Politics

Q&A: Issues, Possible Legal Outcomes in Gay Marriage Cases

Published

10 years ago

April 27, 2015

In this June 26, 2013, file photo, Sean Lewrence, of Philadelphia, holds up a flag during a rally for gay marriage, on Independence Mall in Philadelphia. A federal appeals court on Thursday, Nov. 6. 2014, upheld anti-gay marriage laws in four states, breaking ranks with other courts that have considered the issue and setting up the prospect of Supreme Court review. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)

Mark Sherman, ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — Just two years ago, the Supreme Court struck down part of the federal anti-gay marriage law that denied a range of government benefits to legally married same-sex couples.

The decision in United States v. Windsor did not address the validity of state marriage bans, but courts across the country, with few exceptions, said its logic compelled them to invalidate state laws that prohibited gay and lesbian couples from marrying.

The number of states allowing same-sex marriage has grown rapidly. As recently as October, just over one-third of the states permitted same-sex marriage. Now, same-sex couples can marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. A look at what is now before the Supreme Court, and the status of same-sex marriage around the country:

___

WHAT’S LEFT FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO DO AMID ALL THIS CHANGE?

The justices on Tuesday are hearing extended arguments, scheduled to run 2½ hours, in highly anticipated cases about the right of same-sex couples to marry. The cases before the court come from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, all of which had their marriage bans upheld by the federal appeals court in Cincinnati in November. That appeals court is the only one that has ruled in favor of the states since the 2013 Windsor decision.

___

WHAT’S AT STAKE?

Two related issues would expand the marriage rights of same-sex couples. The bigger one: Do same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry or can states continue to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman? The second: Even if states won’t allow some couples to marry, must they recognize valid same-sex marriages from elsewhere?

___

WHAT ARE THE MAIN ARGUMENTS ON EACH SIDE?

The arguments of marriage-rights supporters boil down to a claim that states lack any valid reason to deny the right to marry, which the court has earlier described as fundamental to the pursuit of happiness. They say state laws that allow only some people to marry violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law and make second-class citizens of same-sex couples and their families. Same-sex couples say that preventing them from marrying is akin to a past ban on interracial marriage, which the Supreme Court struck down in 1967.

The states respond that they have always set the rules for marriage and that voters in many states have backed, sometimes overwhelmingly, changes to their constitutions to limit marriage to a man and a woman. They say a lively national debate is underway and there is no reason for courts to impose a solution that should be left to the political process. The states also argue that they have a good reason to keep defining marriage as they do. Because only heterosexual couples can produce children, it is in the states’ interest to make marriage laws that encourage those couples to enter a union that supports raising children.

___

IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PLAYING A ROLE?

The administration is backing the right of same-sex couples to marry, although its argument differs in one respect. The plaintiffs say that the state laws should fall, no matter what standard the court applies. The administration calls for more rigorous scrutiny than courts ordinarily apply to most laws, saying it is appropriate when governments discriminate against a group of people. That already is the case for claims that laws discriminate on the basis of race, sex and other factors. But the administration is silent about what the outcome should be if the court does not give gays the special protection it has afforded women and minorities.

The Justice Department’s decision to stop defending the federal anti-marriage law in 2011 was an important moment for gay rights, and President Barack Obama declared his support for same-sex marriage in 2012.

___

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COURT STRIKES DOWN THE STATE BANS?

A ruling that same-sex couples have a right to marry would invalidate the remaining anti-gay marriage laws in the country. If the court limits its ruling to requiring states to recognize same-sex unions, couples in states without same-sex marriage presumably could get married elsewhere and then demand recognition at home.

___

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COURT RULES FOR THE STATES ON BOTH QUESTIONS?

The bans in 14 states would survive. Beyond that, confusion probably would reign. Some states that had their marriage laws struck down by federal courts might seek to reinstate prohibitions on gay and lesbian unions. Questions also could be raised about the validity of some same-sex weddings. Many of these problems would be of the Supreme Court’s own making.

___

WHY IS THAT?

From October to January, the justices first rejected appeals from states seeking to preserve their marriage bans, then allowed court rulings to take effect even as other states appealed those decisions. The result is that the court essentially allowed the number of states with same-sex marriage to double.

___

WHERE IS SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LEGAL?

Same-sex couples can marry in 36 states, the District of Columbia and parts of Missouri. More than 500 marriage licenses were issued to same-sex couples in Alabama this year after a federal court struck down the state’s ban. But probate judges have not issued any more licenses to gay and lesbian couples since the Alabama Supreme Court ordered a halt to same-sex unions in early March.

Gay and lesbian couples may not marry in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, most of Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas.

___

HOW MANY MARRIED SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE THERE IN THE U.S.?

Gary Gates, an expert at UCLA’s Williams Institute on the demography of gays and lesbians in the U.S., estimated that there were 350,000 married same-sex couples as of February. Gates relied on Gallup Inc. survey data and Census Bureau information to arrive at his estimate. That’s just 0.3 percent of the nation’s 242 million adults, Gates said. Almost as many same-sex couples are unmarried, Gates said.

___

WHAT ARE THE NEXT ISSUES FACING GAY RIGHTS?

One fight in the news this year is over efforts to carve out religious exemptions for people and institutions that object to same-sex marriage. It is clear that churches do not have to marry same-sex couples if doing so violates their religious tenets, but what about county clerks? Can photographers refuse to shoot same-sex weddings? Can bakers decline to bake a cake for two men? Civil rights groups say they will continue pressing for other protections from discrimination against LGBT people in employment and housing, among other areas. Even if same-sex couples win the right to marry everywhere, people still can be fired because of their sexual orientation in more than half the states.

___

Online:

Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourt.gov

Follow Mark Sherman on Twitter at: http://www.twitter.com/shermancourt.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Texas Asks Appeals Court to Uphold Voter Photo ID Law

Don't Miss

Obama’s Top 10 Jokes at the Correspondents’ Dinner

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Barbara Lee

Congresswoman Barbara Lee Reflects on Historic Moment Less Than One Week from Election Day

Congresswoman Barbara Lee (CA-12) today released a piece on Medium reflecting on Vice President Kamala Harris’ historic presidential campaign 50 years after Lee worked on the presidential campaign of Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm.

Published

8 hours ago

November 4, 2024

Oakland Post

Congresswoman Barbara Lee.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee (CA-12) today released a piece on Medium reflecting on Vice President Kamala Harris’ historic presidential campaign 50 years after Lee worked on the presidential campaign of Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm:

“As Election Day approaches, I’m reflecting on a few dates and numbers that mean something to me.

Zero: the number of Black members in Congress 56 years ago. Next Congress, we hope to swear in over 60 members in the Congressional Black Caucus.

Three: The number of Black women to ever serve in the United States Senate since the first Congress in 1789.

Two: The number of Black women that will be elected to the Senate this year alone if we do our job.

1972: The first time a Black woman, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, ran for president in one of the major political parties of the United States.

Zero: the number of Black women to ever serve as president of the United States.

IF we do the work, we can change that with President Kamala Harris.

As I reflect on what would be Congresswoman Chisholm’s 100th birthday next month, I could not help but remember that my first official involvement in U.S. politics was working for her presidential campaign in 1972.

Over 50 years later, I have been involved in every single campaign since. Shirley was my mentor — she was a bold visionary, a progressive woman who understood that working together in coalitions was the only way to make life better for everyone, to build an equitable society and democracy that lived up to the creed of “liberty and justice for all.”

The historic moment we are in today is not lost on me. I have had the privilege to have known Vice President Kamala Harris for over three decades. She, after all, is a daughter of the East Bay. She, like Shirley, truly is a fighter for the people.

And I know she can move our country forward in a new way. As a member of her National Advisory Board, I have campaigned across our country to help take her message, her legacy of service, and her “to-do list,” as she says, to voters who were almost starting to feel hopeless, but are now feeling hopeful once again, captured by the politics joy and the bright possibilities brought upon by a possible Harris-Walz administration.

Recently, I visited churches in North Carolina with members of the Congressional Black Caucus. The chair of our CBC political action committee, Chairman Gregory Meeks from New York’s fifth district, eloquently and powerfully presented a vision of what Dr. Maya Angelou wrote in her famous poem, “And Still I Rise:” “I am the dream and the hope of the slave.”

Meeks remarked that on Jan. 20, 2025, we will observe the birthday of our drum major for justice, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

He also described that on Jan. 20, IF we do the work — if we knock on doors, if we make those phone calls, if we spread our message — standing on the podium at the U.S. Capitol will be the first Black speaker of the House of Representatives, Hakeem Jeffries.

In the wings will be over 60 members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Holding Frederick Douglass’ Bible will be the first African American woman appointed to the highest court of the land, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

She will be swearing-in the first Black woman to serve as president, Kamala Harris, in front of the shining white dome of the United States Capitol, built by enslaved Black people.

In front of her and beyond, the tens of millions of Black men and women who voted for her. The world will witness the hope and the dreams of our ancestors ushering in a new way forward.

As I sat in front of the stage this week at the Ellipse in Washington, D.C., as Vice President Harris delivered remarks with the Oval Office behind her, I could not help but feel that our country was ready for this historic moment.

We are not only voting for a Black woman as Commander in Chief of the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world. We are definitively stating that we will not allow the clocks of freedom and justice to be turned back.

We are voting for our ancestors’ hopes and dreams. We are voting for the generations that will come after us, long after we are gone. We are voting for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Let’s get this done.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Bay Area

Pamela Price Appoints Deputy D.A. Jennifer Kassan as New Director of Community Support Bureau

On Monday, District Attorney Pamela Price announced Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Kassan as the new director of the Community Support Bureau. Kassan has over 25 years of experience as an attorney and advisor for mission-driven enterprises including benefit corporations, low-profit limited liability companies, nonprofits, cooperatives, hybrid organizations, investment funds, and purpose trusts.

Published

8 hours ago

November 4, 2024

Oakland Post

Alameda County Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Kassan. Courtesy photo.

Special to The Post

On Monday, District Attorney Pamela Price announced Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Kassan as the new director of the Community Support Bureau.

