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/commentisfree/2013/mar/28/same-sex-marriage-activists-react
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Gay rights activists respond to the historic supreme court hearings | Gay rights activists respond to the historic supreme court hearings |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| As the supreme court justices heard two landmark gay marriage cases this week, their comments and questions have been picked apart to try and divine which way the court will rule in June. Pundits, politicians and commenters have started to weigh in with their predictions. But there's another element to the proceedings which must be considered: how the events of the last two days fit in with the larger context of the gay rights movement. | As the supreme court justices heard two landmark gay marriage cases this week, their comments and questions have been picked apart to try and divine which way the court will rule in June. Pundits, politicians and commenters have started to weigh in with their predictions. But there's another element to the proceedings which must be considered: how the events of the last two days fit in with the larger context of the gay rights movement. |
| We wanted to know how the hearings of the past two days resonate with those who have been fighting for gay rights for decades, so we asked three long-time gay rights activists, Charlotte Bunch, Andy Humm and Arthur Leonard, to reflect on the hearings and to discuss the court's perceived hesitance to make a hard and fast ruling on Doma and Proposition 8. | We wanted to know how the hearings of the past two days resonate with those who have been fighting for gay rights for decades, so we asked three long-time gay rights activists, Charlotte Bunch, Andy Humm and Arthur Leonard, to reflect on the hearings and to discuss the court's perceived hesitance to make a hard and fast ruling on Doma and Proposition 8. |
| Navigate this panel: | Navigate this panel: |
| • Find out more about the activists • What has surprised or disappointed you about the proceedings? • What are your hopes and concerns for the Prop8 and DOMA rulings? • Are there any lessons to be learned from Roe v Wade? | • Find out more about the activists • What has surprised or disappointed you about the proceedings? • What are your hopes and concerns for the Prop8 and DOMA rulings? • Are there any lessons to be learned from Roe v Wade? |
| What has surprised or disappointed you about the proceedings? | What has surprised or disappointed you about the proceedings? |
| Bunch: What surprised me the most Tuesday in particular was the attitude at being annoyed at being asked to make a decision from many of the justices. It really surprised me, because if you're a judge, that's your job – to make decisions. So when they make comments about being asked to do something unusual or exceptional – that's what courts do – they make judgements about fundamental issues. I was surprised that they were so cautious about making a decision about such a controversial issue because that's the role of the supreme court! | Bunch: What surprised me the most Tuesday in particular was the attitude at being annoyed at being asked to make a decision from many of the justices. It really surprised me, because if you're a judge, that's your job – to make decisions. So when they make comments about being asked to do something unusual or exceptional – that's what courts do – they make judgements about fundamental issues. I was surprised that they were so cautious about making a decision about such a controversial issue because that's the role of the supreme court! |
| Humm: The court surprisingly seems headed toward buyer's remorse at having taken the Prop 8 case. So rather than deal with the merits and declaring the California ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional – as they should – or upholding its constitutionality, they will let the lower court ruling stand. Gay couples will once again be able to marry in California and in a couple of other states in the western ninth circuit such as Hawaii and Nevada. | Humm: The court surprisingly seems headed toward buyer's remorse at having taken the Prop 8 case. So rather than deal with the merits and declaring the California ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional – as they should – or upholding its constitutionality, they will let the lower court ruling stand. Gay couples will once again be able to marry in California and in a couple of other states in the western ninth circuit such as Hawaii and Nevada. |
| And while the court struggled mightily with "standing" issues in the Defense of Marriage Act case the next day, too, a majority seems disposed toward overturning it and giving legally married gay couples in nine states and the District of Columbia their 1,000 federal rights including things like social security survivorship benefits and the right to bring their foreign-born spouses into the US. | And while the court struggled mightily with "standing" issues in the Defense of Marriage Act case the next day, too, a majority seems disposed toward overturning it and giving legally married gay couples in nine states and the District of Columbia their 1,000 federal rights including things like social security survivorship benefits and the right to bring their foreign-born spouses into the US. |
| Leonard: I was surprised – and I think many commentators were surprised – at Justice Kennedy's suggestion that the court may have erred in granting review in the Proposition 8 case. If he actually holds that view, which was also echoed by Justice Sotomayor, and wins the support of some others, Proposition 8 may be dead by default. | Leonard: I was surprised – and I think many commentators were surprised – at Justice Kennedy's suggestion that the court may have erred in granting review in the Proposition 8 case. If he actually holds that view, which was also echoed by Justice Sotomayor, and wins the support of some others, Proposition 8 may be dead by default. |
| But that would also mean that the ninth circuit's decision survives and would be available as a precedent when that court considers the Nevada and Hawaii marriage cases. | But that would also mean that the ninth circuit's decision survives and would be available as a precedent when that court considers the Nevada and Hawaii marriage cases. |
| What are your hopes and concerns for the Prop 8 and Doma rulings expected in June? | What are your hopes and concerns for the Prop 8 and Doma rulings expected in June? |
| Bunch: The major concern I have is that without a clear ruling that applies everywhere, we're going to end up with a continuing muddling of varying situation for same-sex couples in all states. So you'll end up with a situation that applies differently and given the mobility of US citizens, life will be made more complicated for gay couples. | Bunch: The major concern I have is that without a clear ruling that applies everywhere, we're going to end up with a continuing muddling of varying situation for same-sex couples in all states. So you'll end up with a situation that applies differently and given the mobility of US citizens, life will be made more complicated for gay couples. |
| Humm: Winning the Doma case will be big, but the swing vote, Kennedy, seems to want to do it on the grounds of states' rights rather than equal protection, which is problematic. | Humm: Winning the Doma case will be big, but the swing vote, Kennedy, seems to want to do it on the grounds of states' rights rather than equal protection, which is problematic. |
| We didn't like it when Congress passed Doma and decided who will be recognized as married federally, something they'd never done before. But we have applauded the Congress many times for passing civil rights laws and other statutes that override the conservative laws in many states. | We didn't like it when Congress passed Doma and decided who will be recognized as married federally, something they'd never done before. But we have applauded the Congress many times for passing civil rights laws and other statutes that override the conservative laws in many states. |
| Leonard: I am hopeful, having reviewed the transcript and recordings of the arguments, that the result will be a revival of the right for same-sex couples to marry in California, and an end to the blatant discrimination against married same-sex couples under federal law. | Leonard: I am hopeful, having reviewed the transcript and recordings of the arguments, that the result will be a revival of the right for same-sex couples to marry in California, and an end to the blatant discrimination against married same-sex couples under federal law. |
| Any fears I had that one or both cases will turn into ghastly defeats for gay rights have been alleviated by the arguments, which give grounds for optimism, although I think it unlikely that the court will issue a decision that requires all fifty states to embrace marriage equality immediately. | Any fears I had that one or both cases will turn into ghastly defeats for gay rights have been alleviated by the arguments, which give grounds for optimism, although I think it unlikely that the court will issue a decision that requires all fifty states to embrace marriage equality immediately. |
| What lessons can be learned from Roe v Wade? | What lessons can be learned from Roe v Wade? |
| Bunch: I'm rather disturbed by Justice Ginsburg's notion that these changes should only happen at the result of political process – at a slow pace. I'm a veteran of the civil rights movement and we used to say in response to gradualism: "Give me my rights now and you can get used to it gradually." | Bunch: I'm rather disturbed by Justice Ginsburg's notion that these changes should only happen at the result of political process – at a slow pace. I'm a veteran of the civil rights movement and we used to say in response to gradualism: "Give me my rights now and you can get used to it gradually." |
