SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 07 2012, 11:18am EDT
Contact:
Nicole Collins Bronzan
Communications Director, Freedom to Marry
nicole@freedomtomarry.org
646-375-2044
History-Making Night for Freedom to Marry In Ballot Fights, Obama Reelection, and State House Wins
The freedom to marry won resounding victories in lat night's election, including first-ever wins at the ballot as voters supported marriage for same-sex couples in Maine and Maryland. Minnesotans made history with the first vote against a constitutional amendment that would have excluded same-sex couples from marriage. In Washington, where ballots are still being counted, signs are strongly pointing to another imminent victory for the freedom to marry.
NEW YORK
The freedom to marry won resounding victories in lat night's election, including first-ever wins at the ballot as voters supported marriage for same-sex couples in Maine and Maryland. Minnesotans made history with the first vote against a constitutional amendment that would have excluded same-sex couples from marriage. In Washington, where ballots are still being counted, signs are strongly pointing to another imminent victory for the freedom to marry.
"Our huge, happy, and historic wave of wins last night signaled irrefutable momentum for the freedom to marry, with voters joining courts, legislatures, and the reelected president of the United States in moving the country toward the right side of history," said Evan Wolfson, founder and president of Freedom to Marry. "The anti-gay opposition kept moving the goalposts and had as their last talking point that we could not win a popular vote on the freedom to marry. Last night, voters in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and, all signs suggest, Washington proved them wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong."
"Not only did we win the freedom to marry in more states and at the ballot, but Americans also reelected the candidate for president who supports the freedom to marry, rejecting the anti-gay, anti-marriage candidate and party. With the possibility that the Supreme Court may consider a marriage case in the coming months, we are creating the climate that will enable more elected officials, judges, and even justices to embrace the freedom to marry, knowing that their support will stand the test of time and, indeed, be true to where the American people already are."
In 2011-2012, Freedom to Marry raised and invested a total of $7 million into the four ballot states in the 2011-2012 cycle, including infusions of $4.6 million in cash to the campaigns, in-kind contributions of staff and expertise, and securing $2.4 million in funding for separate public education efforts. Freedom to Marry was the largest out-of-state funder of marriage work in three of the four battleground states, and is the largest funder of work to advance the freedom to marry in the nation. In addition to funding, Freedom to Marry's central support of marriage work in the states included political and messaging guidance, new media coordination, and strategic leadership.
In the presidential race, exit polling showed President Obama won with voters aged 18-29, 60% to 37%. And defying conventional wisdom, turnout of voters in that age bracket was up from 18% of the electorate in 2008 to 19% in 2012.
According to a May 2012 CNN/ORC survey, Americans overall support the freedom to marry by 54% to 42% but among voters 18 to 34, support is 73% to 24%. And among Democrats and Independent voters, support is 70% to 28% and 60% to 37%.
"Far from hurting President Obama, his support for the freedom to marry galvanized his base of younger voters and Democrats, as well as independents, delivering the turn-out that carried him to victory. The president's reelection further reflects and accelerates the momentum for marriage, which Freedom to Marry will transform into more victories in 2013."
Other election results also provided good news for the freedom to marry. Iowa and New Hampshire, two states where anti-gay forces have attempted to strip away the freedom to marry, saw crucial victories that will protect their freedom to marry laws. In New Hampshire, Maggie Hassan, a strong supporter of the freedom to marry, was elected governor, defeating anti-marriage candidate Ovide Lamontagne. In addition, both the New Hampshire House and Senate will have strong, pro-freedom to marry majorities. As a result, the freedom to marry is safe for the foreseeable future in New Hampshire.
In Iowa, anti-gay forces failed in their efforts to oust Justice David Wiggins, who joined the unanimous state supreme court ruling in favor of the freedom; voters this time repelled the attacks that had previously targeted three of the other justices. Additionally, Democrats retained narrow control of the Iowa state senate, 26-23, with Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal -- who has vowed to stop any anti-marriage amendment -- winning re-election. If they'd won back the chamber, Republicans had committed to advance an amendment that would undermine the marriage decision.
