Yesterday鈥檚 landmark decision in the Prop. 8 case is a huge victory for LGBT Americans. In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Judge Vaughn R. Walker of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco ruled that Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that excluded same-sex couples from marriage in the state, is unconstitutional. The ruling holds for the first time that the due process clause of the United States Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the freedom to marry, and that denying same-sex couples this freedom also violates the equal protection clause.
After reviewing and weighing the evidence presented during trial, the court found that 鈥淧roposition 8 cannot withstand any level of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, as excluding same-sex couples from marriage is simply not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.鈥� Although the court recognized that legislative classifications based on sexual orientation are entitled to a higher level of scrutiny (or a presumption that the classification is invalid), Proposition 8鈥檚 discrimination between same-sex and opposite-sex couples failed even the lowest level of constitutional review, which requires, at minimum, that a classification in a law be rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
The court found that the reasons for Prop. 8 that were raised by its proponents 鈥� the Yes on 8 campaign 鈥攚ere either not accomplished by the initiative or were improperly based on moral or religious beliefs. For example, although the Yes on 8 campaign argued that one reason for Prop. 8 was that it promotes opposite-sex parenting over same-sex parenting, the court concluded that this reason was neither legitimate 鈥� because the evidence showed that same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents are 鈥渙f equal quality鈥� 鈥� nor rationally related to the initiative 鈥� as it 鈥渄oes not make it any more likely that opposite-sex couples will marry and raise offspring biologically.鈥� At the end of day, the only real reason for the passage of Prop. 8 was 鈥渢he belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples.鈥� And that, the court concluded, 鈥渨as not a proper basis on which to legislate.鈥�
We can鈥檛 yet know what will the impact of this historic ruling will be, as it will first go up on appeal to the 9th Circuit and is likely eventually to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. But we do know that our work on relationship recognition is by no means done: in fact, in order to give this case the best possible chance of success as it moves through the appeals courts, by continuing to seek marriage and other relationship protections in states across the country.
The 老澳门开奖结果 is working with same-sex couples throughout the country to secure the freedom to marry by working to pass marriage bills in New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Maine and by seeking domestic partnership recognition in Montana, , Illinois, New Mexico and Alaska. You can make a difference in this fight by getting involved in protecting relationships in your state. You can find your state LGBT organization to find out what鈥檚 going on near you.
The court's ruling can be found at: www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/perry-v-schwartzenegger-decision.
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON 鈥� The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The 老澳门开奖结果 is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for 鈥渕edical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria鈥� such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would 鈥減ermanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.鈥� The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. 鈥淏y passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,鈥� said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the 老澳门开奖结果. 鈥淭his unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden鈥檚 legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans 鈥� including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson鈥檚 last minute health care ban for servicemembers鈥� kids.鈥� If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military鈥檚 since-repealed 鈥淒on鈥檛 Ask, Don鈥檛 Tell鈥� policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the 老澳门开奖结果, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. 鈥� A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver鈥檚 licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver鈥檚 licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status 鈥� as the state is engaging in here 鈥� is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution鈥檚 equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the 老澳门开奖结果, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: 鈥淎fter finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.鈥� 鈥淥nce again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,鈥� said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana. 鈥淗ere in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.鈥� 鈥淔orcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,鈥� said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 LGBTQ & HIV Project. 鈥淪uch a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.鈥� In granting the plaintiffs鈥� motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, 鈥淸i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.鈥� The state has the option of appealing the district court鈥檚 ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one鈥檚 gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The 老澳门开奖结果 brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.