| The lesson I draw from Roe v Wade is that we made a mistake in the women's movement in thinking that the controversy was over and not being prepared for the extent of the controversy. But I don't think that you wouldn't have had controversy if Roe v Wade hadn't been ruled. We already had the controversy over abortion – and the difference for me is that women wouldn't have had legal access to abortion without the ruling. | The lesson I draw from Roe v Wade is that we made a mistake in the women's movement in thinking that the controversy was over and not being prepared for the extent of the controversy. But I don't think that you wouldn't have had controversy if Roe v Wade hadn't been ruled. We already had the controversy over abortion – and the difference for me is that women wouldn't have had legal access to abortion without the ruling. |
| Leonard: One lesson I draw from Roe v Wade is that the supreme court can sometimes be unexpectedly bold in expanding protection for individual liberty based on the vague wording of the due process clause. | Leonard: One lesson I draw from Roe v Wade is that the supreme court can sometimes be unexpectedly bold in expanding protection for individual liberty based on the vague wording of the due process clause. |
| Another lesson, much discussed in recent weeks, is that if the court gets too far out in front of public opinion, the result can be serious political backlash that may undermine the court's ruling and confine its scope. But I think the circumstances today are distinguishable, and I hope that a majority of the court, in working over the issues in the weeks ahead, may seize on those distinctions and decide to be bold in the Proposition 8 case. | Another lesson, much discussed in recent weeks, is that if the court gets too far out in front of public opinion, the result can be serious political backlash that may undermine the court's ruling and confine its scope. But I think the circumstances today are distinguishable, and I hope that a majority of the court, in working over the issues in the weeks ahead, may seize on those distinctions and decide to be bold in the Proposition 8 case. |
| Public support for same-sex marriage is broader and deeper now than support for abortion rights in the early 1970s when the court was considering Roe v Wade, and there is a steady increase as the rising generation of young voters enters the political mix. | Public support for same-sex marriage is broader and deeper now than support for abortion rights in the early 1970s when the court was considering Roe v Wade, and there is a steady increase as the rising generation of young voters enters the political mix. |
| Humm: There is an argument that sweeping progressive changes imposed by the court can have some negative side effects. Brown v Board of Education, ending racial segregation in schools in 1954, was a 9-0 well-reasoned landmark decision. But it led to massive resistance in the south, which starved their public schools, and racist parents sent their children to private, segregated Christian academies. | Humm: There is an argument that sweeping progressive changes imposed by the court can have some negative side effects. Brown v Board of Education, ending racial segregation in schools in 1954, was a 9-0 well-reasoned landmark decision. But it led to massive resistance in the south, which starved their public schools, and racist parents sent their children to private, segregated Christian academies. |
| Roe v Wade, protecting abortion rights nationwide, was a terrific breakthrough in 1973 when few women had the right to choose. But it took a lot of the gas out of the grassroots movement to win hearts and minds on the issue and change state laws to allow safe abortions. | Roe v Wade, protecting abortion rights nationwide, was a terrific breakthrough in 1973 when few women had the right to choose. But it took a lot of the gas out of the grassroots movement to win hearts and minds on the issue and change state laws to allow safe abortions. |
| Activist bios | Activist bios |
| Charlotte Bunch, Founding Director and Senior Scholar, at the Center for Women's Global Leadership at Rutgers University, has been an activist, author and organizer in the women's, civil, and human rights movements for four decades. She was inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame in 1996. | Charlotte Bunch, Founding Director and Senior Scholar, at the Center for Women's Global Leadership at Rutgers University, has been an activist, author and organizer in the women's, civil, and human rights movements for four decades. She was inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame in 1996. |
| New York Law School Arthur Leonard is the founding editor and writer of the widely cited newsletter, Lesbian/Gay Law Notes. He has testified on the New York City gay rights bill, organized forums that helped change rules on domestic partnership benefits, and helped produce oft-cited studies of the court system and legal profession that demonstrated the need for equality of opportunity and treatment for minorities. | |
| Andy Humm has been the co-host of Gay USA, the weekly cable TV news show, since 1985. A gay activist since 1974, he also writes for the Gay City News and is a former director of education at the Hetrick-Martin Institute for LGBT youth. | Andy Humm has been the co-host of Gay USA, the weekly cable TV news show, since 1985. A gay activist since 1974, he also writes for the Gay City News and is a former director of education at the Hetrick-Martin Institute for LGBT youth. |