In Minnesota, in addition to defeat of the anti-marriage amendment, voters rejected lawmakers who advanced a constitutional amendment to the voters, returning both chambers of the MN State Legislature to Democratic control.
And in Colorado, following the blocking of a civil union law by the Republican-controlled House, voters elected Democrats to take control. This paves the way for approval of a civil union law in 2013.
In the US Senate, three supporters of the freedom to marry replace opponents: In Connecticut, Chris Murphy (D) was elected to replace Senator Joseph Lieberman; In Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren (D) defeated incumbent Scott Brown; In Maine, Angus King (I) was elected to replace Olympia Snowe. Additionally, in Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin (D), an openly lesbian candidate, won a hard-fought race against anti-freedom to marry former Gov. Tommy Thompson, to replace Herb Kohl.
Freedom to Marry is the gay and non-gay partnership working to win marriage equality nationwide. Headed by Evan Wolfson, one of America's leading civil rights advocates and lawyers, Freedom to Marry brings new resources and a renewed context of urgency and opportunity to this social justice movement.
LATEST NEWS
Mamdani and Backers Ridicule Cuomo for Independent Run After Democratic Primary Defeat
"What we saw was New Yorkers' hunger for a new kind of politics," said Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani of the primary race. "I understand that it is difficult for the former governor to come to terms with that."
Jul 14, 2025
Speaking at an event with a major local musicians union Monday after receiving its endorsement in the New York City mayoral race, Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani offered his perspective on why former Gov. Andrew Cuomo had just announced the launch of an independent bid for mayor nearly three weeks after a stunning loss to his progressive rival.
"I think he's struggling to come to terms with what Tuesday meant," said Mamdani, referring to the June 24 Democratic primary. "We spent an entire campaign being told that it was inevitable for Andrew Cuomo to become the next mayor. And he believed that himself. And what we saw was New Yorkers' hunger for a new kind of politics... I understand that it is difficult for the former governor to come to terms with that because it is a repudiation of the kind of politics that he has practiced."
Progressives on Monday said Cuomo, who was forced to resign from office in 2021 after an investigation found he had sexually harassed at least 11 women, was showing disregard for the clear results of last month's election, in which Mamdani shocked the Democratic establishment by winning the most votes of any primary candidate in New York City's history. The democratic socialist won the election by nearly 13 percentage points in the final round of ranked choice voting.
Numerous critics, including one of Cuomo's accusers, alluded to his history of sexual misconduct in their responses to his announcement.
"True to form, Andrew Cuomo once again refuses to accept that no means no," said New York state Assemblymember Phara Souffrant Forrest (D-57).
On the social media platform X, Cuomo posted a video announcing his independent run—which Mamdani took as an opportunity to post his own campaign donation link, immediately garnering far more engagement from social media users than Cuomo's announcement did.
Cuomo said in the video that "the fight to save our city isn't over," and warned that Mamdani offers "slick slogans but no solutions" even as he appeared to copy the democratic socialist's recent campaign videos, which have shown Mamdani engaging with New Yorkers eager to shake his hand.
Some posited that Cuomo was likely "miserable" about having to participate in the type of retail politics Mamdani has excelled in, alluding to a quote from one of the candidate's most vocal backers after he lost the primary.
"All of us have a blind spot," former Gov. David Paterson told The New York Times. "His blind spot is that he doesn't really connect particularly well with, just, people."
Mamdani also poked fun at Cuomo for "making man-on-the-street videos with a guy in Carhartt" and joked that the former governor is likely to pander to New York City's Arab population.
"By next week, he'll be sipping adeni chai and eating khaliat al nahl," he said.
