Tag Archives: Federal Court case

Brian Brown and the National Organization for Marriage Go To Buffalo NY Federal Court Today To Attempt To Get The Right Slander Andrew Cuomo

Brian Brown and the National Organization for Marriage are preparing to go to a federal court in Buffalo today, to convince a judge that it should be able to run ads in the state’s gubernatorial campaign without being  registered as a PAC so NOM and Brian can throw his ample weight behind Carl Paladino while not giving up the names of its donors  NOM calls that requirement a violation of free speech rights and has asked a federal judge in Buffalo to declare a section of state Election Law unconstitutional. Some of the ads would support Paladino — a vocal opponent of gay marriage — while criticizing Cuomo, a gay rights supporter, according to papers filed in court by the National Organization for Marriage.  (SOME?)

“NOM does not want to abide by [the state’s] rules. The fact that all other political committees must follow them is no concern to NOM,” countered Craig R. Bucki, an attorney representing two state Elections Board officials. “NOM, quite simply, seeks to gain preferential status to support and oppose candidates for public office without disclosing from whom it obtains and how it spends money.”

Hey Brian.  Do have a Gayer face than that you gay hating, LGBT Teen Murdering fat fuck?  (Sorry I just can’t help it.  5 minutes in a locked room is all I want.  And probably 4 minutes longer than I would need.)

Gay Couple Challenging Wyoming’s Same Sex Marriage Ban Turn Out To Be Straight Con Artists

Last week I posted about a young gay couple in Laramie Wyoming named David Shupe-Roderick,, and Ryan W. Dupree who had filed a federal court challenge to the constitutionality of Wyoming’s ban on same-sex marriage and were going it alone because they couldn;t afford a lawyer and “find one to take their case for free.”

Well it turns out that the two are nothing more than a pair of STR8 CON ARTISTS.!

LezGetReal who broke the original story follows up on the report and has found out some disturbing things about Shupe-Roberts and Dupree:

Shupe-Roderick, 25, served 4 years in the Wyoming State Penitentiary after he, his brother, and their two girlfriends left Cheyenne in a rental car in January 2004. When they didn’t return the rental car on time, the rental company contacted police. Two days later, Shupe-Roderick – then known as Gerald Shupe — was arrested in Arkansas after being pulled over for an illegal lane change.

After being sentenced, Shupe-Roderick unsuccessfully requested a reduction in his prison sentence on the grounds that he had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and wasn’t taking his prescribed medication when he took the rental car.

Lezgetreal has been contacted by parties close to source as well as information from local authorities and now received further verification through the investigation of other media outlets.

Gerald David Shupe-Roderick, aka Gerald Shupe, now asking to be called David- is currently being prosecuted for falsifying state documents. Last October, he applied to become a notary public, and he allegedly certified on his application form that he wasn’t a convicted felon.

The lawsuit also alleges Shupe-Roderick used a fake same-sex union certificate from Massachusetts to obtain a Wyoming driver’s license……

Shupe-Roderick has also been a plaintiff in court as frequently as he has been a defendant. Besides the gay marriage case, says the Billings Gazette. “He’s filed five other lawsuits in the past three years. In one, he accused prison guards of sexual misconduct, and in another, he accused a would-be business client of assault and breach of contract. He has also sought $16,398 in loans and debts from his former employers/roommates and asserted that Bank of America unlawfully refused to release $5,107 from his bank account. All of those cases were eventually dropped or dismissed.”

There is yet a fifth case is pending in federal court in which Shupe-Roderick is suing “Wyoming Child Support Services” — an apparent reference to the Wyoming Department of Family Services — for allegedly intercepting a $643 federal tax refund. Shupe-Roderick had previously paid child support to his ex-wife to support their 5-year-old son, but in 2009 he agreed to give up his parental rights in exchange for dropping all child support obligations.

It has also been alleged that Shupe has two other children with yet a second woman. Likely the Gay behavior of a man who is so upset he cannot marry a same-sex partner who he told LezGetReal he has known for a mere year! It would seem also that Dupree has a neurological problem and one can only wonder if Mr. Shupe, adept at lawsuits, is using the younger man, to further his personal agenda.

I applaud LezGet Real for following up on the story and when getting further detals that exposed the story as a pathetic con for pronting its follow-up.  THAT took alot of integrity. Because many sites would have just let it slide.

Af for Back2Stonewall I published a post that had multiple aources and links verifying it.  And my indignation to the original story and the “lack of help” would remain true to this day if it \WAS REAL or I ran across another story that placed LGBT individuals standing up up against injustice without getting any help from anybody.  If that was the true case I would do the same thing.. 

As for the revelations that David Shupe-Roderick,, and Ryan W. Dupree are nothing more than grifters and con-artists trying to make a buck off our musery.  I hope that they get everything they deserve and they are nothing morte than scum.

BREAKING NEWS: Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach Has Gone To Federal Court To Block His DADT Discharge

Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach and his attorneys at Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) and Morrison & Foersteris is playing hard ball with the the Air Force, the Pentagon and the Obama and has filed papers in Idaho federal court requesting a temporary order blocking his discharge.  A Federal District Court Judge in Boise should hear the request on Friday.

From The New York Times:

“On Wednesday, Colonel Fehrenbach’s lawyers filed papers in Idaho federal court requesting a temporary order blocking his discharge. The petition contends that a discharge would violate Colonel Fehrenbach’s rights, cause him irreparable harm and fail to meet standards established in a 2008 federal court ruling on don’t ask, don’t tell.

For advocates of abolishing the ban against gay men, lesbians and bisexuals serving openly, Colonel Fehrenbach’s case has become something of a line in the sand. Though President Obama has called for ending the ban and Congress has begun moving in that direction, gay service members continue to face investigations and discharge, albeit at a lower rate than in past years.

Lawyers for Colonel Fehrenbach assert that his case is among the most egregious applications of the policy in their experience. The Air Force investigation into his sexuality began with a complaint from a civilian that was eventually dismissed by the Idaho police and the local prosecutor as unfounded, according to court papers. Colonel Fehrenbach has never publicly said that he is gay.

However, during an interview with an Idaho law enforcement official, he acknowledged having consensual sex with his accuser. Colonel Fehrenbach’s lawyers say he did not realize Air Force investigators were observing that interview; his admission led the Air Force to open its “don’t ask” investigation”

Because this is playing out in Idaho, the higher standards for discharge (laid out by the Ninth Circuit in Witt v. Department of the Air Force) should control. That works to Fehrenbach’s advantage. Also, remember that in March of this year, the Pentagon imposed new “more humane” standards for DADT discharges earlier this year. That should also work to Victor’s advantage as he was outed by a third party who wasn’t considered credible by local law enforcement authorities

It’s going to be an intersting few days for the Department Of justice and The Obama Administraion.  The DOJ knows that there’s a recommendation to discharge Fehrenbach on the desk of the Secretary of the Air Force. If they fight the case, Victor will be discharged. But DOJ told another judge that DADT is going to be repealed. So why would they want to lose a decorated war hero?

Lieutenant Colonel Fehrenbach will be appearing on The  Rachel Maddow Show tonight on MSNBC

**Tou can view the entire application for the TRO and Permanent Injunction and the Memo in support, which were filed this afternoon at the Federal Courthouse in Boise, Idaho aftre the jump.

BREAKING NEWS: Federal District Court Judge Rules That DOMA (The Defense Of Marriage Act) Is Unconstitutional

Today set the stage for two HUGE victories for gay marriage, as a federal judge in Boston ruled that section three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is INDEED unconstitutional.

Both cases were argued, separately, in May,and today the decisons were reached.

Massachusetts, Judge Joseph Tauro ruled that Congress violated the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when it passed DOMA and took from the states decisions concerning which couples can be considered married. In the other, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, he ruled DOMA violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

And in the second case Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services, Tauro ruled that   the federal law’s definition of marriage — one man and one woman — violates state sovereignty by treating some couples with Massachusetts’ marriage licenses differently than others. In Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), a gay legal group, asked Tauro to consider whether DOMA violates the right of eight same-sex couples to equal protection of the law

This also means the Department of Justice, OPM and HHS lost today. And they’will have to decide if they want to appeal it which given the current climate of LGBT rights relations and the Obama administration and will undoubtedly have HUGE ramifications either way. 

Judge In Upcoming DADT Federal Trail BLOCKS Obama Administrations Request To Limit Testimony

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips who will be hearing a case brought against the Obama Administration challenging the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law brought by the Log Cabin Republicans (go figure on that one.) has ruled AGAINT the Departmernt of Justice and the Obama Administration’s effort to bar all testimony on whether Don’t ask, Don’t tell actually benefits the military and how it’s affected the lives of individual service members.

According to Justice Department lawyers, the only pertinent question is whether Congress could have rationally decided when it passed the law in 1993 that it would make the military more effective by reducing potential sources of conflict. It’s legally irrelevant, the government lawyers say, that the Log Cabin Republicans have researchers prepared to testify that the law was irrational from the start and hasn’t accomplished its stated goals, or that former gay and lesbian service members could testify about their discharges.

But Phillips, who will preside over the non-jury trial, said Friday she doesn’t plan to limit the evidence to whatever Congress may have considered in 1993. She pointed to the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2003 that overturned laws banning private homosexual conduct. As Phillips noted, the court didn’t confine itself to reviewing the legislative records in Texas, where the case arose, but considered the purpose and effect of the law before striking it down as an intrusion on personal privacy.

Phillips hasn’t ruled yet on the critical legal question in the case — whether the government can justify the law by citing any conceivable reason for its enactment, or whether administration lawyers will have to show that the ban actually serves a legitimate government purpose. She also hasn’t ruled on the government’s request to delay the trial until Congress acts on legislation to repeal don’t ask, don’t tell

The Log Cabin Republicans’ lawyers say they anticipate favorable rulings on those issues as well and expect to go to trial this month with a good chance of getting the 17-year-old law tossed out.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration and the Department of Justice is going to be defending the discriminatory DADT law in court next week. And, the Obama administration and DOJ continue to defend DOMA in federal courts.  And as for the DADT (Non) Repeal Compromise which does actually nothing to protect gays and lesbians against discharge . It could be awhile before Congress acts on legislation to repeal the law. We’re hearing that Senate consideration of the Defense authorization bill, which contains the compromise repeal language, won’t begin until September. Assuming the repeal language remains in the defense bill, a vote on the conference report could be delayed until December.

So I ask you, where is the change and advocacy we were promised by Obama?  Because asking Courts to uphold “separate, but equal” laws isn’t exactly change.

Federal Jury Decides That Philadelphia Can’t Kick Out Boy Scouts For Being Anti-Gay

A Federal jury has ruled against the City of Philadelphia in its attempt to get the Boy Scouts of America to start paying $200,000 to lease city-subsidized real estate it currently pays just $1 year for, in a unanimous decision a federal jury says the city cannot use the Boy Scouts gay discrimination as a reason to evict. Lawyers for the Scouts “expect U.S. District Judge Ronald Buckwalter [an ex-Scout of course] to issue a permanent injunction that bars the Scouts’ eviction based on their anti-gay policy,” but worth noting is a clause in the city’s lease that allows them to evict for any reason

The federal case made no sense at all. There are no disputed factual issues. So why did a jury even hear the case? Juries don’t rule on whether city policy is unconstitutional. Judges do that. Yet this bizarre federal judge – who has a long affiliated with the scouts – has done everything possible to thwart the eviction, including staging a meaningless jury trial.

The city of Philidelphia should appeal this ruling promptly and at the same time moves to evict the scouts for fiscal reasons, which they are permitted to do under the lease.  And an ethics complaint and investigation should be slapped on Judge Ronald Buckwalter.

Federal DOMA Hearing In Boston Update – Day One

In a press release from GLAD about the hearing today in a federal court in Boston. GLAD is arguing that section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional. The Obama administration’s Department of Justice is defending DOMA and actually had the nerve to send Scott Simpson who wrote the horrid DOMA incest/pedophilia brief last June. Good to know that who DOJ has fighting against our rights in Boston.

“This is a classic equal protection issue. The Constitution applies to gay and lesbian citizens, and married ones, too,” Mary L. Bonauto, GLAD’s Civil Rights Project Director, told the Court. “What governmental purpose does the US have as an employer in treating some of its married employees, retirees and surviving annuitants differently from other married persons, such that Nancy Gill pays for a self and family plan like some of her married colleagues, but the plan doesn’t cover her own spouse?”

Bonauto presented a three-pronged legal argument: By singling out only the marriages of same-sex couples, DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution; DOMA represents an unprecedented intrusion of the federal government into marriage law, which for 230 years has been legislated by states; and by denying federal protections to families, DOMA burdens the marriages of same-sex couples and their right to maintain family integrity.

U.S. District Court Judge, Joseph L. Tauro, vigorously questioned plaintiffs and defendants in a courtroom packed with supporters and media. Judge Tauro heard GLAD’s motion for summary judgment as well as the federal government’s motion to dismiss. The hearing addressed the core issue of whether DOMA Section 3 is constitutional six years after the first same-sex couples in the country started marrying in Massachusetts, the result of GLAD’s groundbreaking marriage case, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health.\

Here Bay Windows does initial reporting includes this passage about the DOJ’s argument:

Justice Department lawyer Scott Simpson, representing the defendants, and Judge Tauro started talking over one another almost right away during Simpson’s opening statement. Simpson tried to present DOMA in a “historical context,” saying that the status quo was not the separation of federal and state governments, but rather, heterosexual marriage, and that DOMA was trying to preserve this status quo. He went on to detail how federal recognition of same-sex marriage would confuse federal government programs that heretofore have not recognized same-sex married couples, a supposition which was quickly rebuffed by Judge Tauro. “The matter is so complex it would be a burden on the federal government?” the Judge asked.

Judge Tauro similarly challenged Simpson’s interpretation of heterosexual marriage being the status quo prior to DOMA. “That was a circumstance,” the judge said, “there was no law.”

Simpson was quoted by the AP calling gay marriage an “experiment”,

If Simpson’s arguments are of the quality he displayed in “that brief,” then this should be a slam-dunk. The man’s an fucking idiot.  And so is Barack Obama for letting the Department of Justice defend this law when it did not have to.