Attorney General Eric Schneiderman this morning filed a friend of the court brief challenging the legality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
"The federal Defense of Marriage Act clearly violates the principle of equal justice under law as enshrined int he U.S. Constitution and improperly intrudes on the traditional role of states in defining marriage," Schneiderman said. in a statement.
"The state of New York has long recognized out-of-state, same-sex marriages and the enactment of the Marriage Equality Act further cements our state's position on this critical civil rights issue. My office will fight every day to defend the fundamental guarantee of equal protection under law for all New Yorkers."
Oh, and in other news, that suit filed to challenge NY's Marriage Equality law? Meritless bullshit.
The full press release from Schneiderman's office is on the flip...
Beautiful day in New York as countless citizens exercised their new right to marry. The City and the state rolled out the rainbow welcome matt in an extraordinary show of support.
A Prominent Republican is joining a prominent Democrat in predicting that Gov. Cuomo will become President Obama's running mate for vice president next year.
Legislative mastermind Brian Brown of National Organization For Marriage (NOM) has revealed the group's brilliant 4-year plan for undoing marriage equality in the Empire State.
Here it is:
Oh wait, that's not it. That's the Underpants Gnomes get rich scheme.
Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown's get rich scheme fleecing ignorant and hateful people of New York after the fold.
Congressman Jay Inslee (WA-01) announced his candidacy for Governor of the State of Washington in Seattle Monday, and Your Erstwhile Reporter was present.
The candidacy was announced with a speech that focused on "process improvements" and the invocation of new technology jobs as an economic engine for job growth (and in fact the event took place at the headquarters of a company that has developed seed-derived biofuels that have been used to power military and commercial aircraft).
But that's not the part that's going to be the most interesting for the civil-rights supportive reader.
The most interesting part is that Inslee was quick to offer his support for full marriage equality in the State of Washington, should he find himself elected.
So it looks like we have some time to kill before the Senate finally gets around to voting on marriage equality sometime late tonight. This gives us plenty of time to speculate wildly about how this might go down.
Earlier this evening, Senator Lanza of Staten Island revealed that he would be voting against the bill. This is tough news for those of us who really want to this bill to pass. Lanza had been one of the dwindling number of true "undecided" votes and many folks, myself included, had hoped that he might be the one to push this one over the top. Alas, that is not to be.
That really only leaves two publicly "undecideds" left, Saland of SD-41 up in the Hudson Valley and Grisanti the frosh from SD-60 in Buffalo.
Saland is and always has been something of a cipher on this issue, though he and the rest of the GOP caucus voted against the bill the last time it came up back in late 2009. Saland has that district pretty wired for himself and has easily fought off challenger after challenger for the last few cycles. That said, it's not entirely certain that he even runs again. In fact, the rumor that he will retire has been going around since at least 2007. The story I've heard many times is that Joe Bruno begged him to stay on at least one more cycle back about that time. He's old, cranky and I get the impression that he doesn't much like the Senate nor the other senators all that much. If he really is calling it quits this time, he may just do the right thing on the way out the door.
Or maybe he won't. He's really kind of a sterotypical grumpy old man and he may decide to stick it to the gays anyway. Guess we'll know soon enough.
What's more interesting, to me anyway, is what happens with Grisanti. As you may recall, Grisanti very narrowly defeated incumbent Dem Antoine Thompson in a drawn affair that lasted months past election day. Now, Thompson was seen (rightly, IMHO) by many folks in that pretty blue district as being something of an ineffectual dolt, a not very bright guy in way over his head.
Grisanti was able to knock off a sitting Dem senator in a fairly deep blue district in a GOP wave year. Can he repeat that feat in 2012?
Maybe. Maybe not.
I think it's safe to say that there are precious few senators with more riding on tonight's vote than Grisanti. He's a former Dem, but he's on the wrong team for SD-60. Yes, he's Italian and that helps with many folks there, but he's also going to be running as a Republican in a presidential year with Obama at the top of the ticket in a largely urban district.
Does he vote against equality and risk pissing off a good portion of the Democrats that he has to win over to win reelection? Or does he piss off Mike Long and make the job of squeaking by a second time all that much harder? Does he hope that the white ethnic Catholic vote bails him out of a "nay" vote? Or does he hope those same folks have moved past this issue already?
Grisanti says we'll learn his vote tonight from the floor of the Senate.
There will plenty of very interested parties paying very close attention when the freshman from Buffalo stands up to explain his vote.
Then there are the wildcards. The names I hear most often that could possibly move from no to yes are Hannon and Fuschillo. Fuschillo has ambitions beyond the senate, statewide ambitions, and Hannon came very, very close to losing his seat in 2008 to a newcomer. Hannon's district ain't what it used to be, though I'm sure his district is at the top of the "must gerrymander" list for the Senate GOP.
Stranger things have happened.
Got any other wild speculation about the vote? Let us know in the comments.
After an all day marathon of closed door conference, Majority Leader Skelos just released this statement:
After many hours of deliberation and discussion over the past several weeks among the members, it has been decided that same sex marriage legislation will be brought to the full Senate for an up or down vote.
The entire Senate Republican Conference was insistent that amendments be made to the Governor's original bill in order to protect the rights of religious institutions and not-for-profits with religious affiliations. I appreciate the Governor's cooperation in working with us to address these important issues and concerns.
As I have said many times, this is a very difficult issue and it will be a vote of conscience for every member of the Senate.
Of course Skelos claimed it was a conscience vote last time and we all know how that went down. That said, I have a good feeling about this one. Honestly, I think the whole chamber would rather have this bill behind them for good, though the all day conference had me worried for a bit.
My guess is that marriage equality finally passes this time. Then it's off to the courts where the NOMs of the world will certainly challenge it.
UPDATE: Seeing credible reports that Lanza is a "nay." That hurts. He was one of the undecideds that I though we had our best chance with. No dice.
Anyone who has followed Greg Ball over the years probably saw this coming. Ball, who has spent the last 10 days or so doing everything he possibly can to make the marriage equality fight in Albany all about himself, even going so far as to cynically troll for twitter followers by polling their opinions on the matter (who else's civil rights should I poll my twitter followers about today?), is apparently still going to vote "no" on the bill, even after putting himself square in the middle of trying to get exemptions (that largely already exist) for religious institutions.
Why? Because Greg Ball is a preening diva prick that doesn't give a rat's ass about anyone but Greg Ball. He's kind of always been that way. The only thing missing (so far, that is) from his little dog and pony show has been a fundraising pitch, fundraising being the only thing in the entire world he enjoys more than being the center of attention. If only he could have found a way to get the gays on horseback...
Like I said, he's an asshole.
That said, he believes that the bill will pass anyway and I think he's probably right. That statement means that the bill will almost certainly get a vote this evening. If it does, look for Saland, Lanza, Grisanti or Hannon - or some combination of all of them - to push this one over the top.
Let me make this as simple as possible for you. Either you believe that LGBT New Yorkers are full and equal citizens, worthy of all the rights, protections and responsibilities of full citizenship...or you do not. It really is that simple. Everything else, the ridiculous exemptions (which already exist) for religious institutions, the chants, the hymns, the signs outside the chamber, all the commentary for and against - all of that stuff - is just noise.
Either all New Yorkers are deserving of full citizenship rights or they aren't. Period.
Municipal clerks in New York may refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples or refuse to marry them, whether or not additional "carve out" provisions are inserted into the upcoming Marriage Equality bill.
Under proposed language specified by GOP State Senator Greg Ball of Putnam County, clerks and other municipal officials can hide behind a "religious protections" clause if they find gay marriage an affront to their beliefs.
The addendums that Ball wants to insert in the bill are unclear and ambiguous, perhaps purposely so. They could provide a loophole for mayors, supervisors, clerks, and county executives to act in contempt of their sworn duties, and keep gay marriage in the courts for years to come.
And more evidence that Maybe Dean Skelos just might be being honest this time about having a conscience vote on marriage equality. Seems they've been polling battleground districts and hating on the gheys just isn't as popular as it once was.
The New York Post reports today that a surprising slew of Republicans, all of whom voted to defeat a same-sex marriage bill in 2009, are ready to vote "yes" this time around. These senators include are Kemp Hannon of Nassau County, Charles Fuscillo of Suffolk County, Betty Little of Glens Falls, Andrew Lanza of Staten Island, Greg Ball of Putnam County, James Alesi of Rochester, and Roy McDonald of Rensselaer County.
According to the Post, Republicans have been conducting secret polls showing majority support for gay marriage in key swing districts, causing the GOP to be concerned that voting down marriage equality this year would cause them to lose control of the Senate next year to Democrats.
....
Republicans are worried about passing gay marriage by a single vote, leaving one of their members to be viewed as the decisive figure, according to the Times.
