Connect with us

News

Supreme Court stays Utah same-sex marriages

Justices put an end to same-sex marriages in Beehive State as litigation continues

Published

on

Supreme Court, gay news, Washington Blade
Supreme Court, gay news, Washington Blade

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied a stay on Utah same-sex marriages (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key).

The U.S. Supreme Court approved on Monday a stay requestĀ on same-sex marriages in Utah, prohibiting gay couples from continuing to wed in the Beehive State as litigation proceeds throughout the courts.

According to the court order, justices ruled to grant the application of stay filed last week by attorneys for Utah Gov. Gary Herbert and Attorney General Sean Reyes in the case of Kitchen v. Reyes.

“The permanent injunction issued by the United States District Court for the District of Utah, case No. 2:13-cv-217, on December 20, 2013, is stayed pending final disposition of the appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit,” the order states.

The vote of the full court indicates U.S. Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who’s response for stay requests in the Tenth Circuit, referred the matter to the entire to the entire court instead of deciding the issue for herself. How each justice voted on the matter isn’t disclosed, but at least five justices must have voted in the affirmative to grant a stay.

The district court that ruled in favor of marriage equality in Utah on Dec. 20 and the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals had already denied stay requests from Utah. But as the highest court in the country, the U.S. Ā Supreme Court has the final word on the stay, so same-sex couples have no further recourse in the matter.

State officials asked the Supreme Court to halt the same-sex marriage in Utah on the basis their continuation would cause financial harm to the state and the couples themselves if their unions were deemed invalid at at a later time. Private attorney Monte Stewart, a Utah-based lawyer and known opponent of same-sex marriage, had signed on to the brief as counsel of record.

Although the Supreme Court has granted the stay request, the litigation that brought marriage equality to Utah hasn’t been resolved and is pending before the Tenth Circuit.

The appellate court has agreed to take up the issue on an expedited basis. State officials’ opening brief must be filed by Jan. 27. The response from attorneys for gay couples is due Feb. 18, and state officials have a chance to respond to that filing by Feb. 25.

James Magleby, one of the attorneys at Magleby & Greenwood PC representing the three plaintiff couples in the lawsuit, said the decision by the Supreme Court was “obviously disappointing,” but predicted in the end the Tenth Circuit would bring justice to same-sex couples seeking to marry.

“This temporary stay has no bearing on who will win on appeal,” Magleby said. “We look forward to defending Judge Shelbyā€™s decision in the Tenth Circuit. We were confident when we filed the case in 2013, we were confident when we presented the arguments to the district court, and we remain equally ā€“ if not more ā€“ confident about our defense of marriage equality before the Tenth Circuit.ā€

LGBT advocates also expressed disappointment with the decision by the Supreme Court, but said they believe it would be only temporary.

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement the stay in Utah same-sex marriages is “disappointing,” but predicted marriage equality would prevail in the end.

“We still live in two Americans where full equality is within reach in one, and another where even basic protections are non-existent,” Griffin said. “As the marriage equality map expands, history is on our side and we will not rest until where you live is not a barrier to living your dreams.ā€

John Mejia, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah, said in a statement Utah should continue to recognize same-sex marriages already performed in the state as valid.

ā€œThe huge response that we have seen since the federal courtā€™s ruling shows how important the freedom to marry is in the state of Utah,ā€ Mejia said. ā€œThough future marriages are on hold for now, the state should recognize as valid those marriages that have already been issued, and those couples should continue to be treated as married by the federal government.ā€

But at least one advocate against same-sex marriage was happy with the decision.

Brian Brown, president of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, praised the Supreme Court as he took a swipe at U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby for issuing the ruling in the first place.

ā€œThe actions of this activist judge are an affront to the rule of law and the sovereign rights of the people of Utah to define marriage,ā€ Brown said. ā€œShelby has attempted to twist what the Supreme Court ruled in the Windsor decision ā€“ that states have the right to define marriage ā€“ and turn it into the exact opposite conclusion. Itā€™s gratifying that the US Supreme Court has decided to stop this nonsense and allow the state of Utah the time to reverse it on appeal.ā€

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

United Kingdom

UK Supreme Court rules legal definition of woman limited to ‘biological women’

Advocacy groups say decision is serious setback for transgender rights

Published

on

The U.K. Supreme Court (Photo by c_73/Bigstock)

The British Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled the legal definition of a woman is limited to “biological women” and does not include transgender women.

The Equality Act that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity took effect in 2010.

Scottish MPs in 2018 passed a bill that sought to increase the number of women on government boards. The Supreme Court ruling notes For Women Scotland ā€” a “feminist voluntary organization which campaigns to strengthen women’s rights and children’s rights in Scotland” ā€” challenged the Scottish government’s decision to include trans women with a Gender Recognition Certificate in its definition of women when it implemented the quota.

Stonewall U.K., a British advocacy group, notes a Gender Recognition Certificate is “a document that allows some trans men and trans women to have the right gender on their birth certificate.”

“We conclude that the guidance issued by the Scottish government is incorrect,” reads the Supreme Court ruling. “A person with a GRC (Gender Recognition Certificate) in the female gender does not come within the definition of ‘woman’ for the purposes of sex discrimination in section 11 of the EA (Equality Act) 2010. That in turn means that the definition of ‘woman’ in section 2 of the 2018 Act, which Scottish ministers accept must bear the same meaning as the term ‘woman’ in section 11 and section 212 of the EA 2010, is limited to biological women and does not include trans women with a GRC.”

The 88-page ruling says trans people “are protected by the indirect discrimination provisions” of the Equality Act, regardless of whether they have a Gender Recognition Certificate.

“Transgender people are also protected from indirect discrimination where they are put at a particular disadvantage which they share with members of their biological sex,” it adds.

Susan Smith, co-founder of For Women Scotland, praised the decision.

“Today the judges have said what we always believed to be the case, that women are protected by their biological sex,” she said, according to the BBC. “Sex is real and women can now feel safe that services and spaces designated for women are for women and we are enormously grateful to the Supreme Court for this ruling.”

Author J.K. Rowling on X said it “took three extraordinary, tenacious Scottish women with an army behind them to get this case heard by the Supreme Court.”

“In winning, they’ve protected the rights of women and girls across the UK,” she added.

Advocacy groups in Scotland and across the U.K. said the ruling is a serious setback for trans rights.

“We are really shocked by today’s Supreme Court decision ā€” which reverses 20 years of understanding on how the law recognizes trans men and women with Gender Recognition Certificates,” said Scottish Trans and the Equality Network in a statement posted to Instagram. “The judgment seems to have totally missed what matters to trans people ā€” that we are able to live our lives, and be recognized, in line with who we truly are.”

Consortium, a network of more than 700 LGBTQ and intersex rights groups from across the U.K., in their own statement said it is “deeply concerned at the widespread, harmful implications of today’s Supreme Court ruling.”

“As LGBT+ organizations across the country, we stand in solidarity with trans, intersex and nonbinary folk as we navigate from here,” said Consortium.

The Supreme Court said its decision can be appealed.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Two charged with assaulting, robbing gay man at D.C. CVS store

Incident occurred after suspects, victim ā€˜exchanged wordsā€™ at bar

Published

on

D.C. police just after 1 a.m. on April 10 arrested two men for allegedly assaulting and robbing a gay man inside a CVS store at 1418 P St., N.W., according to a police report and charging documents filed in D.C. Superior Court.

The charging documents state that the alleged assault and robbery occurred a short time after the three men ā€œexchanged wordsā€ at the gay bar Number 9, which is located across the street from the CVS.

The arrested men are identified in the charging documents as Marquel Jose Diaz, 27, of Northwest D.C., and Lorenzo Jesse Scafidi, 21, of Elizabeth City, N.C. An affidavit in support of the arrest for Diaz says Diaz and the victim ā€œwere previously in a relationship for a year.ā€

Court records show Diaz was charged with Simple Assault, Theft Second Degree, and Possession of a Controlled Substance. The court records show the controlled substance charge was filed by police after Diaz was found to be in possession of a powdered substance that tested positive for cocaine.

Scafidi was charged with Simple Assault and Theft Second Degree, the court records show.

The D.C. police report for the incident does not list it as a suspected hate crime. 

The court records show both men pleaded not guilty to the charges against them at a Superior Court arraignment on the day of their arrest on April 10. The records show they were released by a judge while awaiting trial with an order that they ā€œstay awayā€ from the victim. They are scheduled to return to court for a status hearing on May 21.

The separate police-filed affidavits in support of the arrests of both Diaz and Scafidi each state that the two men and the victim ā€œexchanged wordsā€ inside the Number 9 bar. The two documents state that both men then entered the CVS store after the victim went to the store a short time earlier.

Scafidi ā€œcame into the CVS shortly after and entered the candy aisle and slammed Complainant 1 [the victim] to the ground causing Complainant 1ā€™s phone to fall out of CP-1ā€™s pocket,ā€ one of the two affidavits says. It says Scafidi ā€œagain picked up CP-1 and slammed him to the ground.ā€

The affidavit in support of Diazā€™s arrest says Diaz also followed the victim to the CVS store after words were exchanged at the bar. It says that after Scafidi allegedly knocked the victim down in the candy aisle Diaz picked up the victimā€™s phone, ā€œswung onā€ the victim ā€œwhile he was still on the ground,ā€ and picked up the victimā€™s watch before he and Scafidi fled the scene.

Without saying why, the two arrest affidavits say Diaz and Scafidi returned to the scene and were arrested by police after the victim and at least one witness identified them as having assaulted and robbed the victim.

Attorneys representing the two arrested men did not respond to phone messages from the Washington Blade seeking comment and asking whether their clients dispute the allegations against them.

The victim also did not respond to attempts by the Blade to obtain a comment from him. The police report says the victim is a resident of Fairfax, Va.

Continue Reading

El Salvador

Gay Venezuelan makeup artist remains in El Salvador mega prison

Former police officer said Andry HernƔndez Romero was gang member because of tattoos

Published

on

The Salvadoran capital of El Salvador from El BoquerĆ³n Volcano (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A new investigation points to a discredited, former police officer who played a ā€œkey roleā€ in the wrongful deportation of Andry HernĆ”ndez Romero, a gay asylum seeker and makeup artist who was sent to a maximum security mega prison in El Salvador under Trumpā€™s Alien Enemies Act.Ā 

USA Today found in a recent investigation that the former Milwaukee police officer who filed the report about HernĆ”ndez, citing his tattoos as the reason for the gang affiliation, has a long history of credibility and disciplinary issues in his former police officer position. 

The private prison employee who previously worked as a police officer until he was fired for driving into a house while intoxicated ā€” among other alcohol-related incidents ā€” ā€œhelped seal the fateā€ of HernĆ”ndez.Ā 

The investigation by USA Today found that the former police officer accused HernĆ”ndez of being a part of the Tren de Aragua gang because of his two crown tattoos with the words ā€œmom,ā€ and ā€œdad,ā€ which are now being identified as Venezuelan gang-related symbols. 

Since then, his story has made headlines across the nation because HernĆ”ndez has no criminal record and is legally seeking asylum in the U.S. due to credible threats of violence against him in Venezuela because of LGBTQ persecution. 

He was targeted shortly after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which is a proclamation for all law enforcement officials to ā€œapprehend, restrain, secure, and remove every Alien Enemy described in section 1 of [the] proclamation.ā€

Charles Cross, Jr., the former police officer, signed the report which wrongfully identified HernĆ”ndez as a gang member. Cross was fired in 2012 after many incidents relating to his credibility and how it was affecting the credibility of the department to testify in court. 

He had already been under investigation previously for claiming overtime pay that he never earned. In 2007, he had also faced criminal charges for damage to property, according to court records. 

In March, the Washington Blade spoke with the Immigrant Defenders Law Center Litigation and Advocacy Director Alvaro M. Huerta regarding the case and stated that ā€œofficials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection alleged his organizationā€™s client was a member of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuela-based gang, because of his tattoos and no other information.ā€ 

HernĆ”ndez came to the U.S. last year in search of asylum and now makes up one of 238 Venezuelan immigrants who were deported from the U.S. to El Salvador, Honduras and Venezuela. Many of those being deported are being sent to the Center for Terrorism Confinement, a maximum-security mega prison in El Salvador, which has been accused of human rights violations.Ā 

According to the investigation, the Department of Homeland Security ā€œwouldnā€™t offer further details on the case, or the process in general, but reiterated that the department uses more than just tattoos to determine gang allegiance.ā€ 

His story is now being looked at as a cautionary tale of the lack of due process of law the U.S. government is taking, as the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement ramp up deportations across the nation. 

Organizations like the Human Rights Campaign are now calling for Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem to cease wrongful deportations and return HernĆ”ndez home. The petition also urges the U.S. government to afford all Americans, forging nationals and asylum seekers residing in the U.S., due process of law as required by the Constitution. 

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular