Postedon Jul 13, 2010 at 10:40 am
The New York Times editorial Board applauds last week's marriage ruling in Massachusetts.
"For 14 years, as states, courts and many Americans have begun to change their minds on the subject, the federal government has clung to its official definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman. On Thursday, a federal judge in Massachusetts finally stood up and said there was never a rational basis for that definition."
Postedon Jul 13, 2010 at 08:48 am
As both sides await news of a likely appeal in the Massachusetts marriage ruling from last week that could eventually lead to the Supreme Court, they are keeping an eye on California. A federal judge in San Francisco is expected to rule any day on whether voters in that state were within their rights when they supported a 2008 ballot initiative that banned marriage equality.
That decision could have major reverberations around the country and also end up before the nation's highest court.
Postedon Jul 12, 2010 at 02:00 pm
Theodore Olson, one of the attorneys for two couples challenging California's ban on the freedom to marry, told a federal judge in San Francisco on Friday that two rulings by another U.S. judge in Boston Thursday provide "compelling support" for their case.
Postedon Jul 12, 2010 at 12:09 pm
A key part of a law denying married gay couples federal benefits has been thrown out the window in Massachusetts, the first state to legalize the freedom to marry.
The ball now lies in the White House's court, which must carefully calculate the next move by an administration that has faced accusations it has not vigorously defended the law of the land.
Postedon Jul 12, 2010 at 09:16 am
A judge’s decision on Thursday declaring that a state law honoring the freedom to marry in Massachusetts should take precedence over a federal definition of marriage has exposed the fractures and fault lines among groups working to bolster states’ rights.
Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, said the court's ruling "provides a return to the way the federal government has always dealt with marriage — leaving it to the states."
Postedon Jul 11, 2010 at 08:00 am
Scott Stringer is a New York Democratic politician and the current Borough President of Manhattan. In 2005, he entered the race to succeed C. Virginia Fields as Manhattan Borough President. On September 13, 2005, he won the Democratic primary against 9 other candidates and was later elected in the November general election. He took office as Borough President on January 1, 2006.
In July of 2010, Mr. Stringer and his fiancée, Elyse Buxbaum, announced they would wed in Connecticut in what they described as a protest of New York’s failure to legalize the freedom to marry.
Postedon Jul 10, 2010 at 05:23 pm
On Thursday, in a sweeping opinion in the deliberately narrow Gill v. Office of Personnel Management case, Judge Joseph Tauro of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts struck down a key part of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Postedon Jul 09, 2010 at 02:30 pm
On Thursday night's "Rachel Maddow Show", Chris Hayes talked to Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley and Tobias Wolff about a federal judge's ruling in two cases against the Defense of Marriage Act.