And Senate majority leader, Dean G. Skelos, who previously said he'd let the vote to come to the floor-- even though he would vote "no"-- now says he will have to discuss the issue with his caucus before allowing the vote.
The strongest force against gay marriage has been the state Conservative Party, who says it will deny political support to any Republican who backs gay marriage.
Looks like this train just might be (finally!) leaving the station.
Well, well, well. This is interesting, though I'm not terribly surprised. The New York Times is reporting that three of the "nay" votes from the last time a marriage equality vote made it to the floor of the Senate have now flipped and become "yeas."
Three wavering Democratic lawmakers in the State Senate have agreed to support legislation legalizing same-sex marriage in New York, several people with knowledge of the negotiations said on Monday, marking a potential turning point for the long-debated measure.
The three senators - Joseph P. Addabbo Jr., Shirley L. Huntley of Queens and Carl Kruger of Brooklyn - all voted against the measure in 2009, when it failed by a wide margin. Their switch to the yes column leaves all but one Senate Democrat supporting same-sex marriage -and the fate of the legislation in the hands of the Republican majority in the chamber.
Republican senators voted unanimously against same-sex marriage two years ago, but several have indicated in recent weeks that they are undecided. Speaking with reporters on Monday, Dean G. Skelos, the Senate majority leader, said that if a same-sex marriage bill came to the floor, each Republican senator would be free to vote his or her conscience, but he added that he had not formally asked his members where they stood.
The announcement, just days from the end of the legislative session next Monday, signifies the first clear advance in months for advocates of same-sex marriage and a victory for John L. Sampson, the Democratic minority leader, who has spent weeks coaxing a consensus out of his oft-fractious conference.
This is certainly good news and I think if Skelos actually means what he says about a conscience vote, I believe that it may actually pass this time, perhaps even comfortably. That said, Skelos told the Dem leadership in 2009 before that last that he would free his conference to vote their consciences and he, well, he flat out lied and punk'd Sampson (and LGBT New Yorkers) something good. And let's not forget the three closet cases that voted against equality last time out....
I have a feeling it may be different this time though. I just don't think the issue is as much of a winner for the haters as it used to be and the number of Dem "nays" is down to only one, the gay hatin', single issue abomination that is the Rev Ruben Diaz. (By the way, what on earth does Diaz do after this is no longer an issue? Seriously, what will he do with himself then?)
So, my fingers are crossed. I think this is the best shot we've ever had to extend full citizenship rights to all New Yorkers. But, I'm still a realist. If you want this as much as I and millions of others do, hit the phones and let your state senator know how you feel. Now is the time to make your voice heard.
Republican New York Assembly Woman Janet Duprey shares her experience of changing her vote on marriage equality from "No" to "Yes" in 2009. It's a great read in the upstate Times Union. I hope her colleagues in the Senate read it.
Of particular interest is once again, predictions of the sky falling on the issue of LGBT rights turn out to be unfounded. She says:
"After the vote, some were quick to write my political obituary. They said my constituents would never forgive me for changing my vote. They said the extremists who promised to defeat me would win.
They were wrong. The outpouring of support and appreciation I received was overwhelming. It came from my constituents and from advocates committed to standing behind those who support the freedom to marry.
That community of support made a difference. The moral and financial support, strategic advice and counseling and dedicated commitment by volunteers proved too much for those who campaigned against me because of my vote.
I did not lose my election because of my stand. Neither has any of the 72 Republican legislators who have voted for the freedom to marry.
They'll be collecting signature and encouraging Queens voters to call their Senators. This outreach action is aimed directly at critical population in the key Senate districts of Queens, NY.
Forest Hills Action; Post-carding and 'Stop and Dials' on Queens Boulevard. Take the E F M or R to Forest Hills 71 Av.
Shift: 5pm-8pm
It is an ideal location due to its easy access to the subway and because of the heavy and friendly foot traffic. A central commuting hub techinically is in Senator Stavisky's disctict, but is adjacent to critical swing Senators Shirley Huntley and Joseph Addabbo.
Seen on a listserve:
I love this location, and it was super easy getting signatures here last week. Plus - many of the signatures hit Huntley's district as well, so it's doubly effective as a site.
Press is expected, so nice photo-op for them would be nice.
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has long exploited Republican Dede Scozzafava's defeat in a 2009 Special Election in New York's 23th Congressional District to its fullest to serve as a warning to politicians to tow the line on denying marriage equality.
