Connect with us

Local

Lawyer: Va. marriage ban necessary for ‘procreation’

Anti-gay Alliance Defending Freedom files brief with federal appeals court

Published

on

Josh Duggar, Victoria Cobb, Family Foundation of Virginia, Allison Howard, Concerned Women for America, E.W. Jackson, Norfolk, gay marriage, same-sex marriage, marriage equality, Virginia, gay news, Washington Blade
Josh Duggar, Victoria Cobb, Family Foundation of Virginia, Allison Howard, Concerned Women for America, E.W. Jackson, Norfolk, gay marriage, same-sex marriage, marriage equality, Virginia, gay news, Washington Blade

A lawyer with the Alliance Defending Freedom argues in a brief submitted to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban is necessary for “procreation.” (Photo courtesy of the Family Foundation of Virginia)

A lawyer for an anti-gay legal group said in a brief filed with a federal appeals court on March 28 that Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban is necessary for the “procreation” of children.

“Redefining marriage harms marriage’s ability to serve those interests by serving marriage’s inherent connection to procreation and communicating that the primary end of marriage laws is to affirm adult desires rather than serve children’s needs, and suppressing the importance of both mothers and fathers to children’s development,” wrote Byron J. Babione of the Alliance Defending Freedom in a brief he filed with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., on behalf of Prince William County Circuit Court Clerk Michèle McQuigg.

Babione argued that U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen “sought to discredit these procreation- and child-focused purposes for marriage” in her Feb. 13 ruling that struck down Virginia’s constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

“Plaintiffs ask this court to use the law’s power to redefine the institution of marriage,” said Babione. “That redefinition would transform marriage in the public consciousness from a gendered to a genderless institution – a conversation that would be swift and unalterable, the gendered institution having been declared unconstitutional.”

Babione also cites the Witherspoon Institute in his brief to make the argument that it is “best for a child to be reared by his or her own mother and father.” The New Jersey-based conservative think tank largely funded Mark Regnerus’ study on the issue that a federal judge earlier this month dismissed as “entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration” in his ruling that struck down Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban.

“Genderless marriage communicates that marriage exists primarily for the government to approve emotional or romantic bonds, because those sorts of bonds (and not sexual conduct of the type that creates children) would be the prominent feature shared by the couples who marry,” said Babione.

David B. Oakley, who represents Norfolk Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer, III, in the case, said in a separate brief he filed with the federal appeals court on March 28 that Allen “began her opinion with the misconception that Virginia’s definition of marriage is solely based upon prejudice and animus towards gay and lesbian couples.” She opened her ruling with a quote from Mildred Loving, whose challenge of Virginia’s interracial marriage ban prompted the U.S. Supreme Court to issue its landmark Loving v. Virginia decision in 1967.

Oakley further argued Schaefer and others who issue marriage licenses would “face exposure to additional lawsuits” from those denied them if the 4th Circuit upholds Allen’s ruling.

“Same-sex marriage proponents want to open the door of marriage for their benefit and then slam it shut behind them,” wrote Oakley. “It will not be long before other groups come knocking.”

Court records indicate the Family Research Council on March 26 sought to file an amicus brief in the Bostic case, but the federal appeals court blocked it as “premature.” The Washington Blade was unable to immediately obtain a copy of the filing.

Timothy Bostic and Tony London of Norfolk and Carol Schall and Mary Townley of Chesterfield last year challenged the commonwealth’s marriage amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal – who filed a separate lawsuit last summer on behalf of Victoria Kidd and Christy Berghoff of Winchester and Joanne Harris and Jessica Duff of Staunton – have been allowed to join the Bostic case.

U.S. District Judge Michael F. Urbanski in January certified the ACLU and Lambda Legal lawsuit as a class action.

The federal appeals court on May 12 is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the Bostic case.

Attorney General Mark Herring earlier this year announced he would not defend Virginia’s marriage amendment that voters in 2006 approved by a 57-43 percent margin.

Briefs from the lawyers who are representing the plaintiffs are due to the court on April 11.

“Our attorneys will review the briefs from the clerks and will respond as appropriate in the brief the commonwealth will file by the April 11 deadline,” Herring spokesperson Michael Kelly told the Blade.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Norton reintroduces bill to ban discrimination against LGBTQ jurors in D.C. Superior Court

Congresswoman notes Congress controls local court system

Published

on

D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) on Friday, June 20, reintroduced her bill to ban discrimination against LGBTQ D.C. residents in the process for selecting people to serve as jurors in D.C. Superior Court.

“The bill would clarify that D.C. residents may not be excluded or disqualified from jury service in the local D.C. trial court, the D.C. Superior Court, based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” Norton said in a statement.

“Specifically, this bill would clarify that the term ‘sex,’ which is a protected class under the nondiscrimination law that applies to jurors in the D.C. Superior Court includes sexual orientation and gender identity,” Norton said.

She points out in her statement that under the D.C. Home Rule Act approved by Congress that created D.C.’s local government, including an elected mayor and City Council, the federal government retained control over the local court system.

“Therefore, until D.C. is given authority to amend Title 11 of the D.C. Code, which one of my bills would do, an act of Congress is required to clarify that LGBTQ+ jurors in the D.C. Superior Court are protected from discrimination,” according to her statement.

A spokesperson for Norton couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether Norton is aware of specific instances where residents were denied jury service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  

Online records of congressional action on Norton’s juror nondiscrimination bill show she had introduced it in 2019, 2021, and 2023, when it died in committee each year, except for the 117th Congress in 2022, when it was approved by a committee but died in the full House.

“During Pride month we are reminded of the many contributions of the LGBTQ+ community,” Norton said in her June 20 statement. “Nobody, including D.C. jurors, should be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, and D.C. juries should not be deprived of the service of LGBTQ residents,” she added.

Continue Reading

Photos

PHOTOS: Pride on the Pier

Blade’s WorldPride celebration ends with fireworks show

Published

on

The Washington Blade's Pride on the Pier. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Washington Blade’s second day of Pride on the Pier at The Wharf DC ended with a fireworks show on Saturday, June 7. The fireworks show was presented by the Leonard-Litz LGBTQ Foundation.

(Washington Blade photos by Michael Key)

The Washington Blade’s Pride on the Pier (Photo by Cedric Craig for Wild Side Media)
Continue Reading

Virginia

Hashmi to face Reid in Va. LG race

State senator won Democratic primary on Tuesday

Published

on

Ghazala Hashmi (Screen capture via One Vote At A Time/YouTube)

State Sen. Ghazala Hashmi (D-Chesterfield) will face John Reid in the race to become Virginia’s next lieutenant governor. 

Hashmi won the Democratic primary with 27.49 percent of the vote. She defeated former Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney, state Sen. Aaron Rouse (D-Virginia Beach), Babur Lateef, Victor Salgado and Alexander Bastani.

“Tonight, Virginians made history,” said Hashmi in a statement. “We didn’t just win a primary, we sent a clear message that we won’t be bullied, broken, or dragged backward by the chaos in Washington.”

Reid, a gay conservative talk show host, in April won the Republican nomination to succeed Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, who is running to succeed Gov. Glenn Youngkin. 

The incumbent governor days after Reid secured the nomination called for him to withdraw his candidacy amid reports that a social media account with his username included “pornographic content.” Reid, who would become the first openly gay person elected to statewide office in Virginia if he wins in November, has strongly denied the reports.

Former state Del. Jay Jones defeated Henrico County Commonwealth’s Attorney Shannon Taylor in Democratic attorney general primary. Jones will face Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares in November.

Youngkin cannot run for a second, consecutive term.

Former Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger will face off against Earle-Sears in November. The winner will make history as the first woman elected governor in the state’s history.

Continue Reading

Popular