transdada

poetics, time, body disruption and marginally queer solutions

Tuesday, September 21, 2004

Arkansas attorneys spar over gay marriage


Attorneys in a lawsuit over a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Arkansas disputed the term marital status in briefs filed with the Arkansas supreme court Monday. The Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union brought the lawsuit, which argues that the Arkansas Marriage Amendment is vague and nonsensical and should be removed from the November 2 ballot.

Supporters of the amendment say it is clearly written and that the ACLU seeks to deny voters a chance to vote on the amendment, which would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The amendment further states, "Legal status for unmarried person which is identical or substantially similar to marital status shall not be valid or recognized in Arkansas."

~

Gay group to ask Supreme Court to rule on same-sex marriages
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


TRENTON -- The gay rights group pushing to make same-sex marriages legal in New Jersey will ask the state Supreme Court to consider the issue.

Lambda Legal officials said today they would file papers that seek a ruling from the state's highest court on a lawsuit brought on behalf of seven same-sex couples. A Superior Court judge ruled last fall against legalizing gay marriage.

The appeal papers filed by Lambda include comments on New Jersey's new domestic partnership law, which took effect this summer. That law grants some legal rights to same-sex partners, such as the ability to make medical decisions for each other.

"The domestic partnership law is an important start, but it falls far short of marriage," said David Buckel, director of Lambda's Marriage Project. "Lesbian and gay couples in New Jersey won't have equal protections and security until they can get married, and that's what we're seeking."

~

HRC LAUNCHES GAY BAR DISCRIMINATION INVESTIGATION
by: Don Romesburg, OIA Newswire


In a major move following two months of bad faith by a Castro bar owner facing nearly 20 sworn complaints alleging racial discrimination in his bars, the San Francisco Human Rights Commission has announced that it will begin a rare, full-scale investigation. This neutral City government agency investigation could include subpoenas and sworn interviews with complainants, witnesses, bar staff, and others, resulting in a finding of fact regarding concerns raised by IsBadlandsBad.com and those who have come forward.

In a September 15 letter to bar owner Les Natali's lawyer, the HRC gave two reasons for moving from mediation to a full investigation. First, after nearly two months of attempting to bring Mr. Natali to the table, the bar owner had repeatedly failed to even propose mediation dates, despite many attempts to find acceptable dates by both the HRC and IsBadlandsBad.com. Second, Mr. Natali further attempted to circumvent the HRC's usual format for mediation, offering irregular proposals for HRC negotiation.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home