April, 03 2009, 11:37am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brad Luna 202/216.1514 Cell: 202/812.8140
Trevor Thomas 202/216.1547 Cell: 202/250.2758
Iowa Becomes First Midwestern State to Recognize Marriage Equality for Gay and Lesbian Couples
Human Rights Campaign Hails Unanimous Iowa Supreme Court Decision as Part of Growing Trend Towards Marriage Equality Across the Country
WASHINGTON
The
Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, applauded the Iowa state
Supreme Court's unanimous 7-0 decision today ruling that the equal
protection provision of Iowa Constitution guarantees gay and lesbian
couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples. As a result
of the court's decision in Varnum v. Brien, Iowa becomes the
first state in the Midwest and the third in the nation to now recognize
marriages for gay and lesbian couples.
"This
is a truly historic day for Iowa and a proud day for every American who
believes in the promise of equal rights and fairness for all," said
Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "The Iowa Supreme Court
did its job by recognizing that gay and lesbian couples who form
committed relationships and loving families deserve the same level of
respect afforded to heterosexual couples. The unanimous court made
forcefully clear that the state constitution guarantees the same rights
and protections for all Iowans. This decision strengthens Iowa families
and makes a strong statement for equality all across the nation."
"We
congratulate and commend Lambda Legal, the numerous organizations and
individuals who briefed the Supreme Court, and, of course, the
courageous plaintiff couples and their families who looked to the
courts to vindicate their rights," said Solmonese. "We also thank One
Iowa for their hard work across the state to ensure that gay and
lesbian couples and their families receive the recognition that they
rightfully deserve."
The
ruling is similar to past Supreme Court decisions in Massachusetts,
Connecticut and California that also found state constitutional
violations where gay and lesbian couples were denied the right to
marry. (The California decision was affected by Proposition 8, a
change to the state constitution approved by voters last November. A
legal challenge to Proposition 8 is pending.)
Speaking
for the unanimous court, Justice Mark S. Cady wrote that "[w]e are
firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the
institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any
important governmental objective." The court rejected the possibility
that civil unions-or any institution other than civil marriage-could
satisfy the guarantees of the state constitution.
The Varnum
case began in December 2005, when Lambda Legal filed suit in Iowa
District Court on behalf of six gay and lesbian couples (later amended
to include three of their children). In August 2007, the Iowa District
Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny gay and lesbian
couples the right to marry. The District Court granted a stay of the
decision pending appeal to the Iowa Supreme Court.
A growing number of states across the
country are providing relationship recognition to gay and lesbian
couples. Two states, Massachusetts and Connecticut, already permit gay
and lesbian couples to marry under state law. New York recognizes
marriages by gay and lesbian couples legally entered into outside of
the state. In recent weeks state legislatures in New Hampshire and
Vermont have passed bills that would recognize marriages by gay and
lesbian couples, which could make them the first states to enact
marriage equality legislatively. (The Vermont House of Representatives
voted yesterday in support of marriage equality after the state Senate
approved the bill last month.)
In addition to the three states that
now provide for marriage equality under state law, eight states plus
Washington, D.C. have laws providing at least some form of state-level
relationship recognition, short of marriage, for gay and lesbian
couples. Five of these states-California, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
Oregon, and Vermont-plus Washington, D.C. provide gay and lesbian
couples with access to the state level benefits and responsibilities of
marriage, through either civil unions or domestic partnerships.
Key results from the ruling:
- Gay
and lesbian couples in Iowa will soon be able to obtain civil marriage
licenses and receive the same respect and protections afforded to all
married couples under state law. The decision becomes effective in as
soon as 21 days unless the state files a petition for rehearing. - Churches
and other religious institutions will not have to recognize or perform
ceremonies for these civil marriages, as the court's opinion expressly
states: "A religious denomination can still define marriage as a union
between a man and a woman, and a marriage ceremony performed by a
minister, priest, rabbi, or other person ordained or designated as a
leader of the person's religious faith does not lose its meaning as a
sacrament or other religious institution. The sanctity of all
religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning
as those celebrated in the past. The only difference is civil marriage will now take on a new meaning that reflects a more complete understanding of equal protection of the law." - The
court's decision does not entitle gay and lesbian couples in Iowa to
receive the federal rights and benefits extended to married couples.
The so-called federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) discriminates
against gay and lesbian married couples by denying them over 1,000
federal rights, benefits, and responsibilities including social
security benefits, the ability to file a joint federal tax return, and
the right to petition for a spouse to immigrate. A lawsuit filed in
federal court in Massachusetts last month challenges a portion of DOMA. - Other states may
legally recognize the civil marriages of gay and lesbian couples
performed in Iowa in the same way they recognize out-of-state marriages
by heterosexual couples.
The Human Rights Campaign and Human Rights Campaign Foundation signed onto an amicus, or "friend of the court," brief in the Varnum
case to support and further explain the argument for extending civil
marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples under the state
constitution. A number of civil rights organizations, elected
officials, religious groups, historians, law professors, child
advocates and others also either signed or filed briefs of their own in
favor of extending civil marriage laws to gay and lesbian couples.
The Human Rights Campaign represents a grassroots force of over 750,000 members and supporters nationwide. As the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, HRC envisions an America where LGBT people are ensured of their basic equal rights, and can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community.
LATEST NEWS
Stateless Palestinian Woman Details 'Very Traumatizing' Abuse Suffered in ICE Detention
Trump administration immigration officials reportedly dismissed Ward Sakeik's ordeal as a "sob story."
Jul 06, 2025
A newlywed Palestinian woman from Texas released from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention earlier this week says she was shackled for long periods, denied food and water, and subjected to other human rights abuses during nearly five months in ICE custody—all because she is a stateless person.
Ward Sakeik, 22, was born in Saudi Arabia to Palestinian parents from Gaza. Because Saudi Arabia does not grant birthright citizenship to the children of foreign nationals, Sakeik was officially stateless when her family legally emigrated to the United States when she was 8 years old.
“I was moved around like cattle.”
Ward Sakeik, US college graduate and homeowner, speaks out following 140 days in ICE hellhole pic.twitter.com/bNTgs7362h
— World Socialist Web Site (@WSWS_Updates) July 5, 2025
Sakeik's parents subsequently applied for—and were denied—asylum in the U.S. but were allowed to remain legally in the country pending routine check-ins with ICE.
After graduating high school and the University of Texas, Arlington, starting a wedding photography business, marrying a U.S. citizen, and beginning the process of obtaining a green card, Sakeik and her husband went on their honeymoon in the U.S. Virgin Islands. She was detained shortly after arriving back in the United States after Customs and Border Protection agents flagged her for flying over international waters—a move that Department of Homeland Security officials said violated immigration policy.
"After a few hours from returning from our honeymoon, I was put in a gray tracksuit and shackles," Sakeik said at a press conference following her release. "I was handcuffed for 16 hours without any water or food on the bus. I have moved around like cattle. And the U.S. government attempted to dump me in a part of the world where I don't know where I'm going and what I'm doing or anything."
"We were not given any water or food, and we could smell the driver eating Chick-fil-A," she continued. "We would ask for water, bang on the door for food, and he would just turn up the radio and act like he wasn't listening to us."
Sakeik said unhygienic conditions at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas—where an ICE officer was shot in the neck during a Friday evening attack—caused widespread illness among detainees.
"The restrooms are also very, very, very unhygienic," she said. "The beds have rust everywhere. They're not properly maintained. And cockroaches, grasshoppers, spiders, you name it, are all over the facility. Girls would get bit."
"I wouldn't wish this upon anybody," Sakeik said during a Saturday interview on CNN. "It was very hard, very traumatizing, and very, very difficult."
Eric Lee, an attorney for Sakeik, told CNN that immigration officials dismissed Sakeik's account as a "sob story."
"I guess what we would ask the American people is, 'Who are they gonna believe, their lying eyes or the statements of the people who are responsible for carrying out what are really crimes against humanity here in the United States?'" Lee added.
Sakeik said she now plans to advocate on behalf of women and girls imprisoned by ICE.
"I... want the world to know that the women who do come here come here for a better life, but they're criminalized for that," she said. "They are dehumanized, and they're stripped away from their rights. We have been treated as a 'less-than' just simply for wanting a better life."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Exactly What We Would Expect': Climate Scientists Weigh in on Deadly Texas Flooding
"It's not a question of whether climate change played a role—it's only a question of how much," said one expert.
Jul 06, 2025
As the death toll from catastrophic flooding in Texas continued to rise, climate scientists this weekend underscored the link between more frequent and severe extreme weather events and the worsening climate emergency caused primarily by humans burning fossil fuels.
Officials said Sunday that at least 69 people died in the floods, 59 of them in Kerr County. Of the 27 missing girls from Camp Mystic—some of whom were sleeping just 225 feet from the Guadalupe River when its waters surged during flash flooding Friday—11 are still missing.
While some local officials blamed what they said were faulty forecasts from the National Weather Service—which has been hit hard by staffing cuts ordered by the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency in line with Project 2025—meteorologists and climate scientists including Daniel Swain of the University of California, Los Angeles have refuted such allegations, citing multiple NWS warnings of potentially deadly flooding.
However, some experts asserted that vacancies at key NWS posts raise questions about forecasters' ability to coordinate emergency response with local officials.
Climate scientists do concur that human-caused global heating is causing stronger and more frequent extreme weather events including flooding.
"This kind of record-shattering rain (caused by slow-moving torrential thunderstorms) event is *precisely* that which is increasing the fastest in a warming climate," Swain wrote in a statement. "So it's not a question of whether climate change played a role—it's only a question of how much."
As Jeff Masters and Bob Henson wrote Saturday for Yale Climate Connections:
Many studies have confirmed that human-caused climate change is making the heaviest short-term rainfall events more intense, largely by warming the world's oceans and thus sending more water vapor into the atmosphere that can fuel heavy rain events. Sea surface temperatures this week have been as much as 1°F below the 1981-2010 average for early July in the western Gulf [of Mexico] and Caribbean, but up to 1°F above average in the central Gulf. Long-term human-caused warming made the latter up to 10 times more likely, according to the Climate Shift Index from Climate Central.
"The tragic events in Texas are exactly what we would expect in our hotter, climate-changed, world," Bill McGuire, professor emeritus of geophysics and climate hazards at University College London, said Saturday. "There has been an explosion in extreme weather in recent years, including more devastating flash floods caused by slow-moving, wetter, storms, that dump exceptional amounts of rain over small areas across a short time."
It’s hard to make the Texas flood tragedy worse, except to know that on the same day Trump signed a bill to stop our efforts to defeat the climate change that is causing increased frequency of disastrous floods. And giving us more expensive electricity. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/05/c...
[image or embed]
— Governor Jay Inslee (@govjayinslee.bsky.social) July 5, 2025 at 9:29 AM
Instead of taking action to combat the planetary emergency, the Trump administration is ramping up fossil fuel production while waging war on clean energy and climate initiatives. The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law by Trump on Friday slashes the tax credits for electric vehicles and other renewable technologies including wind and solar energy that were a cornerstone of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.
Keep ReadingShow Less
27 Arrested for Defying UK Ban on Nonviolent Pro-Palestine Group
"We oppose genocide—I didn't think that was that controversial—and we support the people who resist genocide," said one arrested protester.
Jul 06, 2025
Metropolitan Police arrested at least 27 protesters who gathered in central London on Saturday to publicly support Palestine Action, a nonviolent direct action group now officially designated a terrorist organization by the U.K. government.
According to Middle East Eye, Palestine defenders including 83-year-old Rev. Sue Parfitt, a former government attorney, an emeritus professor, and health workers gathered by a statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Parliament Square, where they held signs reading, "I OPPOSE GENOCIDE, I SUPPORT PALESTINE ACTION."
Members of the group Defend Our Juries informed Metropolitan Police of their plan prior to the demonstration.
"If we cannot speak freely about the genocide that is occurring... democracy and human rights in this country are dead."
"We would like to alert you to the fact we may be committing offenses under the Terrorism Act tomorrow, Saturday 5 July, in Parliament Square at about 1pm," the group said in an open letter to Met Commissioner Mark Rowley.
"If we cannot speak freely about the genocide that is occurring, if we cannot condemn those who are complicit in it and express support for those who resist it, then the right to freedom of expression has no meaning, and democracy and human rights in this country are dead," the letter argues.
Parfitt told Novara Media that members of Defend Our Juries were "testing the law."
"I know that we are in the right place doing the right thing," she said. "...We cannot be bystanders."
"We are losing our civil liberties, we must stop that for everybody's sake," Parfitt said in a separate interview with The Guardian.
Prior to his arrest, Defend Our Juries member Tim Crosland, the former government lawyer, told The Guardian that "what we're doing here as a group of priests, teachers, health workers, human rights lawyers [is] we're refusing to be silenced."
"Because it goes to the core of what we believe in: that we oppose genocide—I didn't think that was that controversial—and we support the people who resist genocide," he added. "In theory we are now terrorist supporters and can go to prison for 14 years, which is kind of crazy. I think what we are here to do is just expose the craziness of that."
Crosland said as he was being arrested, "This is what happens in modern day Britain for opposing genocide, it's quite something isn't it?"
A bystander told Novara Media: "I just feel disgusted by this government. I voted for them and they're now arresting people who are calling for a genocide to end. And this is a Labour government, they're meant to have left-wing roots."
Members of the group Defend Our Juries publicly declare their opposition to Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza and their support for the proscribed group Palestine Action while Metropolitan Police officers look on before arresting them during a July 4, 2025 demonstration in London. (Photo: Kristian Buus/In Pictures via Getty Images)
In a statement, Defend Our Juries sarcastically said that "we commend the counter-terrorism police for their decisive action in protecting the people of London from some cardboard signs opposing the genocide in Gaza and expressing support for those taking action to prevent it."
"It's a relief to know that counter-terrorism police have nothing better to do," the group quipped.
Last week, British lawmakers voted to ban Palestine Action as a terrorist group after some of its members vandalized two aircraft at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire on June 20. The group—which was founded in 2020 and has also vandalized U.S. President Donald Trump's golf course in Turnberry, Scotland—is known for taking direction action against companies that supply weapons to Israel, which is accused of genocide in an ongoing International Court of Justice case concerning the war on Gaza.
On June 23, U.K. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe the group under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act of 2000, introduced under former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair and widely criticized for its overbroad definition of terrorism. The House of Commons voted 385-26 Wednesday in favor of banning Palestine Action and the House of Lords approved the designation Thursday without a vote.
Palestine Action tried to delay the ban via legal action. However, the High Court on Friday denied the group's appeal for interim relief was denied on Friday, a decision that was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
The nonviolent group is now on the same legal footing in Britain as Al-Qaeda and Islamic State. Joining or supporting Palestine Action is now punishable by up to 14 years behind bars.
At midnight, Palestine Action will be proscribed under the Terrorism Act.Their real “crime”? Exposing the UK’s role in arming Israel’s genocide.This is a dark day for our democracy.Criminalising non-violent resistance won’t silence the truth.We are all Palestine Action 🇵🇸
[image or embed]
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana.bsky.social) July 4, 2025 at 2:38 PM
Earlier this month, a group of United Nations experts urged the U.K. government to not ban Palestine Action.
"We are concerned at the unjustified labeling of a political protest movement as 'terrorist,'" the experts wrote. "According to international standards, acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism."
The U.N. experts warned that under the ban, "individuals could be prosecuted for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression and opinion, assembly, association, and participation in political life."
"This would have a chilling effect on political protest and advocacy generally in relation to defending human rights in Palestine," they added.
Hundreds of jurists, artists and entertainers, and others have also decried the ban on Palestine Action.
"Palestine Action is intervening to stop a genocide. It is acting to save life. We deplore the government's decision to proscribe it," Artists for Palestine U.K.—whose members include Tilda Swinton, Paul Weller, Steve Coogan, and others—wrote in a statement last month.
"Labeling non-violent direct action as 'terrorism' is an abuse of language and an attack on democracy," the artists added. "The real threat to the life of the nation comes not from Palestine Action but from the home secretary's efforts to ban it. We call on the government to withdraw its proscription of Palestine Action and to stop arming Israel."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular