- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- March 2009
- October 2006
- July 2002
America's Leading Gay News Source
Supreme Court nears action on D.C. gay marriage case
The U.S. Supreme Court could decide as soon as Tuesday whether or not to hear a case seeking to force the District of Columbia to allow voters to decide whether to repeal the city’s same-sex marriage law.
According to the court’s public docket, the nine justices scheduled a private conference among themselves for Friday to discuss the case known as Jackson v. the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics. Under longstanding court rules, the justices usually announce a decision on whether to accept or reject a case on the Monday following such a conference.
“Generally, if a case is considered at a conference, viewers can expect that the disposition of a case will be announced on an Orders List that will be released at 10 a.m. the following Monday,” the court’s website says.
A court spokesperson said because a federal holiday, Martin Luther King Day, falls on Monday, the court is expected to release its decision on the Jackson case on Tuesday.
Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of a Beltsville, Md., Christian church, and other same-sex marriage opponents filed a petition with the Supreme Court Oct. 12 asking the court to consider hearing the case in a process known as a petition for a Writ of Certiorari. The case consists of their appeal of a lower court ruling that rejected their contention that the city must allow voters to decide the marriage question in a ballot initiative.
The D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the Board of Elections and Ethics’ decision to bar Jackson and his supporters from organizing a ballot initiative on grounds that, if approved, the initiative would violate the city’s Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act bans discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Jackson and his attorneys argue that the city did not have the authority to ban ballot measures that impact the Human Rights Act because only Congress could make such a change by amending the city’s Home Rule Charter. Gay rights attorneys have joined city attorneys in disputing that contention, claiming the city acted within the scope of the Home Rule charter in the 1970s when it put in place restrictions on certain ballot measures.
City attorneys defended those restrictions in a brief submitted before the Supreme Court on Dec. 17. The attorneys, among other things, argued that the case involves a local matter pertaining to the city’s initiative and referendum law. They noted that the high court has a longstanding precedent of deferring to state or D.C. appeals courts on cases that don’t have a national impact.
If the Supreme Court rejects Jackson’s request to take on the case, the D.C. Court of Appeals decision remains in force to permanently prevent a ballot measure on the same-sex marriage law.
If it accepts the case, it would become the first time the Supreme Court addresses a same-sex marriage-related issue. But the case would not address marriage itself or whether same-sex marriage is protected under the constitution — only the question of whether D.C. voters should be allowed to decide the issue through a ballot measure.
Arthur Spitzer, legal director of the ACLU’s D.C. area office, said it’s possible that the court won’t issue a decision on the Jackson case on Tuesday.
“If there’s no order that day, that’s also significant, meaning either that the justices were not able to decide in their first discussion, or that someone is writing a dissent from denial,” he said.
He was referring to a decision denying Jackson’s request that the court take the case.
Tagged with Bishop Harry Jackson, same-sex marriage, Supreme Court
We welcome your thoughtful, respectful comments. Please read our 'Terms of Service' page for more information about community expectations.
Comments from new visitors, flagged users, or those containing questionable language are automatically held for moderation and may not appear immediately.


view print edition
so a preacher from the next state over is sticking his nose in DC laws…. so if the christians are going to deny gays the same rights under the us constitution they have simply based on there religious views will they grant gay people a second tier citizenship along with lower tax rates
[Translate]
Touch screen popularity contests do not result in justice or fairness. Gay rights are human rights. No one no matter if they have a 51% majority or not should have the right to say I can’t marry the person I love so long as we are both consenting adults.
[Translate]
I’m sure the Bishop will run back to Maryland in time for the gay marriage fight this Spring.
[Translate]
Gay marriage is wrong. As my favorite quote goes, “God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve”. Being gay is not normal and i fell it is a disease.Physically guys are not meant to be with guys and girls are not meant to be with girls.
[Translate]