The Times reported that Cuomo launched his campaign after making a deal with Mamdani's other challengers, including Republican Curtis Sliwa and independent candidates Mayor Eric Adams and attorney Jim Walden. Cuomo has said he will drop out of the race if he not the front-running challenger by early September, and will encourage the other candidates to do the same.
As Nia Prater wrote at New York magazine on Monday, the strategy "appears to be acknowledging an unavoidable reality of the race: that having multiple candidates vying for the same bloc of moderate and conservative voters will likely favor Mamdani's candidacy."
In a recent Data for Progress poll, Mamdani was shown to have the support of 40% of respondents, with Cuomo in second at 24%. Adams had 15%, while Sliwa had 14% and Walden was in last place with 1%.
"In addition, the poll found that Democratic voters preferred Mamdani by 52% compared to 32% for Cuomo and 8% for Adams," reported Prater. "Voters also appeared to have low opinions of both Cuomo and Adams. Seventy percent of respondents said they had an unfavorable opinion of Adams compared to 29% favorable, while 59% viewed Cuomo unfavorably compared to 39% who said they had a favorable opinion of the former governor."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who endorsed Mamdani in the primary, said the poll was a good sign for the progressive candidate.
"But don't kid yourself," he said. "The billionaires will spend endlessly to defeat him. This is an election of national significance. Either we develop a strong progressive working-class movement, or we end up with oligarchy and authoritarianism."
Along with ridiculing Cuomo's attempt to wrest control of the nation's largest city from a candidate who has focused his campaign on making life more affordable for working families, Mamdani's campaign also condemned Cuomo for taking millions of dollars in donations from Republican billionaires and supporters of President Donald Trump.
"While Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams are tripping over themselves to cut backroom deals with billionaires and Republicans, Zohran Mamdani is focused on making this city more affordable for New Yorkers," campaign spokesperson Jeffrey Lerner told the Times. "That's the choice this November."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sotomayor: Supreme Court Expedites Trump 'Lawlessness' With Education Department Decision
"That decision is indefensible," the justice wrote. "It hands the executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out."
Jul 14, 2025
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Monday delivered a blistering dissent to an emergency decision that enables President Donald Trump to plow ahead with laying off nearly 1,400 employees at the Department of Education while a case challenging the plan plays out.
"This case arises out of the president's unilateral efforts to eliminate a Cabinet-level agency established by Congress nearly half a century ago," wrote Sotomayor, joined by her liberals, Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. "As Congress mandated, the department plays a vital role in this nation's education system, safeguarding equal access to learning and channeling billions of dollars to schools and students across the country each year."
"Only Congress has the power to abolish the department," she continued, calling out Trump's executive order and Education Secretary Linda McMahon's subsequent move to fire half the agency's workforce. "When the executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the judiciary's duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it."
Sotomayor explained that "two lower courts rose to the occasion, preliminarily enjoining the mass firings while the litigation remains ongoing. Rather than maintain the status quo, however, this court now intervenes, lifting the injunction and permitting the government to proceed with dismantling the department."
"That decision is indefensible," she argued. "It hands the executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out. The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave. Unable to join in this misuse of our emergency docket, I respectfully dissent."
If a Democratic president declared his intention to unilaterally shut down the Department of Homeland Security, then attempted to transfer or shutter its key offices and decimate its workforce, does anyone seriously think this Supreme Court would let him?
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) July 14, 2025 at 3:51 PM
The high court's right-wing majority—which includes three Trump appointees—did not write an opinion, as is customary for shadow docket decisions. The administration responded by pledging to proceed with its efforts to eviscerate the department.
"It is a shame that the highest court in the land had to step in to allow President Trump to advance the reforms Americans elected him to deliver using the authorities granted to him by the U.S. Constitution," McMahon said in a statement. "We will carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to ensure resources are directed where they matter most – to students, parents, and teachers."
Supreme Court says the president can’t abolish student debt, but he CAN abolish the Department of Education.This isn’t hypocrisy. It’s end times fascism—a fatalistic politics willing torch the government and incinerate the future to maintain hierarchy and subvert democracy.
— Astra Taylor (@astra.bsky.social) July 14, 2025 at 4:32 PM
McMahon and Trump's mass firing effort—part of a broader effort to shutter the department—had been blocked by a U.S. district court in Massachusetts and the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in response to a lawsuit in which Democracy Forward is representing a coalition that includes the American Federation of Teachers and Service Employees International Union.
"We are incredibly disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision to allow the Trump-Vance administration to proceed with its harmful efforts to dismantle the Department of Education while our case moves forward," the coalition said in a Monday statement. "This unlawful plan will immediately and irreparably harm students, educators, and communities across our nation."
"Children will be among those hurt the most by this decision," the coalition stressed. "We will never stop fighting on behalf of all students and public schools and the protections, services, and resources they need to thrive."
The Associated Press reported that "separately on Monday, more than 20 states sued the administration over billions of dollars in frozen education funding for after-school care, summer programs, and more."
Keep ReadingShow Less
5,800+ Gaza Children Diagnosed With Malnutrition in June: UNICEF
"Children's bodies are wasting away," the agency said. "This is not just a nutrition crisis. It's a child survival emergency."
Jul 14, 2025
More than 5,800 children in the Gaza Strip were diagnosed with malnutrition in June alone amid Israel's ongoing U.S.-backed siege and annihilation of the Palestinian territory, the United Nations Children's Fund said Sunday.
According to the UNICEF, at least 5,870 malnourished children in Gaza were hospitalized last month for urgent treatment, including more than 1,000 cases of severe malnutrition, the most lethal form of the ailment. Malnutrition diagnoses have increased in Gaza over each of the past four months. In May, 5,119 children between 6 months and 5 years of age suffering acute malnutrition were admitted for treatment in Gaza, as Common Dreams reported.
"Child malnutrition in Gaza is rising fast," the agency warned in a statement. "Children's bodies are wasting away. This is not just a nutrition crisis. It's a child survival emergency."
Gaza medical officials said late last month that more than 300 Palestinians—including many children and elders—had recently died from malnutrition and lack of medical care due to Israel's siege and bombing. The Gaza Health Ministry says at least 67 children have died of starvation since October 2023, when Israeli forces began obliterating the enclave in retaliation for the Hamas-led attack on Israel.
In addition to blocking food and other humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, Israel Defense Forces troops have killed more than 800 people at or near food distribution points run by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. IDF officers and soldiers say they were ordered to fire live bullets and artillery shells into crowds of desperate aid-seekers.
In recent days, Israeli forces have also massacred children and others queued up for malnutrition treatment at an international charity clinic in Deir al-Balah and waiting for water in the al-Nuseirat refugee camp. The IDF attributed the latter attack to a "technical error."
More than 310 United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East staffers have also been killed by Israeli forces since the start of the Gaza onslaught.
Israel's forced starvation of Gaza has been condemned by numerous national governments, progressive members of U.S. Congress, international human rights groups, and United Nations experts, who have called the policy genocidal. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder and forced starvation.
Israel's policies and practices in Gaza are also the subject of a genocide case currently before the International Court of Justice, which has ordered tIsrael to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza and to allow humanitarian aid into the strip. Israel has been accused of ignoring these orders. Israeli leaders including National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir have called for the bombing of Gaza humanitarian aid depots and IDF soldiers—who purportedly fight for the "word's most moral army"—have posted videos on social media celebrating or mocking the starvation of Palestinians.
Since October 2023, at least 58,386 Palestinians have been killed and more than 139,000 wounded by Israeli forces in Gaza, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, whose figures have been found to be accurate or an undercount by peer-reviewed studies. At least 14,000 people are also missing. Most of Gaza's more than 2 million people have also been forcibly displaced, often multiple times.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular