This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/obama-administration-gay-marriage-brief
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Obama administration files limited brief to supreme court on Doma | Obama administration files limited brief to supreme court on Doma |
| (about 1 month later) | |
| The Obama administration has asked the US supreme court to strike down California's same-sex marriage ban, arguing in a legal submission that it violates the constitution's guarantee of equal rights. | The Obama administration has asked the US supreme court to strike down California's same-sex marriage ban, arguing in a legal submission that it violates the constitution's guarantee of equal rights. |
| The Justice Department argued that the ban was based on "impermissible prejudice" because gay people in California are permitted to enter into domestic partnerships, which afford she same rights as marriage but confer a lesser status. It is one of the administration's strongest declarations in support of same-sex marriage, but the brief did not call for a full federal legalization of same-sex marriage, as campaigners had hoped. | The Justice Department argued that the ban was based on "impermissible prejudice" because gay people in California are permitted to enter into domestic partnerships, which afford she same rights as marriage but confer a lesser status. It is one of the administration's strongest declarations in support of same-sex marriage, but the brief did not call for a full federal legalization of same-sex marriage, as campaigners had hoped. |
| The case, Hollingsworth v Perry, is due to be argued on 26 March. In the "friend of the court" brief (pdf), filed just before the deadline, the administration said that "classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to heightened scrutiny". | The case, Hollingsworth v Perry, is due to be argued on 26 March. In the "friend of the court" brief (pdf), filed just before the deadline, the administration said that "classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to heightened scrutiny". |
| The brief notes that people in civil unions have identical substantive rights and obligations to marriage under California state law, but Proposition 8 "relegates them to a legal status – domestic partnership – distinct from marriage but identical to it in terms of the substantive rights and obligations under state law". | The brief notes that people in civil unions have identical substantive rights and obligations to marriage under California state law, but Proposition 8 "relegates them to a legal status – domestic partnership – distinct from marriage but identical to it in terms of the substantive rights and obligations under state law". |
| It adds: "The designation of marriage, however, confers a special validation of the relationship between two individuals and conveys a message to society that domestic partnerships or civil unions cannot match." | It adds: "The designation of marriage, however, confers a special validation of the relationship between two individuals and conveys a message to society that domestic partnerships or civil unions cannot match." |
| The brief concludes by questioning the logic of offering same-sex couples similar protections to marriage, without the label. "California's extension of all of the substantive rights and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian domestic partners particularly undermines the justifications for Proposition 8. It indicates that Proposition 8's withholding of the designation of marriage is not based on an interest in promoting responsible procreation and child-rearing – petitioners' central claimed justification for the initiative – but instead on impermissible prejudice." | The brief concludes by questioning the logic of offering same-sex couples similar protections to marriage, without the label. "California's extension of all of the substantive rights and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian domestic partners particularly undermines the justifications for Proposition 8. It indicates that Proposition 8's withholding of the designation of marriage is not based on an interest in promoting responsible procreation and child-rearing – petitioners' central claimed justification for the initiative – but instead on impermissible prejudice." |
| US attorney general Eric Holder issued a statement in support of the administration's filing. "Throughout history, we have seen the unjust consequences of decisions and policies rooted in discrimination," Holder said. "The issues before the supreme court in this case and the Defense of Marriage Act case are not just important to the tens of thousands Americans who are being denied equal benefits and rights under our laws, but to our nation as a whole." | US attorney general Eric Holder issued a statement in support of the administration's filing. "Throughout history, we have seen the unjust consequences of decisions and policies rooted in discrimination," Holder said. "The issues before the supreme court in this case and the Defense of Marriage Act case are not just important to the tens of thousands Americans who are being denied equal benefits and rights under our laws, but to our nation as a whole." |
| Two same-sex couples brought the case to California federal district court in May 2009, sponsored by the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER). A district court and the US court of appeals ruled that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. | Two same-sex couples brought the case to California federal district court in May 2009, sponsored by the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER). A district court and the US court of appeals ruled that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. |
| A week earlier, the Obama administration filed a brief in an another supreme court case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which bans federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The case, United States v Windsor, is due to be argued on 27 March, a day after the Proposition 8 case. | A week earlier, the Obama administration filed a brief in an another supreme court case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which bans federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The case, United States v Windsor, is due to be argued on 27 March, a day after the Proposition 8 case. |
| Chad Griffin, Human Rights Campaign President and co-founder of AFER, said it was "enormously gratifying" to receive support from Obama and the US government. | Chad Griffin, Human Rights Campaign President and co-founder of AFER, said it was "enormously gratifying" to receive support from Obama and the US government. |
| "President Obama and the solicitor general have taken another historic step forward consistent with the great civil rights battles of our nation's history," Griffin said. "The president has turned the inspirational words of his second inaugural address into concrete action by urging our nation's highest court to put an end to discrimination against loving, committed gay and lesbian couples and their families." The brief in the Proposition 8 case notes that laws in seven other states have similar laws to California, the implication being that those laws would fall if the supreme court decides Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. The states are Hawaii, Delaware, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Rhode Island, some of which are already working to legalize same-sex marriage. | "President Obama and the solicitor general have taken another historic step forward consistent with the great civil rights battles of our nation's history," Griffin said. "The president has turned the inspirational words of his second inaugural address into concrete action by urging our nation's highest court to put an end to discrimination against loving, committed gay and lesbian couples and their families." The brief in the Proposition 8 case notes that laws in seven other states have similar laws to California, the implication being that those laws would fall if the supreme court decides Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. The states are Hawaii, Delaware, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Rhode Island, some of which are already working to legalize same-sex marriage. |
| According to the Human Rights Commission, at least 38 states ban same-sex marriage, and while Obama spoke about how same-sex couples should be treated equally under law in his inaugural address, the administration was initially not expected to file the brief. | According to the Human Rights Commission, at least 38 states ban same-sex marriage, and while Obama spoke about how same-sex couples should be treated equally under law in his inaugural address, the administration was initially not expected to file the brief. |
| Businesses, states, equality groups and an array of Republican and conservative leaders have filed briefs in support of the challenge to Proposition 8, including Nike, Google and Hewlett-Packard. | Businesses, states, equality groups and an array of Republican and conservative leaders have filed briefs in support of the challenge to Proposition 8, including Nike, Google and Hewlett-Packard. |
| Former Republican national committee chairman Ken Mehlman organized the collection of 100 Republican and conservative signatures for a brief in support of the case. Some signatories had previously voiced opposition to same-sex marriage including Meg Whitman, Hewlett Packard CEO and 2010 California gubernatorial candidate. Beth Myers, former Romney for President campaign manager, Jim Comey, former US deputy attorney general and Stephen J Hadley, a national security adviser to George W Bush. | Former Republican national committee chairman Ken Mehlman organized the collection of 100 Republican and conservative signatures for a brief in support of the case. Some signatories had previously voiced opposition to same-sex marriage including Meg Whitman, Hewlett Packard CEO and 2010 California gubernatorial candidate. Beth Myers, former Romney for President campaign manager, Jim Comey, former US deputy attorney general and Stephen J Hadley, a national security adviser to George W Bush. |
| guardian.co.uk today is our daily snapshot of the top news stories, sent to your inbox at 8am |