Weekly Political Update

A busy week in the LGBT political arena:

• Five straight couples in Arizona are suing to block the state’s proposed ban on same-sex marriage, saying the bill would invalidate their domestic partnerships as well. They’re using the same argument that marriage-equality supporters in Georgia used unsuccessfully a few weeks ago, claiming that the bill violates state law by asking voters to consider more than one issue at a time.
• A California appeals court heard arguments Monday on whether the state’s same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional. No word on when they will give their ruling; it will likely be appealed to the state Supreme Court in any case.
• In Connecticut, a Superior Court judge said the state’s civil-union law was sufficient for same-sex couples, and they didn’t need the right to get married. Supporters of same-sex marriage plan to appeal to the state Supreme Court. If this fails, it could affect marriage-equality tactics elsewhere, as it casts doubt upon the “civil unions first, then on to marriage” strategy.
• Supporters of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts pushed for and received more time to convince legislators to vote against a marriage ban. Legislators delayed a vote on a proposed constitutional ban until after the November election, and defeated a separate move to reconvene next week.
• The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a ban on same-sex marriage in Nebraska does not violate the U. S. Constitution. A U. S. district judge had earlier ruled that the ban was too broad and “deprived gays and lesbians of participation in the political process.” The Nebraska amendment not only bans same-sex marriage, but denies same-sex couples other legal protections. The partners of state workers cannot share their health insurance benefits, for example.
• The Tennessee Supreme Court said a November vote on a constitutional same-sex-marriage ban could proceed. The ACLU had argued that the state had not met the requirements for the proposed vote. The Court ruled, however, that the ACLU did not have the standing to file the case. One wonders at the coincidence that “all state Supreme Court judges face a popular retention vote on the November ballot.”
• In a look ahead, the U. S. House is scheduled to vote next week on the Federal Marriage Amendment. The Senate voted a month ago not to proceed with a full vote on the amendment, effectively killing it. This means the House vote is purely for political posturing. Given the state-level setbacks this week, though, a defeat of the FMA in the House would send a strong message that marriage equality is still alive and kicking. You can write to your representatives through HRC’s special Web page.

Finally, in a Rolling Stone interview, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom takes the Democrats to task for favoring same-sex marriage, but not having the courage to say so. It’s a short piece that gives me hope there’s at least one sensible politician out there on this issue.