Same-sex couples in Montana sue state for 'failing to provide legal protections'

Via press release from the ACLU of Montana:

Seven committed same-sex couples today filed a lawsuit against the state of Montana for failing to provide legal protections to same-sex couples and their families in violation of the Montana Constitution's rights of privacy, dignity and the pursuit of life's basic necessities and its guarantees of equal protection and due process. The goal of this lawsuit is ensure that same-sex couples are able to protect their families with the same kind of legal protections that opposite-sex couples are offered through marriage.

Because there is a constitutional amendment in Montana barring marriage for same-sex couples, the couples in the lawsuit are seeking the protection of state-recognized domestic partnerships, similar to those in place in several other states.

"Mary Anne and I are part of a family unit, bonded by love and mutual respect and a desire to share in a close relationship that benefits not only us, as partners, but our wider family and the entire community," said Jan Donaldson, a Helena nurse, of her 27-year relationship with her partner, pediatric neurologist Mary Anne Guggenheim. "We depend on one another, in all aspects of our life together. We want to be able to do that with grace and dignity and to feel secure that our relationship will be respected. We want our relationship to be recognized for what it clearly is - a loving commitment of responsibility worthy of security and protection by the state."

Montana law automatically grants married opposite-sex couples safeguards upon which they can depend in times of need. But, under Montana law, it is possible for same-sex couples to be barred from visiting their partners in the hospital and to be left out of conversations about emergency medical care. Montana inheritance laws refuse to recognize same-sex couples, and can leave surviving partners with nothing if their partners die without valid wills. Today's lawsuit seeks a mechanism such as the domestic partnership laws adopted by several other states to provide similar protections for committed same-sex couples.

On December 31, 2009, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that patients had a right to doctor-assisted suicide. I've been told by several sources with Montana connections that the case could have an important bearing on the lawsuit filed today. Read More...

Interview with Lt. Dan Choi who learned of his DADT discharge today

Today, Dan Choi learned that he's been discharged from the Army under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He'll be on Rachel Maddow tonight, but was gracious enough to do an interview with AMERICAblog this afternoon here in Las Vegas. I talked to him about the news of his discharge and his activism. Also, Dan's statement on his discharge is below:


From Dan:

My Statement on DADT Discharge

This morning I received notification of my honorable discharge from the army under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." After 11 years since beginning my journey at West Point and after 17 months of serving openly as an infantry officer this is both an infuriating and painful announcement.

But my service continues. To all those veterans who have endured similar trials and injustices or prematurely ended their military service because of the unjust policy: our fight has only begun.

The true honor and dignity of service does not come from a piece of paper, a pension or paycheck, a rank or status; only an unflinching commitment to improve the lives of others can determine the nature of one's service. From the first moment we put on our nation's uniform and swore our solemn oath, we committed ourselves to fight for freedom and justice; to defend our constitution and put the needs of others before our own. This is not an oath that I intend to abandon. Doing so at such a time, or remaining silent when our family and community members are fired or punished for who they truly are would be an unequivocal moral dereliction that tarnishes the honor of the uniform and insults the meaning of America.

Lt. Dan Choi

I saw the letter from the Adjutant General of the NY National Guard. It actually states that the discharge is happening because the Board of Officers found that:

1LT Choi did public admit, on more than one occasion, in person and through the media, that he is a homosexual

And, for that, Dan was discharged. That's Don't Ask, Don't Tell in operation.

More from Eve Conant of Newsweek. Read More...

Military surveyed troops about integration in the 1940s, then Truman ignored the study and lifted the ban anyway

Now we know. Yes, they did do a survey of the troops in the 1940s to see how white troops felt about integrating with black troops. The white service members overwhelmingly said "no." Yet later in the decade, Truman ordered the services fully integrated anyway.

So now we have our historical precedent. You survey the troops, then you move ahead with ending the bigoted, discriminatory policy anyway. Any deviation from this historical precedent would be evidence of caving to bigotry. I guess we'll know in December which side of history the President Obama will choose to come down on. Read More...

On the UN's IGLHRC vote: A GOP backlash and some intense lobbying by Amb. Rice

Two really interesting tidbits on the vote to certify IGLHRC at the U.N. from Turtle Bay, the UN blog at Foreign Policy Magazine.

First, how the GOPers caused a backlash:

Earlier this month, Christopher Smith (R-NJ) and Trent Franks (R-AZ) rallied behind a campaign headed by Islamic countries, principally Egypt, to block a move to allow the New York-based group to secure accreditation. In a letter to U.N. members, Smith and Franks wrote that "the preservation of the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of religion require" the gay rights organizations to undergo further questioning of its views.

In previous years, American conservatives like Smith, backed by the White House and the Vatican, exercised enormous influence on social matters at the United Nations. But the letter from Smith and Franks appeared to have backfired, awakening congressional leadership that has grown decidedly more liberal during the past two years.

They created a backlash, which got Democratic members of Congress to write supportive letters. And, look who the GOPers team up with: Egypt and the Vatican, among others. Let's just say, Egypt doesn't have a sterling human rights record. And, the Vatican is enmeshed in the ongoing child rape scandal that continues to spread -- and reaches the highest levels of the Catholic Church.

Then, there was the lobbying of our U.N. Ambassador, Susan Rice, not necessarily to wrangle votes for the resolution, but to get some countries to not vote against it:

Behind the scenes, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Susan E. Rice and her team quietly informed key governments, including African states, of the importance Obama and his administration placed on this issue. Jessica Stern, a policy advisor for IGLHRC, said the diplomacy was critical in persuading African states that might have voted against the measure to abstain or to not show up.

