Legal Issues

International Court Rejects Discrimination Claims by Christians Who Won’t Serve Gays

The 4th Section chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the United Kingdom is acting within the “margin of appreciation” under the European Convention on Human Rights in upholding the decisions by two employers to discharge employees who were unwilling to abide by the employers’ non-discrimination policies, which forbid sexual orientation discrimination. The employees in question, one governmental and one non-governmental, posed objections based on their Christian beliefs.

The 4th Section’s … <Read More>

Supreme Court Will Hear Dispute of HIV Prevention Funding Requirements

The Supreme Court announced that it will review the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Alliance for an Open Society International, Inc. v. U.S. Agency for International Development, 651 F.3d 218 (2011), en banc review denied, 678 F.3d 127 (2012), which held that the federal government probably violated the 1st Amendment rights of the plaintiff agencies by conditioning their receipt of funding under the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 2003 … <Read More>

Michigan Appeals Court Rejects Challenge to “Absurd” Benefits Policy

Despite finding that an employee benefits policy adopted by the Civil Service Commission drew “absurd” distinctions based on marital status and biological relationships, a 2-1 panel of the Court of Appeals of Michigan ruled on January 8 that the policy, extending health insurance benefits eligibility to non-marital cohabitants of state employees, did not violate equal protection or the state’s anti-gay marriage amendment. Attorney General v. Civil Service Commission, 2013 Westlaw 85805 (Mich. App., Jan. 8, … <Read More>

6th Circuit Revives Damage Suit in Sex Sting Case

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit has revived a lawsuit filed by a gay male couple who were caught up in a sex sting operation at Hix Park in Westland, Michigan, in October 2007. The court held that Chief District Judge Gerald E. Rosen (E.D. Mich.) erred in dismissing all of the plaintiffs’ claims, finding that plaintiffs had made a plausible argument that there was not probable cause to … <Read More>

Rumination on Prop8/DOMA Possibilities from the Supreme Court

I’ve been reading lots of speculation about what the Supreme Court might do in Hollingsworth v. Perry (the Proposition 8 case from California) and U.S. v. Windsor (the DOMA Section 3 case from New York). Both cases will be argued late in March. Both present the Court with questions of equal protection of the laws and, added at the instance of the Court, with questions of federal jurisdiction.

Most of the speculation I’ve seen seems … <Read More>

2012 Ends With a Spate of New LGBT-Related Court Decisions

State and federal courts released a flood of new LGBT-related opinions in the last few weeks of 2012. Here is a brief summary of the most significant.

The Montana Supreme Court divided 4-3 in a December 17 ruling over whether the court could issue a declaratory judgment on a claim that the statutory structure of Montana law unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples. Donaldson v. State, 2012 MT 288. Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote for the … <Read More>

Federal Court Finds Real Estate Brokers Discriminated Against PWA

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti ruled on December 3 that two New York City realtors, Manhattan Apartments, Inc., and Abba Realty Associates, violated a city law when dealing with a person living with AIDS who was seeking to rent an apartment with financial support from the NYC HIV/AIDS Services Administration (HASA).  The New York Law Journal published the court’s opinion on December 12.

Judge Conti awarded the plaintiff, Keith Short, $20,000 in damages, and also … <Read More>

Another development on the DOMA Case – What Could It Mean?

The Supreme Court has appointed Prof. Vicki Jackson of Harvard Law School to be "amicus curiae" in United States v. Windsor to brief and argue in support of the point of view that the Court does not have jurisdiction to decide the merits of the case.  Presumably, the Court fears that because the Solicitor General (representing the government), BLAG (representing the Republican leadership of the House of Representatives), and Edie Windsor, the plaintiff-respondent, all want … <Read More>

Supreme Court Takes Marriage Cases, But Leaves Itself an Out

The Supreme Court announced on December 7 that it would review the 9th Circuit's Proposition 8 ruling and the 2nd Circuit's DOMA Section 3 ruling, but in both cases it indicated that it would hear argument about whether the petitioners had standing to seek review of the decisions.  The arguments in both cases will probably take place late in March, with opinions expected by the end of the Court's term in June.  The cases are … <Read More>

Sacramento Federal Judges Disagree About First Amendment Analysis of California’s Law Protecting Minors from “Conversion Therapy”

Ruling on consecutive days, federal judges sitting on consecutive floors in the U.S. Courthouse in Sacramento, California, reached directly opposite views on how to analyze a California law prohibiting licensed health care professions from providing “sexual orientation change effort” therapy to patients under 18 years of age.  In Welch v. Brown, No. CIV 2:12-2484 WBS KJN (E.D.Cal., Dec. 3, 2012), Senior District Judge William B. Shubb, who was appointed to the court by President George … <Read More>