Search
Equality: one step closer
Governor Paterson has instructed state agencies to begin recognizing same-sex unions performed in other jurisdictions, domestic and foreign, in the state of New York.
In a directive issued on May 14, the governor’s legal counsel, David Nocenti, instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere “should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union.”
The revisions are most likely to involve as many as 1,300 statutes and regulations in New York governing everything from joint filing of income tax returns to transferring fishing licenses between spouses. [Emph. added]
Think about that for a moment: everything from income tax returns to fishing licenses presently treats gay and straight New Yorkers differently. Think about that massive legal disability when next you see a republican election mailer complaining about the 'special rights' gay people supposedly seek.
Let's just hope
Let's just hope that the Conservative Party and their ally Roger Adler don't mount another successful challenge against marriage equality in New York State. Now that Adler is running for judge in Brooklyn and wants the support of Democrats, he may choose to distance himself from the Conservative Party this time around. But he wrote an amicus brief against the last marriage equality law for the Conservative Party while also donating to the Conservative Party. So he may come through for them again.
Here we go again
Seems some people are already latching onto the exact arguements used by Roger Adler and the Conservative Party last time around to block marriage equality. According to Salon.com:
The precedent set by Adler and the Conservative Party last time around (separation of powers) will be the basis of this fight as well.
As to Mr. Duane Motley, he is nothing but a full time lobbyist who makes his living off trying to block all rights to homosexuals.
Paterson's right; Motley's wrong
Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states, in part: "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State." This means that, the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) notwithstanding (because it's clearly unconstitutional), New York and all other states are required to recognize marriages completed in any other state.
So if DOMA is unconstitutional, why hasn't it been struck down? Because it hasn't been challenged. In order to challenge a law, you must be directly affected by that law. In other words, a couple must get married in one state, then move to another state and be denied the full rights of marriage under DOMA. Then, and only then, can DOMA be challenged. Only recently have same-sex marriages begun to be performed in Massachusetts. There was a possible case (I'm not sure where it stands now) where a same-sex couple married in Massachusetts moved to Rhode Island and then filed for divorce. The last I heard, officials in Rhode Island hadn't decided whether to grant it, or deny it because of DOMA.
Governor Paterson is simply upholding the U.S. Constitution, as he pledged to do when he assumed the office of Governor.
The best news of the week
and one of the best reasons I can think of to put the State Senate in Democratic hands. We can race NJ for the honor of being the first state to legislate same-sex marriage into being. Then Motley, Adler et al. can start becoming footnotes to history. Decades from now, people will look back on these decisions the way we now look at Loving v. Virginia - with slightly morbid curiosity that there were actually laws on the books based on such bigoted social attitudes.
My (unformed) opinion of Paterson went way up because of this.