Windy City Media Group Frontpage News

THE VOICE OF CHICAGO'S GAY, LESBIAN, BI, TRANS AND QUEER COMMUNITY SINCE 1985

home search facebook twitter join
Gay News Sponsor Windy City Times 2021-09-01
DOWNLOAD ISSUE
Donate

Sponsor
Sponsor

  WINDY CITY TIMES

Supreme Court deliberations continue in private
by Lisa Keen, Keen News Service
2015-05-04

This article shared 4053 times since Mon May 4, 2015
facebook twitter google +1 reddit email


The U.S. Supreme Court has almost certainly made its decision about the right to marry for same-sex couples. The justices met in private conference Friday, May 1, and took a vote. They have until June 30 to issue their decision.

Most legal observers who watched or listened to the oral arguments from April 28 in Obergefell v. Hodges, an appeal seeking to strike down bans on same-sex marriages in four states, predict Justice Anthony Kennedy will vote with the court's four liberal wing and find the bans unconstitutional. A few, like University of California School of Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, believe the vote could even be 6 to 3, with Chief Justice John Roberts on board.

Those who think Roberts could join a majority to strike down the laws were heartened by a question he posed to the attorney defending Michigan's ban, John Bursch.

"I'm not sure it's necessary to get into sexual orientation to resolve the case," said Roberts. "I mean, if Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can't. And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn't that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?"

If the court decided state bans on same-sex marriage constitute sex discrimination, "then I can promise you that lawyers in almost any case where a law discriminates against gay people will make the argument that the law constitutes unconstitutional sex discrimination," said Roberta Kaplan, who argued on behalf of Edith Windsor in the case that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act ( DOMA ).

"On the other hand, there is always a bit of a disconnect with this argument, particularly when it's clear that the law at issue was passed to treat people differently based on their sexual orientation, not their gender."

For instance, Kaplan said she would be surprised if a ruling in Obergefell will stop the passage of the growing number of laws attempting to provide a religious exemption for businesses to discriminate against LGBT people. The impact of those "religious freedom" laws, she said, is going to be "hotly litigated, no matter what."

Many had expected it the Supreme Court might use the Obergefell case to designate what level of judicial scrutiny for courts to use in evaluating laws that disadvantage LGBT people. To date, the high court has used only the easiest level: requiring governments to identify a legitimate rational purpose for the law. And many had hoped the high court would at least designate "heightened scrutiny," the same as used for laws that discriminate on the basis of sex.

But there was almost no discussion in the Supreme Court on April 28 about what level of scrutiny discrimination based on sexual orientation should take.

"In part, that is probably because there really is not a lot of legitimate room for debate about the factors that would apply —for example, is there a history of discrimination against gay people," said Kaplan. The court also seeks to determine whether the characteristic being singled out for discrimination is relevant, whether the characteristic is immutable, and whether the group that shares that characteristic is politically vulnerable.

But Kaplan said the court may not have discussed the level of scrutiny because "the justices have already decided not to address the issue in Obergefell, similar to their failure to address it in Romer and Windsor."

Interestingly, during oral arguments on California's Proposition 8 case in 2013, it was Kennedy who said he was "wrestling" with the idea of sex discrimination. But that case was dismissed on a procedural issue, and Kennedy's authorship of the majority opinion in U.S. v. Windsor found DOMA served "no legitimate purpose."

And Roberts' seeming willingness to recognize sex discrimination in the context of bans on same-sex marriage stood in stark contrast to his equally blunt comment to same-sex couples' attorney Mary Bonauto.

"My question is you're not seeking to join the institution, you're seeking to change what the institution is. The fundamental core of the institution is the opposite-sex relationship and you want to introduce into it a same-sex relationship."

To that remark, Harvard Law Professor Charles Fried said he would have replied, "So what?"

"At one time, people thought women were inferior to men intellectually and physically, and Aristotle thought women made no contribution to the genetic component." said Fried, a U.S. Solicitor General under President Reagan and a former member of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. "They were wrong then, and we think we've got it right now. If I had been arguing…I'd have said, 'Maybe that was the definition back then, but it's the wrong definition of the concept we're talking about now'."

Jenny Pizer, law and policy project director for Lambda Legal, said that limiting the definition of marriage to only male-female couplings is "a sex discrimination problem right on its face" because it "involves a core sex stereotype that men should seek intimate relationships with women, and vice versa." And, she noted, many lower courts have already recognized as sex discrimination certain harassment of gay men at work and the denial of spousal benefits to employees with same-sex spouses. Among them were federal district court decisions in the California on Proposition 8 case ( Perry v. Schwarzenegger ) and the federal benefits case ( Golinski v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management ).

Pizer said the majority could be heading toward a conclusion that says a state ban on marriage for same-sex couples is sex discrimination on its face and is based on gender stereotypes.

A number of legal observers commenting on last week's oral argument have been saying much the same thing. For instance, Cornell Law Professor Michael Dorf wrote: "…laws that ban SSM do not merely draw formal distinctions based on sex. They rely on the very sorts of stereotypes about proper sex roles that the modern sex discrimination cases condemn as the central problem with laws that discriminate on the basis of sex.

"Just as it's sex-stereotyping for the state to say a woman can't be a lawyer because women are supposed to be wives and mothers," wrote Dorf, "so it's sex-stereotyping for the state to say a woman can't marry a woman or a man can't marry a man because men should be with women. Put differently, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is sex discrimination in a substantive, not just a formal sense."

And a ruling like that, said Dorf, would have "broad implications for other state laws and policies that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation."

But it's not clear why Roberts asked the question about sex discrimination. And his question regarding sex discrimination has to be viewed against the backdrop of his dissent in Windsor. There, Roberts prominently stated, "Interests in uniformity and stability amply justified Congress's decision to retain the definition of marriage that, at that point, had been adopted by every State in our Nation, and every nation in the world."

The "at that point" phrase may say something important, too, especially given Roberts' subsequent statement in the Windsor dissent that, "The Court does not have before it, and the logic of its [majority] opinion does not decide, the distinct question of whether the States, in the exercise of their 'historic and essential authority to define the marital relation,' may continue to utilize the traditional definition of marriage."

The transcripts and audio recording of the oral argument in Obergefell v Hodges is available at supremecourt.gov . ( Click on "Oral Arguments" in the black band under the banner, then, on the pull-down menu, choose either "Argument Transcripts" or "Argument Audio."

© 2015 Keen News Service. All rights reserved.


This article shared 4053 times since Mon May 4, 2015
facebook twitter google +1 reddit email

  ARTICLES YOU MIGHT LIKE

Gay News

WORLD Japan politics, video games, lesbian tennis player, Mr. Gay World 2021-10-10
- LGBTQ+-rights activists were hoping Japan would finally allow same-sex marriage if Taro Kono, who has publicly supported same-sex marriage, became the country's next prime minister—but their hopes were dashed. Japan's ...


Gay News

"I can't be silent": Michael O'Connor discusses his longtime activism 2021-10-04
By Kayleigh Padar - Years ago, longtime activist Michael O'Connor heard that some Black legislators in Illinois didn't want to support the Marriage Equality Act because they didn't believe Black people would benefit from same-sex marriage. He decided to prove ...


Gay News

Liz Cheney: 'I was wrong' to oppose same-sex marriage 2021-09-27
- U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney said—in a segment of the CBS show 60 Minutes that aired Sept. 26—she was "wrong" to oppose same-sex marriage when her objection to it caused a public split with her family, including ...


Gay News

Nearly two-thirds of Swiss residents vote for marriage equality 2021-09-26
- Almost two-thirds of Switzerland's voters backed the government's plan to introduce same-sex marriage in a referendum held Sept. 26, with campaigners calling it a historic day for gay rights in Switzerland, Yahoo! News reported, citing AFP. ...


Gay News

NATIONAL Danica Roem, 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' abortion appeal, Lambda Legal 2021-09-26
- Transgender Virginia legislator Danica Roem is facing a conservative marriage-equality opponent and former Trump administration member in her re-election race this November, Yahoo! News noted. Roem, a Democrat, was elected to the House of Delegates in ...


Gay News

WORLD Marches, world leaders, Swiss marriage, soccer match 2021-09-26
- Thousands of people including soldiers and diplomats marched peacefully through the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv in an annual Pride parade despite some opposition to an event called off last year because of the coronavirus pandemic, Reuters ...


Gay News

[UPDATE] Lisle school offers job to lacrosse coach in same-sex marriage 2021-09-21
- The administration at Lisle’s Benet Academy, a west suburban Catholic school, has reversed course and offered a job to a woman in a same-sex marriage after initially rescinding the offer, The Chicago Tribune reported. ...


Gay News

Pope again refuses to bless same-sex marriages 2021-09-18
- Pope Francis told reporters recently on a return flight from Hungary that the Catholic Church is unable to bless same-sex marriages because marriage is a divine sacrament between a man and a woman, per The Advocate. ...


Gay News

Polis marriage marks first same-sex wedding of sitting governor 2021-09-17
- On Sept. 15, Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis wed longtime partner Marlon Reis—marking the first same-sex marriage of a sitting U.S. governor, NPR reported. Polis keeps making history. In 2018, Polis became the first openly gay ...


Gay News

LGBTQ advocates celebrate two Illinois marriage certificate modernization bills 2021-07-27
--From a press release - Trans and non-binary people who were married in Illinois will now be able to obtain marriage certificates that reflect their authentic selves thanks to legislation signed today by Governor JB Pritzker, according to Equality Illinois and ...


Gay News

WORLD Marriage in Chile, Polish website, Toronto news, 'Reclaim Pride' march 2021-07-25
- On July 21, Chile's Senate approved an equal-marriage bill, DW.com reported. The regulations were presented during the second government of the socialist Michelle Bachelet (2014-2018) and last June 1, during ...


Gay News

LGBTQ advocates celebrate passage of Illinois marriage certificate name change legislation 2021-05-28
--From a press release - LGBTQ advocates are celebrating passage of state legislation that will provide certainty for individuals requesting that their Illinois marriage certificates reflect a legal name change. HB 2590 is an initiative of Equality Illinois and Chicago House ...


Gay News

LGBT-inclusive marriage-certificate act passes state General Assembly 2021-05-21
--From a press release - May 21. 2021 - In an effort to modernize marriage certificates in Illinois, state Sen. Sara Feigenholtz and state Rep. Ann Williams helped pass The Marriage Certificate Modernization Act through the Illinois General Assembly. The legislation ...


Gay News

Starting May 3, ceremonies in Cook County's downtown Marriage Court can be performed by Zoom 2021-04-30
- CHICAGO (April 30) — Marriage and civil union ceremonies at Cook County's downtown Marriage and Civil Union Court (Marriage Court) may be performed via Zoom videoconference, as well as in person, starting next week, according to ...


Gay News

Illinois Senate passes proposal removing gendered language from marriage certificates 2021-04-21
--From a press release - On April 21, on its third reading, the Illinois Senate passed (by a bipartisan vote of 44-13) a proposal that amends the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act to allow the removal of gendered language ...


 



Copyright © 2021 Windy City Media Group. All rights reserved.
Reprint by permission only. PDFs for back issues are downloadable from
our online archives. Single copies of back issues in print form are
available for $4 per issue, older than one month for $6 if available,
by check to the mailing address listed below.

Return postage must accompany all manuscripts, drawings, and
photographs submitted if they are to be returned, and no
responsibility may be assumed for unsolicited materials.
All rights to letters, art and photos sent to Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago
Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) will be treated
as unconditionally assigned for publication purposes and as such,
subject to editing and comment. The opinions expressed by the
columnists, cartoonists, letter writers, and commentators are
their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay,
Lesbian, Bisexual and Transegender News and Feature Publication).

The appearance of a name, image or photo of a person or group in
Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times
(a Chicago Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender News and Feature
Publication) does not indicate the sexual orientation of such
individuals or groups. While we encourage readers to support the
advertisers who make this newspaper possible, Nightspots (Chicago
GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay, Lesbian
News and Feature Publication) cannot accept responsibility for
any advertising claims or promotions.

 
 

TRENDINGBREAKINGPHOTOS







Sponsor
Sponsor


 



Donate


About WCMG      Contact Us      Online Front  Page      Windy City  Times      Nightspots      OUT! Guide     
Identity      BLACKlines      En La Vida      Archives      Advanced Search     
Windy City Queercast      Queercast Archives     
Press  Releases      Join WCMG  Email List      Email Blast      Blogs     
Upcoming Events      Todays Events      Ongoing Events      Bar Guide      Community Groups      In Memoriam      Outguide Categories      Outguide Advertisers      Search Outguide      Travel      Dining Out      Privacy Policy     

Windy City Media Group publishes Windy City Times,
The Bi-Weekly Voice of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans Community.
5315 N. Clark St. #192, Chicago, IL 60640-2113 • PH (773) 871-7610 • FAX (773) 871-7609.