May, 26 2009, 01:36pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brad Luna | Phone: 202/216.1514,Trevor Thomas | Phone: 202/216.1547
California Supreme Court Takes Step Back from Equality
Nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights group responds to court ruling
SAN FRANCISCO
The
Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, responded to the
California Supreme Court's split 6-1decision today ruling that
Proposition 8, the narrowly approved measure which eliminated the right
of same-sex couples to marry, is valid. As a result of the court's decision in Strauss v. Horton,
California becomes the first state in the nation to strip away marriage
rights for same-sex couples. As same-sex couples and allies from
across the country react to the news, HRC is releasing an online,
YouTube video set to the song "I Won't Back Down": www.HRC.org/California.
Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, responded to the
California Supreme Court's split 6-1decision today ruling that
Proposition 8, the narrowly approved measure which eliminated the right
of same-sex couples to marry, is valid. As a result of the court's decision in Strauss v. Horton,
California becomes the first state in the nation to strip away marriage
rights for same-sex couples. As same-sex couples and allies from
across the country react to the news, HRC is releasing an online,
YouTube video set to the song "I Won't Back Down": www.HRC.org/California.
"Today's
ruling is a huge blow to Americans everywhere who care about equality.
The court has allowed a bare majority of voters to write same-sex
couples out of basic constitutional protections,"
said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "This ruling is
painful, but it represents a temporary setback. There will be a
groundswell to restore marriage equality in our nation's largest state,
and HRC will not give up until marriage equality is restored in
California."
ruling is a huge blow to Americans everywhere who care about equality.
The court has allowed a bare majority of voters to write same-sex
couples out of basic constitutional protections,"
said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "This ruling is
painful, but it represents a temporary setback. There will be a
groundswell to restore marriage equality in our nation's largest state,
and HRC will not give up until marriage equality is restored in
California."
One
significant effort already underway is a strategic partnership between
HRC and California Faith for Equality (CFE), a statewide group
established to educate, support and mobilize faith communities on LGBT
equality. The partnership joins CFE and its 6,000 supporting faith
leaders with both HRC's Religion and Faith Program expertise as well as
HRC's National Field Department to broaden, diversify and deepen
religious support for marriage equality in California.
significant effort already underway is a strategic partnership between
HRC and California Faith for Equality (CFE), a statewide group
established to educate, support and mobilize faith communities on LGBT
equality. The partnership joins CFE and its 6,000 supporting faith
leaders with both HRC's Religion and Faith Program expertise as well as
HRC's National Field Department to broaden, diversify and deepen
religious support for marriage equality in California.
"This
ruling couldn't be more out of step with what's happening across the
country," said Solmonese, pointing to recent marriage victories in
Iowa, Vermont and Maine. "We have no choice but to return this basic
question of fairness for the estimated 1 million LGBT Californians back
to the voters."
ruling couldn't be more out of step with what's happening across the
country," said Solmonese, pointing to recent marriage victories in
Iowa, Vermont and Maine. "We have no choice but to return this basic
question of fairness for the estimated 1 million LGBT Californians back
to the voters."
"While
we are relieved that the 18,000 couples who married before the Prop 8
vote will still have valid marriages, it does not in any way remove the
sting of this ruling," added Solmonese.
we are relieved that the 18,000 couples who married before the Prop 8
vote will still have valid marriages, it does not in any way remove the
sting of this ruling," added Solmonese.
Over
the past decade, public acceptance of marriage equality for same-sex
couples has changed dramatically. For the first time, more Americans
say they support marriage for same-sex couples (49%) than oppose it
(46%), according to the latest Washington Post/ABC poll released in
late April.
the past decade, public acceptance of marriage equality for same-sex
couples has changed dramatically. For the first time, more Americans
say they support marriage for same-sex couples (49%) than oppose it
(46%), according to the latest Washington Post/ABC poll released in
late April.
WHERE MARRIAGE STANDS TODAY:
Twelve
states plus Washington, D.C. have laws providing at least some form of
state-level relationship recognition for same-sex couples.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont (as of September 1, 2009),
and Maine (as of mid-September 2009, pending possible repeal effort)
recognize marriage for same-sex couples under state law. Five
states--California, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington
(as of July 26, 2009, pending possible repeal effort)--plus Washington,
D.C. provide same-sex couples with access to the state level benefits
and responsibilities of marriage, through either civil unions or
domestic partnerships.
states plus Washington, D.C. have laws providing at least some form of
state-level relationship recognition for same-sex couples.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont (as of September 1, 2009),
and Maine (as of mid-September 2009, pending possible repeal effort)
recognize marriage for same-sex couples under state law. Five
states--California, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington
(as of July 26, 2009, pending possible repeal effort)--plus Washington,
D.C. provide same-sex couples with access to the state level benefits
and responsibilities of marriage, through either civil unions or
domestic partnerships.
Hawaii
provides same-sex couples with limited rights and benefits. New York
recognizes marriages by same-sex couples validly entered into outside
of New York. Legislatures in New Hampshire and New York are
considering marriage legislation that would permit same-sex couples to
marry in those states, and the D.C. Council has passed legislation that
would recognize marriages by same-sex couples legally entered into in
other jurisdictions (that legislation is going through a Congressional
review period).
provides same-sex couples with limited rights and benefits. New York
recognizes marriages by same-sex couples validly entered into outside
of New York. Legislatures in New Hampshire and New York are
considering marriage legislation that would permit same-sex couples to
marry in those states, and the D.C. Council has passed legislation that
would recognize marriages by same-sex couples legally entered into in
other jurisdictions (that legislation is going through a Congressional
review period).
IMPORTANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
For an electronic map showing where marriage equality stands in the states, please visit: www.HRC.org/State_Laws.
For a summary of the history of the case and for a comprehensive listing of HRC's work in California on Proposition 8, please visit:www.HRC.org/California.
A breakdown of the ruling and interpretation by the HRC legal team will be available shortly on HRCBackStory.org: https://www.hrcbackstory.org/2009/05/prop-8-decision-analysisprop-8-decision-analysis/
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
Asked If He Must Uphold the US Constitution, Trump Says: 'I Don't Know'
"I'm not a lawyer," the president said in a newly aired interview.
May 04, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump refused in an interview released Sunday to affirm that the nation's Constitution affords due process to citizens and noncitizens alike and that he, as president, must uphold that fundamental right.
"I don't know, I'm not a lawyer," Trump told NBC's Kristen Welker, who asked if the president agrees with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's statement that everyone on U.S. soil is entitled to due process.
When Welker pointed to the Fifth Amendment—which states that "no person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"—Trump again replied that he's unsure and suggested granting due process to the undocumented immigrants he wants to deport would be too burdensome.
"We'd have to have a million or 2 million or 3 million trials," Trump said, echoing a sentiment that his vice president expressed last month.
Asked whether he needs to "uphold the Constitution of the United States as president," Trump replied, "I don't know."
Watch:
WELKER: The 5th Amendment says everyone deserves due process
TRUMP: It might say that, but if you're talking about that, then we'd have to have a million or two million or three million trials pic.twitter.com/FMZQ7O9mTP
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 4, 2025
Trump, who similarly deferred to "the lawyers" when asked recently about his refusal to bring home wrongly deported Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia, has unlawfully cited the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly remove undocumented immigrants from the U.S. without due process. Federal agents have also arrested and detained students, academics, and a current and former judge in recent weeks, heightening alarm over the administration's authoritarian tactics.
CNNreported Friday that the administration has "been examining whether it can label some suspected cartel and gang members inside the U.S. as 'enemy combatants' as a possible way to detain them more easily and limit their ability to challenge their imprisonment."
"Trump has expressed extreme frustration with federal courts halting many of those migrants' deportations, amid legal challenges questioning whether they were being afforded due process," the outlet added. "By labeling the migrants as enemy combatants, they would have fewer rights, the thinking goes."
Some top administration officials have publicly expressed disdain for the constitutional right to due process. Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, wrote in a social media post last month that "the judicial process is for Americans" and "immediate deportation" is for undocumented immigrants.
The New Republic's Greg Sargent wrote in a column Saturday that "Miller appears to want Trump to have the power to declare undocumented immigrants to be terrorists and gang members by fiat; to have the power to absurdly decree them members of a hostile nation's invading army, again by fiat; and then to have quasi-unlimited power to remove them, unconstrained by any court."
"The more transparency we have gained into the rot of corruption and bad faith at the core of this whole saga, the worse it has come to look," Sargent continued. "Trump himself is exposing it all for what it truly is: the stuff of Mad Kings."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Republicans Set to Give Self-Described 'DOGE Person' Keys to Social Security Agency
"A vote for Trump's Social Security Commissioner is a vote to destroy Social Security," warned one advocacy group.
May 04, 2025
The U.S. Senate on Tuesday is set to hold a confirmation vote for President Donald Trump's pick to lead the Social Security Administration—an ultra-rich former Wall Street executive who has aligned himself with the Elon Musk-led slash-and-burn effort at agencies across the federal government.
"I am fundamentally a DOGE person," Frank Bisignano told CNBC in March, amplifying concerns that he would take his experience in the financial technology industry—where he was notorious for inflicting mass layoffs while raking in a huge compensation package—to SSA, which is already facing large-scale staffing cuts that threaten the delivery of benefits for millions of Americans.
In an email on Saturday, the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works warned that Bisignano "is not the cure to the DOGE-manufactured chaos at the Social Security Administration."
"In fact, he is part of it, and, if confirmed, would make it even worse," the group added. "We're not going down without a fight. Republicans may have a majority in the Senate, but we're going to rally to send a message: A vote for Trump's Social Security Commissioner is a vote to destroy Social Security!"
"If Mr. Bisignano can get away with lying before he's even in place as commissioner, who knows what else he'll be able to get away with once he's in office."
Bisignano, the CEO of payment processing giant Fiserv, has been accused during his confirmation process of lying under oath about his ties to DOGE, which has worked to seize control of Social Security data as part of a purported effort to root out "fraud" that advocates say is virtually nonexistent.
As The Washington Post reported in March, Bisignano testified to the Senate Finance Committee that "he has had no contact" with DOGE.
"But Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said the claim is 'not true,' citing an account the senator said he received from a senior Social Security official who recently left the agency," the Post noted. "The former official... described 'numerous contacts Mr. Bisignano made with the agency since his nomination,' including 'frequent' conversations with senior executives."
Wyden pointed again to the former SSA official's statement in a floor speech Thursday in opposition to Bisignano, saying that "according to the whistleblower, Mr. Bisignano personally appointed his Wall Street buddy, Michael Russo, to be the leader of DOGE's team at Social Security."
The Oregon Democrat said Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee refused his request for a bipartisan meeting with the whistleblower to evaluate their accusations unless "we agreed to hand over any information received from the whistleblower directly to the nominee and the Trump administration."
"All Americans should be concerned that a nominee for a position of public trust like commissioner of Social Security is accused of lying about his actions at the agency and that efforts to bring this important information to light are being thwarted," Wyden said Thursday. "If Mr. Bisignano can get away with lying before he's even in place as commissioner, who knows what else he'll be able to get away with once he's in office."
"He could lie by denying any American who paid their Social Security taxes the benefits they've earned, claiming some phony pretense," the senator warned. "He could lie about how sensitive personal information is being mishandled—or worse, exploited for commercial use."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Chilling Attempt to Normalize Fascism': Groups Decry Trump Official's Arrest Threats
"We must not allow intimidation and authoritarian tactics to take root in our political system."
May 04, 2025
A coalition of advocacy organizations on Saturday expressed support for Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers and warned that the Trump border czar's threat against the Democratic leader marks a "dangerous escalation" of the administration's assault on the rule of law across the United States.
The groups—including All Voting Is Local and the ACLU of Wisconsin—said in a joint statement that Evers' guidance to state officials on how to handle being confronted by federal agents was "a prudent measure aimed at ensuring compliance with state and federal laws while protecting the rights of state employees."
The suggestion by Tom Homan, a leader of President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign, that Evers could be arrested for issuing such guidance undermines "the foundational principles of our democracy, including the separation of powers, the rule of law, and the right of state governments to operate without undue federal interference," the groups said Saturday.
"To threaten our governor over his legal directive is gross overreach by our federal government, and it is not occurring in a vacuum," they continued, warning that the administration's rhetoric and actions represent a "chilling attempt to normalize fascism."
"Similar occurrences are happening across the nation, including within our academic systems," the groups added. "If we do not reject these actions now, states and other institutions will only lose more and more of their autonomy and power. This is exactly why we underscore Gov. Evers' claim that this event is 'chilling.'"
The threats against Gov. Evers in Wisconsin undermine the foundational principles of our democracy: the separation of powers, the rule of law, and the right of state governments to operate without undue federal interference. We must reject this overreach. allvotingislocal.org/statements/w...
[image or embed]
— All Voting is Local (@allvotingislocal.bsky.social) May 3, 2025 at 9:58 AM
Trump administration officials and the president himself have repeatedly threatened state and local officials as the White House rushes ahead with its lawless mass deportation campaign, which has ensnared tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants and at least over a dozen U.S. citizens—including children.
In an executive order signed late last month, Trump accused "some state and local officials" of engaging in a "lawless insurrection" against the federal government by refusing to cooperate with the administration's deportation efforts.
But as Temple University law professor Jennifer Lee recently noted, localities "can legally decide not to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement."
"Cities, like states, have constitutional protections against being forced to administer or enforce federal programs," Lee wrote. "The Trump administration cannot force any state or local official to assist in enforcing federal immigration law."
Administration officials have also leveled threats against members of Congress, with Homan suggesting earlier this year that he would refer Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to the U.S. Justice Department for holding a webinar informing constituents of their rights.
During a town hall on Friday, Ocasio-Cortez dared Homan to do so.
"To that I say: Come for me," she said to cheers from the audience. "We need to challenge them. So don't let them intimidate you."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular