Japan’s Nagoya High Court on March 7 ruled the lack of legal recognition of same-sex marriages violates the country’s constitution. 

The plaintiffs argued Japan’s Civil Code and Family Registration Act, which does not recognize same-sex marriages, violates the country’s constitution. They cited Article 14, Paragraph 1, which guarantees equality under the law and prohibits discrimination based on factors that include race, creed, sex, or social status. The plaintiff also invoked Article 24, Paragraph 2, which emphasizes that laws governing marriage and family matters must uphold individual dignity and the fundamental equality of the sexes.

The plaintiffs sought damages of 1 million yen ($6,721.80) under Article 1, Paragraph 1, of the State Redress Act, which provides for compensation when a public official, through intentional or negligent acts in the course of their duties, causes harm to another individual. The claim centered on the government’s failure to enact necessary legislation, which prevented the plaintiff from marrying.

The court noted same-sex relationships have existed naturally long before the establishment of legal marriage. It emphasized that recognizing such relationships as legitimate is a fundamental legal interest connected to personal dignity, transcending the confines of traditional legal frameworks governing marriage and family.

The court further observed same-sex couples encounter significant disadvantages in various aspects of social life that cannot be addressed through civil partnership systems. These include housing challenges, such as restrictions on renting properties, and financial institutions refusing to recognize same-sex couples as family members for mortgages. Same-sex couples also face hurdles in accessing products and services tailored to family relationships. While the court deemed the relevant provisions unconstitutional, it clarified that the government’s failure to enact legislative changes does not constitute a violation under the State Redress Act.

The lawsuit, titled “Freedom of Marriage for All,” brought together a large coalition of professionals, including more than 30 plaintiffs and 80 lawyers. They filed six lawsuits in five courts throughout Japan.

“We filed these lawsuits on Valentine’s Day, Feb. 14, 2019, in Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya, and Sapporo, and in September of that year in Fukuoka,” noted Takeharu Kato, director of Marriage for All Japan. “Then, in March 2021, the Sapporo District Court handed down the first ruling declaring the current laws unconstitutional, which received extensive worldwide media coverage. Subsequently, the Osaka District Court unfortunately ruled that the current law is constitutional, but among the 10 rulings handed down so far, nine have ruled that not recognizing marriage equality is unconstitutional.”

Kato is a lawyer who is part of the legal team in the Sapporo case. He is also a board member of Marriage for All Japan, a marriage equality campaign.

“The MFAJ (Marriage for All Japan) is fully supporting the lawsuits by publicizing the current status of the trials and the rulings in our websites and social networks, setting up press conferences at the time of the rulings,” Kato told the Washington Blade. “We also make the best of the impact of the lawsuits in our campaign by holding events with the plaintiffs of the lawsuits and inviting them to the rally at Diet (the Japanese parliament) members’ building.”

Kato said the campaign has significantly shifted public opinion, with recent polls indicating more than 70 percent of Japanese people now support marriage equality — up from approximately 40 percent before Marriage for All Japan launched. He also noted 49 percent of Diet members now back marriage equality.

Japan is the only G7 country that does not legally recognize same-sex couples. Taiwan, Nepal, and Thailand have extended full marriage rights to gays and lesbians.

Expressing disappointment, Kato said many Japanese politicians continue to resist marriage equality, despite overwhelming public support. Kato added Marriage for All Japan expects the Supreme Court to rule on their lawsuits in 2016.

“We believe that the Supreme Court will also rule that the current laws are unconstitutional,” he said. “However, the Supreme Court’s ruling alone is not enough to achieve marriage equality under the Japanese legal system. We should put more and more strong pressure on the Diet to legalize marriage equality in Japan as soon as possible.”

Several municipalities and prefectures issue certificates that provide limited benefits to same-sex couples, but they fall short of equal legal recognition.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s government has faced mounting pressure on the issue as public support for marriage equality has surged in recent years. Kishida has yet to push reforms within his own party; encountering fierce opposition from its traditional leadership.

His government in June 2023 passed Japan’s first law addressing sexual orientation and gender identity, aiming to “promote understanding” and prevent “unfair discrimination.” Activists, however, widely criticized the legislation on grounds it fails to provide comprehensive protections or extend marriage rights to same-sex couples.

Following their recent protests at school board meetings in Virginia to challenge the Trump-Vance administration’s anti-LGBTQ policies, a student-led rights group on Wednesday outlined plans to continue their actions.

The Pride Liberation Project released a statement in early March announcing their “March Month of Action” after their first round of protests. The Pride Liberation Project on Wednesday issued another press release that provided additional details.

“Queer students will rally at local school board meetings across Virginia, as they call for education leaders to reject the Trump-Musk’s administration escalating attacks against queer people.” said Conifer Selintung on behalf of the Pride Liberation Project. “Since taking office, the Trump-Musk administration has ignored the real issues facing our schools — like declining reading scores and the mental health crisis — and tried to bully queer students into the closet. Alongside other hateful attacks, they’ve attacked nondiscrimination protections, banned gender-affirming care, and whitewashed history.”

The Pride Liberation Project press release also included a statement from Moth, an LGBTQ student at McLean High School.

“I want to be able to go to school as myself, just like any other student,” said Moth. “To do that, I need my school board to stand up to bullies.”

The Pride Liberation Project has also released a schedule of rallies it plans to hold this month.

The first rally took place at the Prince William County School Board meeting in Manassas on Wednesday. A second event took place at the Roanoke County School Board meeting on Thursday.

Additional rallies are scheduled to take place in Rockingham and York Counties on March 24, Loudoun County on March 25, and Fairfax County on March 27.

An immigrant rights group that represents an LGBTQ asylum seeker from Venezuela says the Trump-Vance administration on March 15 “forcibly removed” him from the U.S. and sent him to El Salvador.

Immigrant Defenders Law Center Litigation and Advocacy Director Alvaro M. Huerta during a telephone interview with the Washington Blade on Tuesday said officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection alleged his organization’s client was a member of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuela-based gang, because of his tattoos and no other information.

“It’s very flimsy,” said Huerta. “These are the types of tattoos that any artist in New York City or Los Angeles would have. It’s nothing that makes him a gang member.”

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.”

“I proclaim that all Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older who are members of TdA (Tren de Aragua), are within the United States, and are not actually naturalized or lawful permanent residents of the United States are liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies,” said Trump in a proclamation that announced his invocation of the 18th century law.

The asylum seeker — who the Immigrant Defenders Law Center has not identified by name because he is “in danger” — is among the hundreds of Venezuelans who the U.S. sent to El Salvador on March 15.

Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia temporarily blocked the deportations. The AP notes the flights were already in the air when Boasberg issued his ruling.

Huerta said U.S. officials on Monday confirmed the asylum seeker is “indeed in El Salvador.” He told the Blade it remains unclear whether the asylum seeker is in the country’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT.

‘We couldn’t find him’

Huerta said the Immigrant Defenders Law Center client fled Venezuela and asked for asylum in the U.S.

The asylum seeker, according to Huerta, passed a “credible fear interview” that determines whether an asylum claim is valid. Huerta said U.S. officials detained the asylum seeker last year when he returned to the country from the Mexican border city of Tijuana.

Huerta told the Blade the asylum seeker was supposed to appear before an immigration judge on March 13.

“We couldn’t find him,” said Huerta.

He noted speculation over whether Trump was about to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, and the Immigrant Defenders Law Center “started getting concerned that maybe he was caught up in this situation.”

“He’s an LGBT individual who is an artist in Venezuela,” said Huerta.

Neither ICE nor CBP have responded to the Blade’s request for comment.

Huerta said it is “hard to say” whether the asylum seeker has any legal recourse.

“He still has an ongoing case in immigration court here,” said Huerta, noting the asylum seeker’s attorney was in court on Monday, and has another hearing in two weeks. “Presumably they should have to allow him to appear, at least virtually, for court because he still has these cases.”

Huerta noted the U.S. since Trump took office has deported hundreds of migrants to Panama; officials in the Central American country have released dozens of them from detention. Migrants sent to the Guantánamo Bay naval base in Cuba have returned to detention facilities in the U.S.

“Something where the government, kind of unliterally, can just say that someone is a gang member based on tattoos, without any offer of proof, without having to go to court to say that and then take them externally to what effectively a prison state (El Salvador), it certainly is completely just different than what we’ve seen,” Huerta told the Blade.

Huerta also spoke about the Trump-Vance administration’s overall immigration policy.

“The Trump administration knows exactly what they’re doing when it comes to scapegoating immigrants, scapegoating asylees,” he said. “They have a population that, in many ways, is politically powerless, but in many other ways, is politically powerful because they have other folks standing behind them as well, but they’re an easy punching bag.”

“They can use this specter of we’re just deporting criminals, even though they’re the ones who are saying that they’re criminal, they’re not necessarily proving that,” added Huerta. “They feel like they can really take that fight and run with it, and they’re testing the bounds of what they can get away with inside and outside of the courtroom.”