This morning the US Supreme Court gave notice of its refusal to hear an appeal from a group of clergy, the Alliance Defense Fund, in Washington D.C. They had been demanding to hold a referendum on the right of gays and lesbians to be married in the District.
The Alliance had challenged last year's decision by the District's Board of Elections which decreed that putting such a referendum on the ballot would be in violation of the D.C. Human Rights Law, prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
The implementing law -- the Initiative Procedures Act -- stipulated that the Elections Board "shall refuse to accept [a proposed initiative] if the Board finds that it . . . authorizes, or would have the effect of authorizing, discrimination" prohibited under the city human rights law.
Keen News Service
The Supreme Court gave no reason why it refused to hear Jackson vs. DC. But in order to agree to a hearing we know that at least four justices must be in favor, so at least one of Scalia, Roberts, Alioto or Thomas must not have wished the case to be argued.
The litigation got underway last March, when the Alliance filed for an emergency stay by the Supreme Court but was denied. They then took their case to the D.C. Court of Appeals, where a July 15th, 2010 ruling went against them in a close 5-4 vote. And today the US Supreme Court let that decision stand.
The most important implication of their refusal is that this is the end of the line for opponents of same-sex marriage in DC. Only a repeal by the City Council (very unlikely) or a new law enacted by Congress and signed by the President (not likely for some years, at least) could now change the legality of same-sex marriage in Washington DC. There are no further legal avenues for the bigots to pursue.
Another possible ramification of this decision is in Maryland, where the legislature is considering marriage equality legislation. Since Maryland already recognizes same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions, and Washington D.C. is a hop, skip or a jump (depending on which part of Maryland you're in) away, the legislature's decision in effect now comes down to whether they want marriage ceremonies for their gay and lesbian citizens to be held in Washington D.C. or in their local communities, with the attending economic benefits thereof.
In the fight for equality there are good days and bad days to wake up to. This was one such good day.
Update. Statement by Human Rights Campaign (HRC):
"Today's action by the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that D.C.'s human rights protections are strong enough to withstand the hateful efforts of outside anti-LGBT groups to put people's basic civil rights on the ballot," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "For almost two years, the National Organization for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund, along with Bishop Harry Jackson, have fought a losing battle to shamelessly harm gay and lesbian couples in D.C. who seek nothing more than to share in the rights and responsibilities of marriage. The D.C. Council and Mayor courageously made marriage equality a reality last year, and the courts have since upheld the rights of D.C. residents to govern ourselves and take the necessary steps to eliminate discrimination in our community."
Via Pam's House Blend
Update. On the Other Hand:
Multiple sources have confirmed that the Iranian government will stone two young men to death for having gay sex.
via Joe.My.God
Update
More on Marriage Equality and Senator Gillibrand in Clarknt67's excellent (as usual) diary
Update: Other marriage equality news:
Sen. Thomas Duane (D-Manhattan), the Senate's biggest booster of gay marriage, said he'll introduce legislation "within weeks" to legalize same-sex marriage - and will push for a vote before the end of June.
Update. Other LGBT civil rights news:
The question of whether Louisiana must put both parents' names on birth certificates of children adopted by gay couples goes before 16 federal appeals court judges on Wednesday.