California Supreme Court About To Do Something Interesting

News for the Week Ended February 16, 2011
BY ANN ROSTOW


California Supreme Court About To Do Something Interesting

Today, we are expecting the California Supreme Court (finally!) to announce how it plans to handle the request it received from the Ninth Circuit panel reviewing the Prop 8 case.

Unfortunately, the justices care little for my deadline, and I am obliged to turn in my column without this vital information.

It’s not clear as of four central time whether the Court will issue an actual response to the Ninth Circuit’s arcane question about the legal standing under state law of the Prop 8 initiative backers. It’s also possible that the court will simply tell us whether they plan to consider the knotty question in the coming weeks or months, or alternatively, they could tell the Ninth Circuit to figure it all out for themselves.

Assuming the justices don’t address the issue in detail this afternoon, and further assuming they don’t tell the Ninth Circuit to go jump in Lake Tahoe, we have no idea how long the justices will wrestle with the relatively boring technical issue that lies between us and an actual decision on same-sex marriage. As I’ve said before, regardless of what happens today, t looks as if the “fast tracked” Prop 8 case has gone on a walkabout.
--


Arizona State Workers Fight To Keep Benefits

Now that we’ve covered the big nearly breaking story, we have a savory smorgasbord of actual news to tantalize your GLBT taste buds. There’s a big federal case about partner rights in Arizona that was just argued before a Ninth Circuit panel on Monday. (Yes, it’s true. The Ninth Circuit is the most fun federal appellate court in the country. Prop 8, the Golinski case, the Arizona case, a legal bonanza!)

There’s also a same-sex Canadian divorce case heading to the Wyoming Supreme Court, where marriage recognition law is ambiguous. And we have loads and loads of state legislative news, including a civil union bill in Hawaii that is perhaps to be finalized as I write.

But before we rush headlong into these exciting affairs, let’s go back to that Arizona case. Alert readers will wonder, hmmm. Why didn’t Ann mention this case before it managed to reach oral arguments at a judicial level one rung down from the US Supreme Court? Wasn’t there a district court ruling, an appeal, a schedule set, briefs filed? Did she just ignore a major federal gay rights case even as she blathered on and on about other trials and tribulations?

Um, yes.

Here’s what happened as far as my memory is concerned.

That idiot governor, Jan Brewer, who replaced our champion in Phoenix, Janet Napolitano, decided to “save money” by dumping domestic partners from the state workplace benefits. Brewer and her campadres in the rightwing Arizona legislature managed to save all of, I don’t know, five dollars out of the state budget, and in the process they left about 480 gay families, including 60 kids, suddenly unprotected.

Lambda filed suit in November 2009, and last July, a federal judge issued an injunction against the state, ruling that the budget rationale was not convincing and that the revised policy appeared to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. I covered all of that, but somehow, I never noticed that Arizona appealed the injunction to the Ninth Circuit. And here we are!
 
The case also failed to register because it’s not a classic marriage case; it’s an equal protection case, arguing that the gay state employees have been denied equal workplace benefits for no legitimate reason. Nonetheless, a ruling in our favor from the three judges on the panel (all appointed by Democrats) would be sensational. Hey, better to write about it late than never. We should see a ruling in the next three to six months if tradition holds.
--


Activia!

There’s so much actual news that I hesitate to draw your attention to the 30-something grocery clerk in Albuquerque who jacked off into a free yogurt sample at the local Sunflower Market. I don’t think he was gay, but I encountered the story at 365gay.com, so it’s sort of a gay news item. Law enforcement took possession of the suspicious dairy treat after a customer complained, and the offender was identified through DNA.

And before we sink our teeth into legislative news from around the US of A, I stumbled over another bad boy on one of my legal blogs, this one an Iowa lawyer named Clovis Bowles who lost his license for 18 months after having oral sex with a client in the law library of the Black Hawk County Courthouse. In the courthouse library? With your client? Really?
--


Merry In Maryland?

Moving right along, we are still bombarded with optimistic news out of Maryland, where it looks like marriage equality is right around the corner, sort of. There’s a senate committee vote on Thursday, and according to the Washington Post, the marriage bill could make it to the senate floor next week.

After a period of suspense, it looks as if we now have the 24 votes we need for passage, and it’s likely that we also have the 29 votes we need to stop a filibuster. (A handful of lawmakers have pledged to vote to bring the bill to the floor, even though they are opposed to the bill itself.)

The House of Delegates is expected to pass marriage should it emerge from the senate, and Governor O’Malley has pledged to sign a bill into law, making Maryland the sixth state to treat same-sex couples on par with their heterosexual counterparts. That said, a November 2012 referendum is possible if opponents rustle up enough signatures in the weeks following an O’Malley signature. So, we’ll see.

Washington lawmakers in the house and senate just introduced a marriage equality bill in the Starbuck State. A civil union bill is lurking in the Colorado legislature. I think I saw another one in Pennsylvania. And as I mentioned, Hawaii is expected to pass civil unions in the next few days, maybe today, and send that bill to a friendly governor.

