does the Convention on the Rights of the Child Impose an Obligation on States to Allow Gay and Lesbian Couples to Adopt?" in their April 2009 edition.

Abstract:

Opposition to the adoption of children by gays and lesbians is invariably based on the claim that such a practice is contrary to the rights and best interests of children. The aim of this article is to examine this claim in light of the provisions of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child. It will be argued that an approach to the interpretation of a child's rights and best interests which is based on empirical evidence reveals that there is no basis for sexual orientation to be a relevant consideration in assessing a person's suitability to adopt a child.

23 Int'l J.L. Pol'y & Fam. 110. SSRN page here.

"Intimate Discrimination: The State's Role in the Accident of Sex and Love"

The Harvard Law Review has an article by Elizabeth F. Emens, which begins:

This is a challenging moment for the law of discrimination. The state’s role in discrimination has largely shifted from requiring discrimination — through official policies such as segregation — to prohibiting discrimination — through federal laws covering areas such as employment, housing, education, and public accommodations. Yet the problem of discrimination persists, often in forms that are hard to regulate or even to recognize.

Chicago and 2 of its Officers Sued For False DUI Arrests & Harassing Gays

The Chicago Tribune reports that:

Seven federal lawsuits have been filed against a Chicago police officer that allege he made false DUI arrests, used excessive force and harassed gays and lesbians.

The suits were filed in the District Court for the Norther District of Illinois, where the plaintiffs make various claims, including claim false imprisonment, excessive force, malicious prosecution, and illegal search and seizure.

The latest complaints are available here, here, and here. See additional coverage at the Windy City Times and another Chicago Tribune article.

[Story discovered at Towleroad]

Iowa Supreme Court Rules Unanimously in Favor of Marriage Equality

Radio Iowa and Human Rights Campaign report that just a short time ago the Iowa Supreme Court ruled unanimously that discrimination against same-sex couples in granting marriage licenses is unconstitutional under the Iowa Constitution. More specific information regarding the case, Varnum v. Brien, can be found on Lambda Legal's website.

Here is another, more detailed article from MSNBC.

UPDATE: Iowa Supreme Court's opinion may be read here.

Vermont House Passes Same-Sex Marriage Bill

Late in the day on Thursday, after five hours of debate, the Vermont House passed the same-sex marriage bill by a vote of 95 to 52, just shy of the 2/3 that would be required to override a veto by Gov. Douglas, according to CNN. For more specific information on the text of the bill, known as "An Act to Protect Religious Freedom and Recognize Equality in Civil Marriage," see the Vermont House journal for April 2nd, beginning on page 9. The bill is scheduled for a final vote in the House on Friday and then will be returned to the Senate for a final vote before heading to the governor.

California Takes Next Step in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Prison Safety Act

The Desert Sun, a newspaper in Palm Springs, CA, has an article that begins:

Gay rights advocates hailed the passage of the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Prisoner Safety Act in committee in the State Assembly this week as an important step toward protecting a vulnerable prison population.

AB 382, if passed, "would add the sexual orientation and gender identity . . . to the list of characteristics to be considered" when the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation "classif[ies] inmates and wards in order to prevent inmate and ward sexual violence and to promote inmate and ward safety."

For details on the bill, see the bill tracking at the website for the California Legislature.

Same-Sex Marriage Update: Iowa, Vermont, & Maine

Iowa: The Iowa Supreme Court's decision on same-sex marriage is expected to be handed down tomorrow morning at 8.30am, according to On Top Magazine. The issue in the case, Varnum v. Brien, is whether the state's ten year old DOMA is unconstitutional. The Polk County District Court held that the state's restriction on marriage was unconstitutional on August 30, 2007. On August 31, 2007, one gay couple was legally married in Iowa as a result of the lower court's ruling. The brief window of legal same-sex marriage in Iowa was closed later on August 31st when Polk County filed an appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court and the District Court granted a stay on the decision pending appeal to the Supreme court. More information regarding the case can be found on Lambda Legal's website.


Vermont: The AP reports that it is expected that the Vermont House of Representatives will vote on the state's same-sex marriage bill by the end of today. If passed, the bill will then be sent to Gov. Douglas, who is expected to veto the bill.


Maine: The offices of legislators in Maine are being flooded by messages from constituents with about three weeks until a hearing on the state's same-sex marriage bill, according to a local news source, seacoastonline.com. The hearing will take place on April 24th.

Sweden Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

After a six hour debate Wednesday morning, the Swedish parliament approved a bill to legalize same-sex marriage, according to the Independent Online and EarthTimes. The measure was approved by a vote of 261 to 22, with 16 abstentions. It was supported by six of the seven parties in the parliament. The new legislation will become effective May 1, 2009.

First Same-Sex Divorce in New York State

A judge in New York State recently permitted the divorce of a same-sex couple living in New York but married in Toronto Canada, reports Pressconnects.com, a Greater Binghamton news outlet.

Same-sex couples cannot get marriage licenses in New York State (see Hernandez v. Robles), but as per a directive signed by Governor Paterson last May, New York recognizes gay marriages performed in other jurisdictions (see New York Times "New York to Back Same-Sex Unions From Elsewhere").

Thanks to Family Law Tweets and NY Divorce Report for reporting on this!

CT Bill Confroming State Law to Same-Sex Marriage Decision Heads to Senate

A bill removing gender references in Connecticut's marriage laws and transforming the already existing same-sex civil unions to legally recognized marriages as of October 2010 was endorsed by the Connecticut Judiciary Committee by a vote of 30 to 10 on Monday, reports newsday.com. The bill also revokes language contained in the 1991 non-discrimination law that explicitly states that Connecticut does not condone same-sex marriage. The bill is intended to bring Connecticut law into conformity with the state Supreme Court's ruling last fall in Kerrigan v. Commissioners of Public Health legalizing same-sex marriage. The next step for the bill is review by the state Senate.