Maggie Gallagher loves to use the phrase "the Dede effect" to scare lawmakers from voting for same-sex marriage legislation, and it's been very effective.
NOM as sought to raise Scozzafava to iconic status as the electoral boogeyman of same-sex marriage. NOM loves to press the talking point that gay-friendly = Electoral Death.
And they're doing it again, seeking to make Scozzafava's loss all about her vote for marriage equality in the New York Assembly House. The new ad says:
But when Dede faced the voters again as a congressional candidate, she learned that New Yorkers do care about defending traditional marriage after all.
Actually. . . NOM? Not so much.
Those of us in New York who watched the race closely, know there was so much more to the story than just her one vote on marriage equality, which scarcely registered at all amidst all her other campaign problems and problematic policy positions.
There were a lot of reasons Republican Scozzafava lost that race. The very least of them her vote on marriage equality. Scozzafava failed to connect with her Republican base for a great number of affronts to conservative principles which ran far and wide, encompassing much, much more than just her support of marriage equality.
Since NOM is an out-of-state special interest group, it's understandable they wouldn't know the truth of the race. The real story from a real New Yorker after the fold.
Rev. Ariel Torres Ortega of Radio Visión Cristiana (another rally sponsor), spoke just one or two spots before NOM president Brian Brown; 4 or 5 spots before Democratic state Diaz. The fine man of the cloth delivered the real crowd pleaser at the 3:10 mark:
"Those who practice such things are worthy to death."
Fortunately, the good reverend won't have to get his own hands dirty! There are lots of folks in the Bronx happy to do God's work for him, like these guys:
Bronx, NY, October 11, 2010: He was beaten, bound and left under his mattress to die.
A terrified 40-year-old Bronx man described how he came face-to-face with the gang of deviant goons who allegedly sodomized and tortured his younger brother and two teenagers during a lurid night of homophobic rage.
New York magazine reported on the death threats the Democratic State Senator's guest made against LGBT New Yorkers on Sunday and added this:
Another pastor, Wanda Rolon, seemed to refer to newly-out pop singer Ricky Martin as "hell's ambassador." Say what you will about these anti-gay factions - they certainly do have a sense of camp.
Apparently, Senator Ruben's co-sponsor for the rally, the National Organization For Marriage's commitment to good Christian values includes a special loophole for the Eighth Commandment. They have a long history of stealing art, copywrited music and other materials. And their latest heist is a gay activist Joe Jervis' video of the rally that they posted as their own on YouTube. They get millions from the Catholic and Mormon Churches and they can't hire their own videographer?!
Keep up the good work spreading the Christian love Sen./Rev. Ruben Diaz, Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown and Rev. Ortega. Sounds like your message is really resonating! Christ would so be proud of you!
The kids over at Queer Rising, whose actions for marriage equality have been some of the more entertaining protests we've covered lately, were incensed when they heard of Diaz's plans to hold an anti-gay rally during the annual AIDS Walk. Faced with a conundrum about whether to counter-protest Diaz in the Bronx, or to support the largest fundraiser to fight HIV/AIDS of the year, they've come up with a pretty fun solution.
From their press release:
Queer Rising will have a large cut-out Ruben Diaz figure replete with "fabulous costume changes" that people will have the opportunity to take photos with at the AIDS Walk for $1.00. All proceeds of will be donated directly to GMHC, with suggested directing of funding to HIV/AIDS work specifically in the Bronx.
Queer Rising member Jake Goodman is quoted as saying, "We are deeply offended by his sullying this inspiring day of charity to promote an agenda of hate."
Despite the sad reality that the Bronx struggles with one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the country-and the fact that Diaz is himself an ex-intravenous drug user-Diaz devoted his day to entertaining non-constituents, fomenting homophobia and hatred over the imaginary problem of marriage equality, and aiming that hatred towards the LGBT community.
"If Senator Diaz cannot be bothered to advocate on his constituents' behalf, we will have to work to make up the difference and let them know that they are not abandoned," said Goodman.
You can find Queer Rising and the ersatz Diaz on the AIDS Walk route at Riverside Drive and W. 95th beginning at 10:30am.
National Organization for Marriage has dusted off the same playbook from California, Maine and elsewhere. They never have anything new. Same shit, new state.
This week, New York. Their ad is out, and it's the nothing new. From them, or from the opponents of LGBT equality, dating back to the days of Anita Bryant.
