Tag Archives: ACLU

WTF?! - ACLU Leaves Gays & Lesbians Out of the Equality Act

WTF?! – ACLU Leaves Gays & Lesbians Out of the Equality Act

Since 1974 when it was first introduced gays and lesbians have been the focus of and have fought tooth and nail to get the Equality Act or some incarnation of it passed in the United States Senate. Yet somehow the ACLU managed to leave both groups out of a tweet supporting it after its most recent passage in the House of Representatives.

We have reached out to the ACLU for comment.

At the time of this posting we have received none.

Indiana High School Sued Over Not Allowing The Words "Gay", "Lesbian" "GSA", or “Gay-Straight Alliance” for School Group

Indiana High School Sued Over Not Allowing The Words “Gay”, “Lesbian” “GSA”, or “Gay-Straight Alliance” for School Group

There is a gay-straight alliance at Leo Jr. Sr. High School in Allen County, Indiana. but you wouldn’t know it because the school has banned all descriptive words words that can be used to name it.. Instead only permitted to refer to itself as a “Pride Alliance.”, BUT the “Pride” in its name is not allowed to refer to LGBT Pride. Instead the group is  required to be used as a reference to an a common school acronym: “Professionalism, Respect, Integrity, Diligence, and Excellence.”

ACLU Indiana is suing the school on the student groups behalf.

Via The Daily Beast:

“There is a lot of language policing,” Ken Falk, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, told The Daily Beast, but it may go well beyond that, too, according to the complaint, filed at the end of November in U.S. District Court.

The ACLU of Indiana’s complaint alleges the Leo Pride Alliance is treated differently from other extracurricular clubs at the school, claiming that it is “not allowed to meet outside of a single classroom,” that it is barred from participating in school fundraisers, and that it can only put up a bulletin board “if members performed community service outside of the school, a requirement not imposed on any other club.”

Other clubs, by contrast, are reportedly allowed to host activities outside of their regular meetings.

According to the complaint, the Leo Pride Alliance has been in existence for two years and now boasts over 30 members. The lawsuit alleges that Leo Jr. Sr. High School staff have told the GSA that it can’t even use terms like “gay” or “lesbian” or “queer” in its advertising—terms that would help LGBT students understand the club’s purpose of providing support and community.

Falk states that denying a GSA its full name not only violates the First Amendment but also sends a potentially damaging message to LGBT youth, many of whom are in early and potentially vulnerable stages of coming out.

The complaint also alleges that the Leo Pride Alliance’s faculty advisor “is required to send a list of all club members to all faculty”—and that no other clubs are required to follow this protocol.

There are currently over 4,000 GSAs in the United States and court cases have repeatedly upheld both their right to exist under the federal Equal Access Act and their right to call themselves “gay-straight alliances” rather than something more euphemistic. The Equal Access Act, passed in 1984, requires schools that allow extracurricular clubs to treat them fairly.

 “This is our fourth GSA case [in Indiana], and the law in this area seems to be pretty much settled but yet we keep coming back to it.”

An East Allen County, Indiana Schools spokesperson said, “We take the rights of our students seriously. We are looking into this matter.”

Yeah right.

ACLU Prepares Lawsuits Against North Carolina And It’s Bigoted Anti-LGBT Laws – What YOU Can Do

ACLU Prepares Lawsuit Against North Carolina

The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina is preparing litigation against the state over a recent bill blocking towns and cities from passing anti-discrimination measures.

Governor Pat McCrory signed House Bill 2 late Wednesday night, several hours after the legislature gave final approval during a one-day special session lawmakers called to address the issue.

Response to the bill was swift. Some major corporations, including Red Hat, American Airlines, IBM and Paypal, have spoken out against it. The NCAA also said it would be monitoring North Carolina’s next steps closely. Protests in Raleigh and Asheville drew hundreds.

Sarah Preston, acting Executive Director of the ACLU of NC says the group is preparing a legal challenge. She says the bill was born out of animus towards the LGBT community and could put the state at risk of losing Title IX funding.

Frayda Bluestein of the UNC School of Government has written extensively on the power structure that exists between North Carolina’s legislature and local municipalities. She says the General Assembly was well within its authority to preempt Charlotte’s ordinance.

But she says whether the GA acted constitutionally is a separate matter. So whether or not a lawsuit could succeed will depend on what grounds the bill is being challenged on, and will then be up to the courts.

Other individual LGBT activists including myself and readers of Back2Stonewall.com are working separately to convince television and movie productions in the state to move their productions and are calling on musicians and bands to cancel their upcoming dates in the bigoted anti-gay state.

Television and movie productions include:  Three Billboards, Shots Fired, Dirty Dancing (TV Remake), HGTV’s  Love It or List It and TNT’s Good Behavior.

Upcoming concerts include: Cyndi Lauper, Beyoncé, Demi Lavato and Nick Jonas.

We ask you all to join is in reaching out to the following artist and productions and ask them to cancel their work in North Carolina and stand in solidarity with us for LGBT civil rights.

North Carolina Film Office

 

Supreme Court To Hear 6th Circuit Same Sex Marriage Cases: Lamda Legal, CAP, and the ACLU React

SCOTUS DOMA

 

The U.S. Supreme Court announced today that it will review the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriage in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee. The Court’s ruling is expected in June 2015 and will likely impact not only the same-sex couples in these four states but also the nearly 160,000 same-sex couples and their 60,000 children who live in the 14 states and Puerto Rico where same-sex marriage bans are currently being enforced, as well as more than 200,000 same-sex couples and their 65,000 children who live in the 19 states where courts struck down same-sex marriage bans under the federal constitution in 2014.

Statistics via The Williams Institure:

• As of today, more than three-quarters (75.8%) of same-sex couples across the country are living in the 36 states where they can marry and more than seven-in-ten (70.4%) Americans are living in states that allow marriage for same-sex couples.
• Williams Institute research suggests that there were 690,000 same-sex couples in the US in 2013 raising an estimated 200,000 children. As many as 30,000 of those children are being raised by married parents.
• Recent Williams Institute analyses suggest that the number of married same-sex couples, estimated to be as high as 130,000 in 2013, has increased by more than 50% over the last 3 years.
• Fourteen states, home to nearly 30% of the US population, (AL, AR, GA, KY, LA, MI, MO, MS, ND, NE, OH, SD, TN, TX) and Puerto Rico continue to enforce bans on same-sex marriage.
• In 2014, courts prohibited nineteen states, home to 32% of the US population, from enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage on federal constitutional grounds (AZ, AK, CO, ID, IN, FL, KS, OK, OR, PA, NC, NV, MT, SC, UT, VA, WI, WV, WY).

 

Center For American Progress:

Executive Vice President for External Affairs, Winnie Stachelberg, issued the following statement today after the announcement that the U.S. Supreme Court will make a decision on marriage equality in the coming term.

The Supreme Court’s decision to again take up the issue of marriage equality is welcome news to the thousands of loving and committed same-sex couples who seek a resolution to the cruel legal limbo that currently denies them the dignity and respect that all families deserve. We are confident that when arguments are heard, the Supreme Court will affirm that the fundamental right to marry is the right of all Americans, regardless of the person they love or where they live.

 

Lambda Legal

The U.S. Supreme Court today announced it has granted review of all six marriage equality cases decided by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, including two Ohio cases litigated by Lambda Legal, the ACLU and Gerhardstein & Branch. The two cases are Henry v. Hodges, where Lambda Legal joined Gerhardstein & Branch, and Obergefell v. Hodges, where the ACLU joined Gerhardstein & Branch. Oral argument is expected to take place later this year. “After years of struggle and the dedicated work of thousands across the movement, we are finally within sight of the day when same-sex couples across the country will be able to share equally in the joys, protections and responsibilities of marriage,” said Jon W. Davidson, Legal Director and Eden/Rushing Chair at Lambda Legal. “While these cases will carry the marriage standard before the Supreme Court, they represent literally dozens of cases in state and federal courts nationwide and the collective effort of Lambda Legal, NCLR, the ACLU, GLAD, and other sister LGBT groups and private (often pro-bono) counsel dating back years.”

 

ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union and Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic are co-counsel in the two Kentucky cases, Bourke v. Beshear and Love v. Beshear, brought by lawyers at Clay Daniel Walton & Adams and the Fauver Law Office. These cases challenge Kentucky’s anti-marriage laws on the ground that they violate due process and equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ACLU along with Lambda Legal and Gerhardstein & Branch are also co-counsel in the Ohio case, Obergefell, et al v. Hodges. “We are thrilled the court will finally decide this issue,” said James Esseks, director of the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender & HIV Project. “The country is ready for a national solution that treats lesbian and gay couples fairly. Every single day we wait means more people die before they have a chance to marry, more children are born without proper protections, more people face medical emergencies without being able to count on recognition of their spouses. It is time for the American values of freedom and equality to apply to all couples.”

 

Just a quick note to people because no other site is reporting this part. But don’t be too overjoyed yet.

Remember, if SCOTUS decide against us, we lose all the other wins in federal court. Only state laws which were changed to stop blocking our right to marry would stand.

Any declarations of victory now could turn into the equivalent of “Dewey Defeats Truman” in 1948.

The ACLU and NGLTF (Task Force) Withdraw Support From The Flawed Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

ENDAThe American Civil Liberties Union along with the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (Task Force) both today have announced that they are withdrawing their support from the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

In a statement also signed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Transgender Law Center. The ACLU objects to a provision in the bill that would allow religiously affiliated employers to continue to discriminate based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

“Federal legislation to protect LGBT people from workplace discrimination is way beyond overdue, but Congress has no place giving religiously affiliated employers a license to discriminate against LGBT workers,” said Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office. ”We can no longer support a bill that treats LGBT discrimination as different and somehow more legitimate than other forms of discrimination.”

Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s (Task Force) in a seperate interview shortly after that organization withdrew its support stated “If a private company can take its own religious beliefs and say you can’t have access to certain health care, it’s a hop, skip and a jump to an interpretation that a private company could have religious beliefs that LGBT people are not equal or somehow go against their beliefs and therefore fire them. We disagree with that trend. The implications of Hobby Lobby are becoming clear.”

“We do not take this move lightly,” she added. “We’ve been pushing for this bill for 20 years.”

Despite the new opposition to the ENDA and the outcry from the majority of the LGBT community against the religious exemption in the current version of the bill the Human Rights Campaign, said Tuesday that it continues to support the bill “because it will provide essential workplace protections to millions of LGBT people.” despite the fact that it its current form ENDA will write LGBT discrimination into law andcould be used by any group. organization, or business that that hides their bigotry behind guise of “religion”.

In a statement to Back2Stonewall from Heather Cronk Co-Director of GetEQUAL:  I understand that HRC wants to continue supporting ENDA because I deeply understand the need for us to fight like hell for LGBTQ workplace protections. However, at some point, our movement needs to speak with one voice in saying that using religion as a tool for discrimination rather than for liberation is simply wrong and that we won’t accept it. I hope that HRC soon reaches the conclusion that the rest of us has, and pulls its support for a bill that sets a dangerous precedent for not only the LGBTQ movement, but also for the women’s movement and the reproductive justice movement

Colorado Court Finds Bigoted Anti-Gay Bakery GUILTY of Discrimination, Hate Groups Whine.

Fuck You cake

Earlier this year David Mullins and Charlie Craig visited the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado and wanted to order a wedding cake for their upcoming wedding.  (The wedding was to take place in Massachusetts and they were to fly home to celebrate with family and friends) only to be denied service because they dared to order a same sex wedding cake from Masterpiece’s bigoted owner.

Via press release from the ACLU:

A Colorado judge today determined that the bakery unlawfully discriminated against the couple by refusing to sell them a wedding cake. David Mullins and Charlie Craig visited Masterpiece Cakeshop last year, with Craig’s mother, to order a cake for their upcoming wedding reception. Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and then celebrate with family and friends back home in Colorado. Masterpiece owner Jack Phillips informed them that because of his religious beliefs the store’s policy was to deny service to customers who wished to order baked goods to celebrate a same-sex couple’s wedding.

Longstanding Colorado state law prohibits public accommodations, including businesses such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation. Mullins and Craig filed complaints with the Colorado Civil Rights Division (CCRD) contending that Masterpiece had violated this law. Earlier this year, the CCRD ruled that Phillips illegally discriminated against Mullins and Craig. Today’s decision from Judge Robert N. Spencer of the Colorado Office of Administrative Courts affirms that finding.

And of course not missing a cue American Family Association hate group spokesdouche Bryan FISTer Fischer is foaming at the mouth on Twitter.

Bryan fischer cake

 

Anti-Gay T-shirts Sold at Connecticut High School Considered ‘Freedom of Speech’

Anti-gay Seth Groody

Last year Seth Groody of Wolcott High School in Connecticut was requested by his school  to remove an anti-gay t-shirt he wore on  ‘Day of Silence’, a day of action in which students across the country vow to take a form of silence to call attention to the silencing effect of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment in schools.

Groody was originally threatened with suspension for wearing the shirt,  a rainbow encased in a circle and slash but when the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) threatened to sue the school for infringing on the student’s constitutional right to free speech, Wolcott High School backed down.

Now not only is Groody permitted to wear the anti-gay t-shirt, but has reported to selling the shirts to his fellow students without any ramifications.

Groody said he and his friends intend to wear the shirts on the upcoming National Day of Silence that is recognized this tear on April 19th.

Sandra Staub, legal director of the ACLU in Connecticut disagrees ‘very strongly’ with Groody’s anti-gay position, but says he should be allowed to express his opinion freely .

I have to wonder if the ACLU would be so adamant and forthright about taking the case of a student who wanted to come to school in KKK attire on MLK Day?  By thier opinion that also could be seen as freedom of speech. The ACLU has helped set a dangerous precedent by allowing hate speech on a school campus.  And while the vast majority of the time I support the ACLU, this is about more than freedom of speech.  It’s about infringing on other people’s learning environment and possible safety. The ACLU needs be more careful in the cases it chooses to advocate for.  They needed not take this case, they had a choice.  And I am sure there are many other more important and less hateful cases out there that the ACLU could have, and should have chosen to defend over a teenage bigots “right to hate”.

Shameful

PLEASE support and register for GLSEN’s Day of Silence.

Source - Gay Star News

Small Appalachian Town in KY, Population 334 Approves LGBT Discrimination Protections

Vicco KY

This is heartwarming, especially coming from such a read state as Kentucky.

The small Appalachian Kentucky mining town of Vicco, which only has a population 334 residents, has approved broad  and sweeping anti-discrimination protections for LGBT residents.

ACLU of Kentucky reports:

Today the Fairness Coalition joined the Appalachian town of Vicco, Kentucky as they approved the state’s first lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) anti-discrimination Fairness ordinance in a decade. The measure, which prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations based upon a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity, received support from three of the city’s four-member commission and Mayor Johnny Cummings.  Vicco joins three other cities in the commonwealth with anti-discrimination Fairness protections–Covington, which passed an ordinance in 2003, Lexington, and Louisville, which both approved laws in 1999.

With a population of 334 residents, Vicco now becomes the smallest municipality in America to offer such protections.

Never underestimate a small group of people doing a lot of good despite pressure around them to do otherwise.

See that there actually is some good in the world after all

Human Rights Campaign FAILS To Make GUIDESTAR’S Top 10 Rated LGBT Organizations

 

 

The Human Rights Campaing, largest and most influential LGBT advocay organization in America has FAILED this year to make it into the top 10 List of Guidestar’s,  list of the best LGBT rights and progressive organizations it that it monitors.

Lambda Legal as been named number 1 as having the best practices and accounability among the LGBT non-profit organizations.

“I am very proud of the amazing talent and leadership of the Lambda Legal staff, board and volunteers that has resulted in this top ranking from our colleagues and peers,” said Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director of Lambda Legal. “We have been fighting for equality for LGBT people and people with HIV for forty years, and we have many victories and achievements about which we are proud because they have changed people’s lives – and our society – for the better. This is a transformational time in our movement for LGBT equality. Lambda Legal will continue to lead the way with all our energy and all our hearts. We are grateful to all our supporters and colleagues around the country, and thank those who have honored us with this top ranking for 2012.”

You can see the rest of the list here.

As for the HRC.

After years of compIaints of by the LGBT community of bloated corporate waste, classism and unaccounabilty I hope that hope that this serves as a wake-up call.

But I doubt it.

 

SCOTUS Takes on BOTH Prop 8 and Windsor DOMA Case – Reactions and Opinions From Across The Web

As we all know by now the Supreme Court issued orders granting hearings in the Prop 8 case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, and one Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case, Windsor v. United States.

SCOTUSblog writes:

Prop. 8 is granted on the petition question — whether 14th Am. bars Calif. from defining marriage in traditional way. Plus an added question: Whether the backers of Prop.. 8 have standing in the case under Art. III.

In Windsor, the government petition (12-307) is the one granted. In addition to the petition question — whether Sec. 3 of DOMA violates equal protection under 5th Amendment, there are two other questions: does the fact that government agreed with the 2d CA decision deprive the Court of jurisdiction to hear and decide the case, and whether BLAG (House GOP leaders) has Art. III standing in this case.

Many expected SCOTUS to take up the Windsor v. United States DOMA case but many, myself included had hoped that they would pass on Prop 8 bringing to an end the 4 years of fighting over same-sex marriage in California and making it legal once again.

Is it a bad omen that SCOTUS took BOTH cases?  Or perhaps maybe a calculated move?

If SCOTUS did indeed pass on Prop 8 which would automatically have made  same-sex marriage legal in California once again and took the DOMA case it would have given the impression that the Supreme Court was leaning left on same sex marriage and would have opened up a huge can of worms with anti-gay right-wing republicans and groups until the June hearing.  Did SCOTUS take both cases to keep the drama to a minimum from both sides until the time it can announce BOTH cases at the same time to get it over with all at once?

Either way one thing is certain.  When the decisions come down in June will be HUGE one way or another and will impact both the lives and the meaning if what it means to be a LGBT American and our community should be ready to react appropriately regardless of the outcome.

He’s some reactions and spin from pro-LGBT and anti-LGBT organizations alike on SCOTUS’ decision to hear both cases.

National Organization For Marriage:

“We believe that it is significant that the Supreme Court has taken the Prop 8 case. We believe it is a strong signal that the Court will reverse the lower courts and uphold Proposition 8. That is the right outcome based on the law and based on the principle that voters hold the ultimate power over basic policy judgments and their decisions are entitled to respect. Had the Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts’ decisions invalidating Proposition 8, it could simply have declined to grant certiorari in the case. It’s a strong signal that the justices are concerned with the rogue rulings that have come out of San Francisco at both the trial court and appellate levels. It’s worth noting that Judge Reinhart is the most overruled judge in America. I think this case will add to his record.”John Eastman, chairman of NOM.

Lambda Legal:

This is an exciting moment in our journey toward equality. DOMA is a terrible law that forces our government to discriminate against loving same-sex couples, and it is time for it to go. It is clear that DOMA’s days are numbered. Every one of the cases that the Court was considering makes a clear and compelling case for striking down this outrageous and discriminatory law. As we have throughout this litigation, we will contribute support and file a friend-of-the-court brief. We look forward to working with the ACLU and other sister organizations in making this case before the Court. As for Hollingsworth v. Perry, while the Supreme Court’s decision to review the Ninth Circuit’s correct and carefully-worded ruling delays the restoration of equal access to marriage for same-sex couples in California, we believe the lower court rulings in California will stand.

Family Research Council:

President Tony Perkins made the following comments regarding the decision:

“Virtually nothing is more important to the future of our country than marriage and the family. This is why we are pleased that the Supreme Court has decided to examine lower court decisions striking down the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8. It was completely appropriate for Congress, using DOMA in 1996, to create uniformity in federal law and explicitly confirm that ‘marriage’ would be between one man and one woman for federal purposes – as it always had been. Since President Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law, 30 states have followed suit by incorporating the definition of marriage into their constitutions.

“Should the Supreme Court decide to overturn the marriage laws of 41 states, the ruling would become even more divisive than the Court’s infamous Roe v. Wade decision. Marriage, unlike abortion laws in the 1970s, has been incorporated into the state constitutions of 30 states. Voters in these states will not accept an activist court redefining our most fundamental social institution.

“However, we remain confident that in the end, the U.S. Supreme Court will recognize that DOMA is supported by numerous legitimate legislative purposes – all of which are consistent with our principles of federalism. The argument that the authors of our Constitution created or even implied a ‘right’ to redefine ‘marriage’ lies outside our constitutional law.

“Additionally, we believe that the people’s vote on Proposition 8 should be respected. Activist courts like the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit should not overturn their decision. We hope the Supreme Court will recognize the right of the people to uphold marriage as it has always been defined,”

Freedom To Marry:

“By agreeing to hear a case against the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, the Court can now move swiftly to affirm what 10 federal rulings have already said: DOMA’s ‘gay exception’ to how the federal government treats married couples violates the Constitution and must fall. When it comes to the whole federal safety net that accompanies marriage – access to Social Security survivorship, health coverage, family leave, fair tax treatment, family immigration, and over 1000 other protections and responsibilities — couples who are legally married in the states should be treated by the federal government as what they are: married.” “Additionally, gay and lesbian couples in California – and indeed, all over the country – now look to the Supreme Court to affirm that the Constitution does not permit states to strip something as important as the freedom to marry away from one group of Americans.”

Liberty Counsel:

Washington, DC — The Supreme Court announced that it will take up two marriage laws, the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (U.S. v. Windsor) and California’s Proposition 8 (Hollingsworth v. Perry), a state marriage amendment. The High Court will decide both cases by the end of the term in June 2013.

If the DOMA case is dismissed because the Legislative Branch had no standing to continue the appeal, than that would mean the federal court of appeals decision would be vacated and only the lower district court decision in the Southern District would stand, meaning the impact of the decision would be limited to only the Bronx, Dutchess, New York City, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester. The decision would not affect the entire state of New York and certainly not the surrounding states in the circuit court of appeals.

If the Prop 8 case were dismissed on standing, that would mean the federal court of appeals decision would be vacated and only the lower district court decision in the Northern District would stand, meaning the impact of the decision would be limited to Alemeda, Contra Costa, Humboldt, Monterey, Napa, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo, Solano, and some other Northern counties. The decision would not affect the entire state of California, nor would it affect the other states within the circuit court of appeals.

“Redefining marriage to include same-sex unions would undermine marriage and the family and would have significant negative social consequences,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The United States Supreme Court has previously indicated in Baker v. Nelson that the U.S. Constitution does not grant a right for same-sex couples to marry. Common sense and a quick read of the Constitution say there is no such right to same-sex marriage. Based on the questions which the Supreme Court will decide, these cases could either be blockbusters or duds. The Court could decide the central issue of same-sex marriage, but the Court could also kick the can down the road and save that question for another day.”

Human Rights Campaign:

“Today is a milestone day for equal justice under the law and for millions of loving couples who want to make a lifelong commitment through marriage. The passage of Proposition 8 caused heartbreak for so many Americans, but today’s announcement gives hope that we will see a landmark Supreme Court ruling for marriage this term. As the Court has ruled 14 times in the past, marriage is a fundamental right and I believe they will side with liberty, freedom and equality, moving us toward a more perfect union as they have done in the past. “Proposition 8 has been already been declared unconstitutional in Federal District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Now the Supreme Court has an opportunity to do the same and send a resounding message of hope to LGBT young people from coast to coast that they have the same dignity and same opportunities for the future as everyone else

Focus on the Family:

The Supreme Court’s decision today to determine whether the Constitution allows state and federal government to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman is a welcome development. When the executive branch of the government is no longer willing to defend its own law, the final arbiter must be the highest court in the land. Today’s announcement sets in motion a process that may conclude with one of the most momentous decisions ever rendered by the United States Supreme Court. Will the Court affirm the basic design of the family that has stood throughout cultures worldwide for multiple millennia, or will it engage in a sweeping exercise of social re-engineering with profound ramifications for this and future generations? The justices and personnel involved deserve our prayers for wisdom and discernment.”Jim Daly, president of Focus On The Family.

Protect Marriage:

The day we’ve been waiting for is finally here. Today we scored a MAJOR victory for traditional marriage in the Supreme Court of the United States!! Just moments ago, the Supreme Court GRANTED our petition seeking the Court’s review of the Ninth Circuit’s erroneous decision striking down California’s Proposition 8. Thankfully, now we finally have a fighting chance at a fair hearing to defend the votes of over 7 million Californians who approved Prop 8 to restore traditional marriage. This is a great relief, after a long and difficult journey through the lower courts where the deck was stacked against us from the start.” – California-based hate group Protect Marriage, via press release.

Here is the SCOTUS order for anyone thats interetested (PDF).