Kentucky: ACLU Files Contempt Of Court Motion Against County Clerk Kim Davis

The ACLU has filed a contempt of court motion against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis for her refusal to follow the law and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Last night, Davis ran out of legal options when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene. Davis is now bound by the ruling by U.S. District Judge Bunning to begin issuing marriage licenses.

The motion specifically asks that Davis not be thrown in jail, but be fined. Clearly the visual of Davis being incarcerated would give the haters the martyr they are dreaming of.

From the motion:

Plaintiffs do not seek to compel Davis’ compliance through incarceration. Since Defendant Davis continues to collect compensation from the Commonwealth for duties she fails to perform, Plaintiffs urge the the Court to impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous to compel Davis’ immediate compliance without further delay.

According to the AP, Davis and her deputy clerks have been summoned to a federal court hearing this coming Thursday at 11am where she may be found in contempt of court.

Supercut: Pop Culture's Journey Toward Marriage Equality

The ACLU reminds us how we got to "here" as the LGBT community looks to next week's SCOTUS oral arguments for marriage equality.

In 1970, the ACLU filed the first freedom-to-marry lawsuit in the United States. We are now at the Supreme Court to fight to win the freedom to marry for couples in all 50 states. As we get closer than ever before to the freedom to marry for all, let’s take a walk down memory lane.

It really has been about visibility, hasn't it?

(via press release)

ACLU Will Appeal 6th Circuit Court Same-Sex Marriage Ruling To SCOTUS

From Chase Strangio, staff attorney in the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project:

"This decision is an outlier that's incompatible with the 50 other rulings that uphold fairness for all families, as well as with the Supreme Court's decision to let marriage equality rulings stand in Indiana, Wisconsin, Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia.

"It is shameful and wrong that John Arthur's death certificate may have to be revised to list him as single and erase his husband's name as his surviving spouse.

"We believe it's wholly unconstitutional to deny same sex couples and their families access to the rights and respect that all other families receive.

"We will be filing for Supreme Court review right away and hope that through this deeply disappointing ruling we will be able to bring a uniform rule of equality to the entire country."

(via press release)

Pennsylvania: Marriage equality lawsuit may resolve based only on briefs filed, no trial

Pennsylvania's marriage equality lawsuit may receive a relatively quick ruling in light of the fact that the state says it will not call any experts nor argue the ban causes harm to the plaintiffs.

From the ACLU website:

A trial became unnecessary after the commonwealth stated that it will not call any experts to counter the plaintiffs’ argument that there is no rational reason why lesbian and gay couples are excluded from marriage, nor does it plan to dispute the specific harms caused to the plaintiffs by the marriage ban. All legal papers in the case will be filed by May 12, meaning a ruling could come at any time after that date.

“We are pleased that this case will be moving forward quickly. Our clients have waited long enough for the state to recognize the love and commitment that these couples have for each other,” said John S. Stapleton, of Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller.

In addition to the motion for summary judgement (asking a judge to decide the case on the briefs alone rather than wait for a trial), briefs were filed by the plaintiffs with testimony from experts on legal disadvantages same-sex couples face on many legal fronts, as well as economic harms to the state's economy due to banning marriage equality.

You can read the plaintiff's motion for here.

ACLU files lawsuit in North Carolina seeking recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages

Via ACLU press release:

The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation and the law firms of Sullivan & Cromwell LLP and Ellis & Winters LLP have filed a new case in federal court on behalf of three married, same-sex couples seeking state recognition of their marriages. Because of the serious medical condition of one member of each couple, they are asking the court to take swift action.

The ACLU has also sought immediate relief on behalf of one of the couples in the existing Fisher-Borne et al. v. Smith case who have a young child who is being denied critical medical care because North Carolina neither recognizes his mothers' marriage nor allows both mothers to adopt their child and establish a legal relationship.

North Carolina's ban on marriage for same-sex couples prevents the plaintiff couples from securing hundreds of protections provided in both state and federal law to married couples. If one member of the couple were to die before the state recognizes their marriage, the surviving spouse will be forever denied not only these protections but the dignity that respect from the state affords, such as having one's relationship acknowledged forever on a death certificate.

ACLU sues state of Utah for not recognizing gay married couples

The ACLU has filed suit with the state of Utah for not recognizing legally performed same-sex marriages that took place between the time a federal judge found the state's ban unconstitutional and when the US Supreme Court issued a stay on any further marriages while the case was under appeal.

The Governor of Utah announced at that time that the more than 1,300 marriages performed would be "put on hold" until the appeals worked their way through the legal system.

From The ACLU:

“These couples were legally married under Utah law and their unions must be treated the same as any other Utah marriage,” said John Mejia, legal director of the ACLU of Utah. “Even our attorney general said that the marriages were entitled to full recognition by the state at the time they were performed.  Regardless of what ultimately happens in the federal challenge to Utah’s marriage ban, the marriages that already occurred are valid and must be recognized now.”

 The lawsuit argues that once same-sex couples are legally married in Utah, they gain protections that cannot retroactively be taken away under the due process clauses of the Utah and United States Constitution.

 Some couples not only wanted to get married to demonstrate their commitment to each other, but also to ensure protection for their children. As a married couple, each parent can establish a legal connection to their children even if they’re not the biological parent or previously recognized adoptive parent. Otherwise, Utah law allows single parents to adopt, but forbids an unmarried partner from being recognized as a parent to the other’s biological or already-adopted children, which could have devastating legal implications.

Read more at the ACLU of Utah website.

Macklemore pitches for the ACLU

Macklemore makes the case for being a member of the American Civil Liberties Union.

The rap superstar shares that the ACLU card is the only card "that lets my gay friends marry the hell out of each other. If you like being free like me, get the ACLU card today."

Michigan: Court strikes down domestic partner ban due to "targeting" gay families

Via press release the ACLU announced that a federal judge has ruled the Michigan law barring domestic partner benefits is unconstitutional:

A federal judge today ruled that a state law that would have barred many public entities from providing health insurance to the domestic partners of their employees is unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union and Kirkland & Ellis LLP challenged the law on behalf of five gay and lesbian public employees, as well as their long-term domestic partners, who either lost their health insurance or would have lost their insurance as a result of the law.

"We're breathing a sigh of relief right now," said Peter Ways, an Ann Arbor teacher whose partner would have lost his benefits. "This law was clearly meant to target families like ours and to make us feel as though we didn't count." In striking down the law, U.S. District Court Judge David M. Lawson found it discriminated by forcing cities, counties, school districts, and community colleges to cancel family benefits for gay and lesbian employees in committed relationships while heterosexual employees had the ability to marry their partners to maintain health insurance. Same-sex couples cannot marry in Michigan.