Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts

Monday, August 2, 2010

David Boies (speaking at Commonwealth Club 8/5) Makes Case Against Prop 8 in Chronicle

0 comments
In the Insight section of yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle, lawyer David Boies made "The Case Against Prop 8" as "Unconstitutional Bias."

Boies, a prominent lawyer who represented former Vice President Al Gore in the post-election Bush v. Gore case and worked on many other high-profile cases, raised a lot of eyebrows when he teamed up with Republican former Solicitor General Theodore Olson to make the legal case against California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage in the state.

Calling anti-gay marriage laws "one of the most invidious of the state-sponsored discriminations against gays and lesbians," Boies' Chronicle article provides a legal primer on recent history in anti-gay legislation. He also explains the tactics the team headed by Boies and Olson took in their arguments before the court hearing their Prop. 8 lawsuit.

Read the entire Boies article, and come hear him speak in-person at The Commonwealth Club Thursday, August 5, at 6:00 p.m.

His Club appearance is part of the Geschke Family Series on the U.S. Constitution in the 21st Century.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Gay Weddings Begin in Washington, D.C.; What's the National and State Outlook?

0 comments

Same-sex weddings began taking place this week in Washington, D.C., the latest jurisdiction to legalize gay marriages. The District of Columbia has an unusual governance, being a city with no state government, but with oversight from Congress.

What is happening in the states, and how do they interact with federal policy (and federal politics) on this controversial topic?

In the video above, The Commonwealth Club of California hosted a February 17, 2010, panel discussion with people on different sides of the gay marriage debate. Panelists included Molly McKay, media director, Marriage Equality USA; Jennifer Morse, president and founder, Ruth Institute at the National Organization for Marriage; Therese Stewart, chief deputy city attorney, San Francisco, and attorney for the plaintiffs in current court case challenging Prop. 8; Kevin Snider, chief counsel, Pacific Justice Institute; and Doug Sovern, broadcast journalist, "Sovern Nation" on KCBS, who served as moderator for the event.

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Prop 8 Decision: How to Strike Balance Between Majority Rules and Minority Rights

0 comments
A 6-to-1 decision this week from the California Supreme Court ruled against the American Civil Liberties Union in Strauss v. Horton, recognizing same-sex partnerships with many, though not all, of the legal rights of marriage. The official court opinion upheld the validity of Proposition 8, which was adopted by California voters last November, including a new section (7.5 to Article I) in the California Constitution: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” That decision was hailed by opponents of same-sex marriage, such as ProtectMarriage.com, but it left supporters of gay marriage hanging as the next stage in their fight against Prop 8 begins. Equality California and the Courage Campaign are working to take the issue back to the ballot box – to repeal Prop 8 – while conducting statewide polls to gauge peoples’ attitudes on same-sex marriage.

Last year the American Civil Liberties Union, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of Proposition 8 in the California Supreme Court on behalf of six couples and Equality California. That legal challenge consists basically of three points:

1. Prop 8 is a revision, not an amendment, of the states' constitution, and therefore requires either a two-thirds vote of each house of the state legislature and a vote of the people, or a constitutional convention and a vote.
2. Prop 8 may violate the principal of trias politica, or separation of executive, legislative, and judiciary powers.
3. The “inalienable” right to marry cannot be determined by majority vote (unless, according to the attorney general, there is state interest in doing so).

Former California State Senator Sheila Kuehl was the first openly LGBT person elected to the California Legislature. She commented on the ruling, arguing that the court lost its way issuing this “slim and dishonest statement that same sex couples are not denied legal rights by denying them the ‘word’ marriage. The Court errs.”

Others agreed. The San Francisco police department alone reported arresting some 200 protesters, most of whom are members of One Struggle, One Fight, a civil rights coalition using civil disobedience.

Assemblyman (and gay rights activist) Tom Ammiano also decried the court's move as a reminder that “equality cannot be denied to any group and it is only a matter of time before justice prevails.”

ACLU head Anthony Romero indicated that the setback was particularly odd in light of “a recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling saying that it is unconstitutional to keep gay couples from marrying – and the passage of laws opening marriage to everyone by the Vermont and Maine legislatures.” Romero concluded that public support for marriage for same-sex couples is gaining ground, but California is being left behind. Romero spoke at The Commonwealth Club recently, highlighting the ACLU's challenges to the U.S. Patriot Act, litigation on the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody, and challenges to the Bush administration’s illegal spying program. (Romero was the inaugural speaker in The Club's series on The U.S. Constitution in the 21st Century.) He is also the first openly gay man (and the first Hispanic) to serve as director of the ACLU. Romero and the ACLU argue that the Prop 8 debate is unique: The first time a ballot initiative has been used to change the California Constitution and strip away existing right for a particular group – a “suspect class.”

Antidiscrimination law is a cultural thread that defines progress in American society: A nation’s ongoing attempts to mitigate oppression of cultural minorities and compensate for systemic disadvantage, exploitation and injury. Tension between constitutionally protected civil liberties and the democratic mandate of majority rule also exploded during early deliberations that led to the Brown v. Board of Education decision, which was also fraught with conflict over whether popular opinion could deprive a minority of a constitutional right. Jusitice William Rehnquist’s court memos explored this key question of “Whether, in the long run, it is the majority who will determine what the constitutional rights of minorities are?”

As for the Fourth Estate, The Commonwealth Club also explored media coverage of Proposition 8 and its aftermath (Wednesday, April 15), highlighting the work of gay journalist/blogger Rex Wockner, Cynthia Laird, of the Bay Area Reporter, Equality Camp organizer Cathy Brooks, and Sandip Roy, from New America Now (KALW).

--By Andrew Shaw

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Prop 8 Opposition

0 comments
In light of the California Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that upheld the constitutionality of Proposition 8, which revoked the right to same-sex marriage in the state, we take a look back to September 2008, when a panel discussion at The Commonwealth Club of same-sex marriage advocates discussed how to approach the public relations battle.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Newsom Courts California's Left; Says State's Fiscal Crisis Can Be Fixed

0 comments

Putting a positive spin on California's continuing fiscal crisis, San Francisco Mayor and likely gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom says the problems can be fixed, though he did not offer specifics. The Democrat also maintained his support for same-sex marriage.

“I don't think there's anything particularly extraordinary about the state's problems,” Newsom said Wednesday night at The Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco. He later criticized the lack of creativity from state lawmakers. “The problem we have in Sacramento is an absence of new ideas,” he said.

Newson's visage has recently blanketed the national media, appearing on seemingly every possible news program in an appeal to gain visibility in advance of a probable run for governor. The mayor has also held numerous town hall-style meetings up and down the state and said he believes voters in predominately conservative counties like Placer share most of the same concerns as liberal voters.

"We have the exact same concerns,” said Newsom, “People there have different perspectives and points of view on many issues, but when it comes down to it, at this time, in the world we live in, in the environment we're living in, it's about jobs, it's about education, it's about health care, it's about roads, infrastructure.”

But it was the contentious issue of same-sex marriage to which the mayor is invariably linked by pundits across the nation that was the portion of the hour-long program where Newsom seemed to hit his stride and rationalized his infamous rallying call that proponents of Proposition 8 successfully used against him.

“I learned that I prefer to be the guy that made a mistake saying, 'whether you like it or not' than the guy who just sits there and plays in the margin," said Newsom, "I'm not going play it safe. I'm going to be authentic. I'm going to be myself. You may not like me, but you know where I stand.”

For a politician with state-wide aspirations, Newsom's appeal appears targeted to the most progressive wing of the California electorate, despite the unpopularity and the politically peril that supporting same-sex marriage poses to his candidacy. He was unapologetic in response to a question from moderator Scott Shafer, who at times sparred with Newsom, saying he did not regret officiating the marrying of the first same-sex couple in the city five years ago.

“The idea that someone wants to share that moment and that experience of something that has been denied them their entire life and they want you to share that, and for [me] to say no because I'm worried about my politics is everything I'm not about. If I was worried about politics I would have never done this, ever. Do you think it's helped in the context of everything else? These guys are running around -- these politicians -- on this.

"I know it's not good politics," he continued. "I understand it better than any human being alive. Every single day people are expressing their point of view about how outraged they are and every consultant saying, 'Well, just tone it down.' I can't tone [down] something as fundamental as someone else's rights. If a politician can put aside someone else's rights so they can get ahead politically ... you've got a million politicians who wish to do that. I'm never going to be that person. I never will.”

At one point early in the program, Newsom sounded a bit like an auctioneer, listing his accomplishments and talking points for a nearly two-minute stretch elicited a few groans from the audience. The point was not lost on the mayor. Later, Newsom was asked about his fight with dyslexia and said that “everyone overcompensates in their own way,” and that he has an ability to retain facts and figures that tend to muddle his message. “It's given me more empathy for special education and to recognize that we are not all wired the same, and we all have a wonderful capacity to live our lives out loud.”

--By Steven Tavares

Thursday, March 5, 2009

State Supreme Court Takes up Prop. 8

1 comments

California’s Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Proposition 8, in San Francisco this week, in the Earl Warren Building courtroom on McAllister Street. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom was a prominent and vocal opponent the 2008 ballot initiative to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. Seating in the court is limited to 20, but you can watch the proceedings online here.

Barack Obama is rumored to have declined a photo op with Newsom during his visit to SF, not wanting to be seen posing with the same-sex-marriage-friendly mayor.

But Prop. 8 hearings aren’t the only reason Newsom is back in the family values spotlight. Criticism of Newsom reached a new height recently as the mayor and wife Jennifer Seible announced that they will be having a child.

San Francisco Chronicle writer, Erin Allday wrote Thursday, February 19, “City Hall chitchat has turned to how this might play in Newsom's run for governor. Analysts say that starting a family can only help the campaign -- and maybe reverse Newsom's long-standing playboy image.”

The baby announcement prompted Guardian Editor Tim Redmond to offer family advice too. “If the mayor, or the president, or the school superintendent, or the school board members, or the supervisors choose private schools, then they're saying that public education is good enough for the poor kids, but not for their own.”

Facing a tumultuous economic climate and a massive city deficit, Mayor Newsom has tough decisions to make in 2009. In his quest to keep San Francisco a thriving center for commerce and a livable city, Newsom’s had trouble meeting some campaign promises, and he is moving forward with staff cuts, opting for 1100 layoffs in the last 7 months (300 last week).

With a potential 2010 run for governor in his future, Newsom is also on the hook for stewarding some of his favorite issues -- homelessness, universal health care, and MUNI reform -- through the current recession and state budget mess.


Dispelling myths behind celebrity politicians can be a real challenge. Try your hand, and listen to Newsom’s recent appearance on KQED Radio. Or better yet, hear from the mayor directly here at The Club. Newsom will sit down for a frank and candid discussion about the issues facing the city, with Scott Shafer, host of KQED’s California Report, 6:30 p.m., Wednesday, March 11th.
CWC-Twitter