Federal Appeals Court to Hear Oral Arguments in Case Challenging Nevada Gay Marriage Ban on April 9

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has set April 9, 2014 for oral arguments in Sevcik v. Sandoval, the lasuit challenging Nevada's ban on gay marriage, Lambda Legal reports via press release:

“This is great news for our couples who have been working so long to have their case heard. We’re very excited to make the case for equality at the Ninth Circuit.”

Last month, Gov. Sandoval and  Carson City Clerk-Recorder Alan Glover withdrew their arguments in support of the marriage ban after the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories that discriminatory classifications based upon sexual orientation must receive heightened scrutiny and should be presumed unconstitutional. The heightened scrutiny standard is much more difficult to meet and rendered the state of Nevada’s arguments in its original brief defending the marriage ban “no longer tenable in the Ninth Circuit,” as Nevada’s Attorney General conceded in a statement released last week. The withdrawal of the two government defendants leaves only the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, which the U.S. District Court had allowed to intervene, defending the marriage ban.

In Sevcik v. Sandoval, Lambda Legal, joined by pro bono co-counsel from O’Melveny & Myers LLP and Snell & Wilmer LLP, represents eight same-sex couples challenging Nevada’s law banning marriage for same-sex couples. The lawsuit argues that barring same-sex couples from marriage violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. A U.S. District Court judge granted Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit in November 2012, and Lambda Legal appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit. The State submitted its brief supporting the marriage ban to the Ninth Circuit on the same day as the Court’s ruling in SmithKline.

Court Grants Expedited Hearing, Allows Withdrawal of State's Defense in Challenge to Nevada Gay Marriage Ban

A federal appeals court has granted the Nevada Governor and Attorney General's request to withdraw a brief defending the state's ban on gay marriage and granted an expedited hearing in the case, Lambda Legal reports:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today granted Lambda Legal's request to expedite the hearing of Sevcik v. Sandoval, its lawsuit challenging Nevada's discriminatory marriage ban. The decision comes just two days after Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval sought leave to withdraw his brief defending the ban. The Ninth Circuit also granted Gov. Sandoval's request to withdraw his brief.

Lambda Legal Senior Attorney Tara Borelli said:

The fact that the government defendants no longer are defending Nevada's exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage makes any delay in these loving and committed couples securing the relief they seek particularly intolerable. The wheels of justice are now on a much faster track.

Gov. Sandoval's request and the earlier decision by Carson City Clerk-Recorder Alan Glover to withdraw his brief were motivated by the Ninth Circuit's recent ruling in SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories that discriminatory classifications based upon sexual orientation must receive heightened scrutiny and should be presumed unconstitutional. The heightened scrutiny standard is much tougher to meet and rendered the state of Nevada's arguments in its original brief defending the marriage ban "no longer tenable in the Ninth Circuit," as Nevada's Attorney General conceded in a statement released last week. The withdrawal of the two government defendants leaves only the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, which the U.S. District Court had allowed to intervene, defending the marriage ban.

Nevada Clerk Changes Position On Gay Marriage Ban Following Ninth Circuit Case Ruling

Following in the footsteps of Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, Carson City Clerk Alan Glover has revised his opinion on the state's same-sex marriage ban (and the impending court case surrounding it). 

 

Both Masto and Glover are reconsidering their stances based on the Ninth Circuit court's ruling on SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories, which ruled that attorneys may not exclude jurors based on sexual orientation. The case indicated that heightened scrutiny is required in judicial processes where sexual orientation is the cause of alleged discrimination.

Where Masto is only reviewing the brief she filed in support of the same-sex marriage ban, Glover has gone a step further and filed a letter to withdraw his brief.

Equality On Trial reports:

The filing notes that he’s no longer opposed to the same-sex couples’ position in the case. He’s intending to file a notice of “non-opposition” with the appeals court...

Because the court now considers sexual orientation to be a “quasi-suspect” classification warranting more judicial scrutiny, the letter suggests, the clerk is less concerned about the broad reach of any eventual decision: it would be tied to sexual orientation claims and wouldn’t reach polygamy claims.

The impact of SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories is already being deeply felt, but how much further will it go? Time will tell.

NV Attorney General Links Gay Marriage To Bigamy, Incest In Brief Defending State's Ban

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) has an onslaught of backlash headed her way after a brief she filed on Tuesday linked same-sex marriage to bigamy and incest. The brief, responding to the Lambda Legal-filed case Sevick v. Sandoval which is challenging Nevada's 2002 ban on gay marriage, stands in vehement opposition to repealing the ban, reportedly "on the basis that it reflects the will of the people." Masto believes that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals need not apply heightened scrutiny to this case as “There exists neither fundamental right, nor suspect or quasi- suspect class, justifying a different standard of review.” A controversial perspective, to be sure, but not nearly as much as the direct links she draws among gay marriage, incest, and bigamy.The Washington Blade reports:

But in a section titled “Marriage Defined” explaining “what marriage is” and “what marriage is not,” Masto reminds the court that in addition to not being for same-sex couples under Nevada law, marriage is also not for those engaging in bigamy or incest.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, took Masto to task for making an implicit comparison between same-sex marriage and bigamy or incest while saying she makes no solid argument against allowing gay nuptials in Nevada.

“Marriage is not ‘defined’ by who is denied it, and nothing in the brief explains why loving and committed couples of the same sex should be denied the legal commitment and bundle of obligations and protections that are available to different-sex couples,” Wolfson said.

Masto differs from other Democratic state attorney generals who have recently decided not to defend gay marriage bans based on their lack of constitutional validity. For their part, Lambda Legal will have words with Masto soon.

Jon Davidson, Lambda’s legal director, said “of course, we find any such comparison objectionable” between same-sex marriage and bigamy or incest. The organization is slated to file its formal response to the attorney general’s brief next month.

GetEQUAL Nevada lead organizer Derek Washington, a friend of Attorney General Masto's, issued the following statement in response to her brief:

"I count Attorney General Cortez Masto as one of my very first mentors, having met her at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver. I am deeply disappointed that she would take the positions she has in her vigorous defense of a law that I find discriminatory and against the ideals of equality this great country was founded on. For the Attorney General to equate marriage equality with bigamy and incest is not only jaw dropping, but it is also a personal affront from someone I thought understood that we, LGBTQ Nevadans, are just the same as all other Nevadans. We work hard, send our children to school and contribute to the health of our communities. To be lumped in with bigamists and sexual criminals by a friend is, to say the very least, heartbreaking."

Nevada Being Sued Over Practice Of ‘Dumping’ Mentally Ill Patients In Cities Where They Know No One

Nevada has apparently come up with a new way of controlling the cost of caring for the institutionalized mentally ill: put them on buses and send them to other states.

That is the basis for a lawsuit that has been filed by the city of San Francisco against the state of Nevada, which claims that it has cost the city over $500,000 to house and care for homeless mental patients who had previously been living at Nevada’s state-run Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hospital in Las Vegas. San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said in a statement:

Homeless, psychiatric patients are especially vulnerable to the kind of practices Nevada engaged in, and the lawsuit I’ve filed today is about more than just compensation. It’s about accountability.

Reuters reports that the suit has been filed as a class action, but has not yet been certified by the court.

The lawsuit stems from a Sacramento Bee report published last April, which found that starting in 2008 Rawson-Neal had sent more than 1,500 patients to cities around the country, sending at least one to every state. The paper discovered this information after reviewing bus receipts provided by the Nevada mental health division.

According to The Bee:

In recent years, as Nevada has slashed funding for mental health services, the number of mentally ill patients being bused out of southern Nevada has steadily risen, growing 66 percent from 2009 to 2012. During that same period, the hospital has dispersed those patients to an ever-increasing number of states.
By last year, Rawson-Neal bused out patients at a pace of well over one per day, shipping nearly 400 patients to a total of 176 cities and 45 states across the nation.

Nevada Teen Offers Angry, Tearful, Loving Testimony on Why His Two Gay Moms Deserve Equality

18-year-old Riley Roberts delivered an emotional, compelling speech before the Nevada Assembly yesterday before it voted 27-14 to pass a resolution advancing efforts toward marriage equality in the state.

With, anger, love, and some tears, Roberts moved the room, and he will move you.

Says Roberts in the video.

“I was born in Nevada 18 years ago and guess who was there? My mom Pamela Roberts and Gretchen Miller, my loving parents. And who was there to watch me take my first steps? Pamela Roberts and Gretchen Miller. And who was there when I said my first words? My two loving parents. And who was there when I kicked my first soccer ball? My two loving parents. And who can I talk to when I need anything? My two loving parents. And who will be there to see me walk across the stage next month and receive my honors diploma? My two gay loving parents who have been together for 22 years."

Marriage Equality News Abounds Today!

Check out the news today from:

• Nevada
• Rhode Island
• Delaware
• France

Hoping all the votes go in the right direction! Peace, Love EQUALITY!

BREAKING: France's National Assembly approves marriage equality bill!