"There is no question that having high-level U.S. government officials make calls on our behalf made a difference, particularly on the high number of abstentions," Stern said, noting that the Bush administration had supported her group's bid for consultative status but never invested the same level of political capital on it. "There was always going to be controversy around our application. But the support of the U.S. government was incredibly significant to the victory we enjoyed yesterday."

Stern and other gay rights activists maintain that U.S. support for gays at the United Nations comes at a time when the Obama administration is facing criticism on the domestic front for not pressing hard enough for gay rights at home.

The countries that abstained or didn't show up made the difference, because I'm pretty sure some of them wouldn't be on our side. The final vote was 23 - 13. But, 13 countries, including Egypt, abstained from voting and five, including Iraq, didn't vote.

Sounds like Susan Rice's team did more lobbying to secure this win than we've seen from the White House lobbying team on any other LGBT issue. Would that they lobbied Congress like this. Read More...

Livestream of Netroots Panel on marriage

Here's the livestream of our panel at Netroots Nation. It's titled, "Marriage Equality: Building a Movement Online" with panelists Adam Bink from Open Left, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly, PCCC's Julia Rosen, and Freedom to Marry's Michael Crawford. I'm the moderator.

Livestream ended. It was an excellent discussion. Read More...

Obama deputy campaign manager: Obama doesn't have to defend DOMA in court

Steve Hildebrand, who served as Barack Obama's Deputy Campaign Manager, is at Netroots Nation. Yesterday, he sat down for an interview with Kerry Eleveld. Hildebrand is always interesting. I got a chance to talk to him briefly yesterday. He was the main contact John and I had with the Obama campaign back in 2008. In fact, on the night Obama secured the nomination, Hildebrand sent John a text thanking him for our help.

At the LGBT Netroot Nation Pre-convention meeting, each participant gave their name, their affiliation and had to say three words. Hildebrand's were: Don't hate Obama. (Mine weren't nearly as profound: Fifth Netroots Nation.)

I thought the most interesting part of the interview was Hildebrand's take on the DOMA lawsuits:

Is there anything you’re disappointed with that you’ve communicated to the administration?

I’m very perplexed on the administration’s continued defense of DOMA in the courts. The Justice Department is not required to defend laws passed by Congress -- they have a history of doing it but it’s not a requirement. Their ultimate duty is to defend the Constitution of the United States and if Congress passes a law that is discriminatory and doesn’t pass muster of constitutionality, the Justice Department in my opinion should not defend those laws. In fact, they should find ways to make sure that those laws are stricken down by the courts.

I’d like to see the president and Attorney General Holder announce that they will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act and to agree with the judge’s findings in the Massachusetts’ court case.

The other thing I would say related to DOMA is that holding out hope that Congress will repeal DOMA is a crazy idea – I don’t foresee in my lifetime Congress having the guts to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. We can’t even get workplace protections passed – how do we expect them to take on religious institutions in this country who hold marriage [as an institution] only allowed between a man and a woman.

Steve is a very smart political strategist. He gets Congress, too. And, I imagine he knows how hard it will be for the Obama administration to enter its reelection campaign while defending DOMA.

They don't have to do it. And, defending DOMA is bad policy and bad politics. Read More...

Thanks for the equalty, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall

The Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is retiring. She made history:

The Massachusetts chief justice who wrote the state’s landmark ruling legalizing gay marriage has announced she’s stepping down.

Chief Justice Margaret Marshall said Wednesday she will retire by the end of October to spend more time with her husband, former New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis. The two-time Pulitzer Prize winner retired in 2001 and has Parkinson’s disease.

The 66-year-old Marshall is a native of South Africa.

Read More...

LGBT youth continue to stand up and lead

Crossposted at Leave It To Seaver

With the intense coverage in the press of high school proms and the stand that a few brave teens took this year, we have a couple inspiring updates. First we had Constance McMillen, whose Mississippi school canceled prom rather than let her attend with her girlfriend and then allowed a decoy prom. Since then, she has been invited to events around the nation, and most importantly, recently won her lawsuit argued by the ACLU.

The other memorable prom story was of Derrick Martin, who asked to bring his boyfriend to prom. After a long delay, the school district allowed him to, at which point he was kicked out of his home by his parents. Yet, despite this, he became an advocate for LGBTQ youth issues and went on to recently start Project LifeVest, partnering with The Trevor Project, Gays And Lesbians United Against Discrimination and Sean's Last Wish.

Martin described Project LifeVest in a recent interview with Waymon Hudson at The Huffington Post (worth a read):

Project LifeVest is an organization dedicated to helping LGBTQ youths in need. If a teen is kicked out for being gay, and has nowhere to turn, we will do whatever we can to help. If someone falls under the scrutiny of the media, like I did when I came out saying I was going to prom, we will be there to direct the media, to be a wall of protection from the stress that comes with media.

We also want to be there for anyone who is injured because of hate or discrimination. We have already worked with a kid whose father, in a fit of rage, stabbed him in the leg with a rusty shovel. We have the connections, and the passion to help those who need it. Discrimination is something that no one should have to endure, especially alone.

There is something truly remarkable about someone who is only a senior in high school and can a) take a stand that results in national media attention despite real personal consequences, and b) turn what would be devastating to most into something that benefits others. You can find out more about Project LifeVest here. Read More...