Kassan has over 25 years of experience as an attorney and advisor for mission-driven enterprises including benefit corporations, low-profit limited liability companies, nonprofits, cooperatives, hybrid organizations, investment funds, and purpose trusts.

Working in the DA’s new administration since 2023, Kassan was most recently assigned to the Organized Retail Theft Prosecution team.

Kassan has a master’s degree in City Planning from the University of California, Berkeley. She received a National Science Foundation Fellowship from Yale Law School, and graduated from Yale Law School in 1995. She earned her B.A. in Psychology with a minor emphasis in Ethnic Studies from UC Berkeley.

Kassan’s education, extensive legal background, list of notable accomplishments and impressive resume includes helping to found and lead multiple organizations to support community wealth building including:

Community Ventures, a nonprofit organization that promotes locally-based community economic development,
the Sustainable Economies Law Center, a nonprofit that provides legal information, training, and representation to support sustainable economies
the Force for Good Fund, a nonprofit impact investment fund
Crowdfund Main Street, a licensed portal for regulation crowdfunding
Opportunity Main Street, a place-based ecosystem building organization that supports under-represented entrepreneurs and provides education about community-based investing.

In addition, Kassan served as an elected member of the City Council of Fremont, California from 2018 to 2024, and on the Securities and Exchange Commission Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies.

In 2020 she was named to the list of World-Changing Women in Conscious Business by SOCAP Global.

“We are excited to see Jenny accept the role as the new leader for the Community Support Bureau,” said Price. “She brings a wealth of talent, experience, and a vision to expand our office’s engagement with community groups and residents, that will level-up our

outreach programs and partnerships with local organizations with the aim of promoting crime prevention.

“We thank Interim CSB Director Esther Lemus, who is now assigned to our office’s

Restitution Unit, for her hard work and a great job fostering positive relationships between the DAO and the community.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Bay Area

Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao’s Open Letter to Philip Dreyfuss, Recall Election’s Primary Funder

Oaklanders Defending Democracy, a group opposing the recall of Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, shared an open letter she wrote to Philip Dreyfuss of Farallon Capital, a coal hedge fund. According to Thao’s supporters, “Dreyfuss is the primary funder of the recall effort to remove her from office. He has not explained his motivations or answered one question about why he’s funding the recall or what his agenda is for Oakland.

Published

9 hours ago

November 4, 2024

Oakland Post

Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao

Special to The Post

Publishers note: Oaklanders Defending Democracy, a group opposing the recall of Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, shared an open letter she wrote to Philip Dreyfuss of Farallon Capital, a coal hedge fund.

According to Thao’s supporters, “Dreyfuss is the primary funder of the recall effort to remove her from office. He has not explained his motivations or answered one question about why he’s funding the recall or what his agenda is for Oakland.

“All we know about him is his firm has invested over $2 billion in coal since 2022. Farallon Capital is a global hedge fund with $39 billion capital under management, headquartered in San Francisco, the supporters say.

The effort to recall Mayor Sheng Thao was built on top of an argument about a crime wave, pinning the blame for it on a newly elected Mayor. Now that crime has dropped massively, recall proponents are left with no compelling argument.

Oct. 30

Dear Philip Dreyfuss,

We haven’t met. As you know, I’m the Mayor of Oakland, elected in 2022 to serve and protect this city. Since stepping into office, I’ve tackled rising crime, homelessness, and budget challenges head-on, working tirelessly for Oakland’s future.

You are a hedge-fund manager and coal investor who doesn’t live in Oakland who is trying to buy our city government. But the people didn’t elect you, they elected me to protect them from people like you.

Shortly after my term began, you launched a campaign to remove me from office, pouring in nearly $500,000 of your own wealth. We’ll know the outcome of your campaign on Nov. 6, but let’s be clear about what’s at stake.

Since I took office, crime has dropped over 30%—we’re on track for less than 100 homicides for the first time since 2019, with 15,000 fewer crimes overall.

We’ve invested hundreds of millions into affordable housing, modernized our 911 system, streamlined construction permitting, and are fighting to make Oakland a safer and cleaner city.

If your recall succeeds, Oakland will see four mayors in just five years, another election for mayor the following year and a whopping $10 million cost to taxpayers. In other words, chaos. None of this will impact you because you don’t live here.

Oaklanders deserve to know who you are. I looked into your record and found that the hedge fund you help manage, Farallon Capital, has invested over $2 billion in coal since 2022.

For years, Oakland has stood tall against coal money threatening the health of West Oakland, Chinatown, Jack London and downtown.

Did you know that life expectancy in West Oakland is 7.5 years lower than the County average? Or that our children suffer from asthma at a rate twice as high as the rest of the County?

Philip, instead of trying to use your wealth to hijack our democracy and create chaos in our city you could have put your money where your mouth is.

Instead of investing in coal you could have invested in our young people—created scholarships for our college-bound kids, funded apprenticeships for those who want to learn a trade or helped rid our schools of lead.

Instead, you chose to divide us while you try to buy us. But I’m here to tell you, Philip, on behalf of the 450,000 residents of my city that Oakland is not for sale. NO to coal. NO to chaos. And NO to your selfish and self-serving recall.

Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, City Hall, Oakland