New York is working on marriage, as is Rhode Island, where evildoers have also proposed a marriage ban. In Indiana, the house passed an amendment that would send a marriage ban to the voters, but not only does the senate have to confirm the plan, but both chambers have to pass the amendment again in the next session in order for the amendment to hit the voters. An antigay Indiana amendment is therefore not immanent, but the 70-26 house vote the other day was depressing nonetheless.

The attempt to roll back marriage rights in Iowa is still being held at bay by the head of the state senate, who thankfully thinks it’s a horrible idea. And even though a poll in New Hampshire showed widespread public opposition to reversing marriage rights in the Granite State, I gather than certain conservatives are still pursuing a repeal, even as Republican leaders have vowed to concentrate on the economy and whatever else is going on over there.

Oh, there’s more. But please. Haven’t we just done enough? Iowa, by the way, is also working on a bill that states that life begins at conception, a valid opinion, but since when can you legislate a point of view? What’s next? A law insisting vitamin C cures colds and swimming right after lunch is bad for your health? Never mind. I have a feeling that anything’s possible.
--


CPACman

So, the Conservative Political Action Conference is over and done with, and although the gay Republicans at GOProud were allowed to co-sponsor this year’s shenanigans, there’s talk that they won’t be welcomed next year, since the new uber conservative CPAC head honcho doesn’t seem to like us very much.

As you know, letting the gays into the CPAC tent led several groups on the religious right to boycott the confab, although most of the libertarian types didn’t seem to mind. But just because GOProud insinuated themselves into the festivities didn’t mean they were home free. Donald Trump and Tim Pawlenty distinguished themselves respectively by coming out against same-sex marriage and suggesting we reinstitute Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

I didn’t pay particularly close attention, but I’m sure there were many others willing to articulate the far right talking points. Indeed, I think Ann Coulter said that the “Gay Left” was destroying the family. I suppose that’s us. Have you destroyed any families lately? Me neither. We’d better get cracking!

I’m not sure why this charade deserves the massive media attention it garners. I read that something like 3,700 people voted in the straw poll that named Ron Paul as the best GOP candidate for 2012. The majority of the voters were men under 25, not exactly the cohort that will decide the primary battles to come.

For some reason, I’m reminded of the sports talk radio host I was listening to in the car yesterday, a man who confessed that he has a secret addiction to Captain Crunch cereal. Several listeners called up to add their voices to the ensuing discussion, expressing relief that they were not alone in their childish passion.

One guy, who sounded like he was under 25 and possibly could support an oddball ideologue who wants to return us to the gold standard, told the audience that he gets a box of Captain Crunch, pours two thirds of it into a giant bowl, pours in milk, waits about 90 seconds for the mixture to reach his preferred consistency and, Presto! Dinner is served!

Truly a repellent mental image in so many ways.

I might add, lest you think I’m a food snob, that Captain Crunch was my personal favorite when I was a little girl, with Lucky Charms a close second. That said, my dream breakfast was sautéed Norfolk Spot, when in season.

OK OK. I’m a food snob.
--


Criminal Minds

Well, I took a little break while waiting for this damn California Supreme Court announcement, and when I came back I discovered a new piece of gay news, the horrific story of a 19-year-old from Hickory, North Carolina, who took a heavy dose of “Mucinex DM,” felt weird, and murdered his gay roommate.

According to the Advocate, Michael Anderson shot Steven Starr with a rifle, shot him again with a pistol, hacked him up with an ax, and carved words into his body. He then called 911 to report that he had butchered Starr to such an extent that the dead man was unrecognizable.

Anderson told the operator he met Starr at a gay bar, where he (Anderson) had gone to “experiment.” It seems that subsequently, Starr let Anderson stay at his place.

As Anderson explained on the 911 call:

“I met him and went to his house and he took me in and I turned straight again. And he wanted to touch me and stuff and I wouldn’t let him, and he kept trying. And I waited until he went to sleep and then I shot him three times. And I mutilated him very badly and I’m sorry, I’m sorry. Oh God, please help me.”

I was going to spin this as a cautionary tale about gay shame run amok, but actually, I think Anderson is a madman who transcends sexual orientation.

As for Mucinex DM, I don’t know whether I want to avoid it like the plague or try one “just for fun.” I know I’ll never see those TV mucus people in quite the same light. Also, a town called “Hickory, North Carolina” is just a little surrealistic. Not sure why.

Do any of you watch Criminal Minds? I love that show, although I have to lock all my doors and windows before I turn it on. However, I have a pet peeve that runs through every episode without fail.

When the team gets together to brief the local police on the profile, one team member starts talking, and then he or she stops and another one picks up the description without missing a beat, then that person stops and the next person chimes in and the vocal relay goes on until everyone has spoken.

In real life, no one butts into someone else’s presentation without some kind of pause or cue. It just doesn’t happen, and if it does, it happens once, not four or five times in succession. And once you start noticing this contrived device, it becomes really irritating. It’s just wrong!