A retired Presbyterian minister was found guilty Friday by a church tribunal of presiding at the marriage of same-sex couples in 2008 and will be censured, pending an appeal.

The six-member panel announced its verdict in the case of the Rev. Dr. Jane Spahr, of San Francisco, who was accused of violating church law by performing 16 gay and lesbian ceremonies.

Spahr

After a four-day church trial that was equal parts Scripture lesson and celebration of marriage, a panel of church leaders from the Presbytery of the Redwoods voted 4-2 that Spahr should be censured because she “persisted in a pattern or practice of disobedience.”

But the six-person panel voted unanimously that the 68-year-old lesbian’s actions did not disrupt the “peace, unity and purity of the church” and praised her “faithful compassion” and her 35-year ministry to gays and lesbians throughout the country.

In its ruling, the panel called upon the church to re-examine its “fear and ignorance that continues to reject the inclusiveness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

“In the reality in which we live today, marriage can be between same-gender as well as opposite-gender persons, and we, as a church, need to be able to respond to this reality as Dr. Jane Spahr has done with faithfulness and compassion,” the panel noted.

The trial at Convenant Presbyterian Church in Napa was a difficult test for the national denomination, which has been split for years over whether to allow ordination of gay ministers and to permit ministers to sanction same-sex marriages.

The church’s highest court has previously held that Presbyterian ministers may bless same-sex unions as long as they do “not state, imply, or represent that a same-sex ceremony is a marriage.”

Gay marriage in California could resume next week as a federal judge today denied defendant’s motion for a permanent stay to his decision to overturn Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that reinstated the ban on same-sex marriage, but extended the temporary stay another week.

Unless another stay is ordered by a higher court, today’s ruling creates a new window of opportunity for same-sex couples to marry, similar to May 2008, when the State Supreme Court overturned California’s ban on same-sex marriages. About 18,000 couples were married before Proposition 8 was passed by 52 percent of the vote that November.

Gay and lesbian couples lined up at San Francisco City Hall all morning in anticipation of today’s ruling, and officials in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and other jurisdictions indicated that if Walker lifted the stay, they would be performing marriages today on a first come, first serve basis.

But the Judge’s ruling extended the temporary stay until 5 p.m. next Wednesday, August 18, effectively allowing Proposition 8 supporters time to appeal his decision to 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and dashing the hopes of hundreds of gay couples hoping to marry today.

Judge Walker

In today’s order, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker wrote:

“Because proponents fail to satisfy any of the factors necessary to warrant a stay, the court denies a stay except for a limited time solely in order to permit the court of appeals to consider the issue in an orderly manner.”

None of the factors the court weighs in considering a motion to stay favors granting a stay. Accordingly, proponents’ motion for a stay is DENIED. … The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment forthwith. That judgment shall be STAYED until August 18, 2010 at 5 PM PDT at which time defendants and all persons under their control or supervision shall cease to apply or enforce Proposition 8.

Final stay order here (PDF).

Walker ruled last week that Proposition 8 was in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment which guarantees of equal protection and due process of law.

In his decision, Walker said “moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians.”

But shortly after issuing his ruling, Walker issued a temporary “stay,” effectively leaving Prop 8 in tact while he considers whether his ruling should remain on hold as the case moves to the appellate court.

Walker’s ruling is expected to be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court, where it would be reviewed by a 3-person panel and their decision could be appealed to the full 9th Circuit and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the meantime, the 9th Circuit Court, however, could issue its own stay and prevent marriage licenses from being issued on August 18.

Proposition 8 supporters indicated last week they would also ask the appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency stay if to block same-sex marriages from occurring should Walker lift the stay.

Because the U.S. Supreme Court is not in session until October, the decision about lifting the stay is likely to be appealed to the lead Justice over the 9th Circuit, which is Justice Anthony Kennedy.

“It is clear that there is no basis for a stay of Judge Walker’s ruling striking down Prop 8,” according to a statement from Kate Kendell, Executive Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. “We hope that the Ninth Circuit will agree that no stay is warranted and will allow marriages to resume. The chance for same-sex couples to marry again is not only fair and just, but an affirmation of love and basic humanity.”

More on this story as it develops.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown filed motions in federal court late Friday, asking the judge to allow the state to begin performing same-sex marriages.

In his brief, Schwarzenegger called on U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker to lift the stay on his ruling that California’s gay marriage ban is unconstitutional, thereby allowing gay marriages to resume:

“The Administration believes the public interest is best served by permitting the Court’s judgment to go into effect, thereby restoring the right of same-sex couples to marry in California,” the brief read.

“Doing so is consistent with California’s long history of treating all people and their relationships with equal dignity and respect.”

The Governor’s brief here (PDF).

News of the Governor’s brief came shortly after Attorney General Jerry Brown filed a motion to lift the stay in the decision to overturn Proposition 8. In that motion, Brown wrote:

“While there is still the potential for limited administrative burdens should future marriages of same-sex couples be later declared invalid, these potential burdens are outweighed by this Court’s conclusion, based on the overwhelming evidence, that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the harm to the plaintiffs outweighs any harm to the state defendants.”

“…The Attorney General respectfully requests that Defendant-Intervenors’ request for a stay pending appeal be denied>”

Brown’s motion here (PDF).

Walker ruled Wednesday that the gay marriage ban created by Proposition 8 violates federal equal protections and due process laws.

However, he agreed to block gay marriages from immediately resuming until he can consider arguments on whether to keep the ban in effect while its supporters take their appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Both Schwarzenegger and Brown were named as defendants in the federal trial challenging Proposition 8, and both declined to defend it in court.

Walker

Is Judge Vaughn Walker gay? Does it matter?

Not surprisingly, supporters of Proposition 8 say the U.S. District Court judge who overturned California’s voter approved ban on gay marriage should have recused himself from the case because, they say, he is gay — and therefore is biased.

“The ‘trial’ in San Francisco in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case is a unique, and disturbing, episode in American jurisprudence,” Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the Board of NOM, said in a statement. “Here we have an openly gay (according to the San Francisco Chronicle) federal judge substituting his views for those of the American people and of our Founding Fathers who I promise you would be shocked by courts that imagine they have the right to put gay marriage in our Constitution. We call on the Supreme Court and Congress to protect the people’s right to vote for marriage.”

Although Walker has never publicly commented about his sexual orientation, Gallagher and others point to a February 7, 2010 article in the San Francisco Chronicle, effectively “outing” the judge.

“Judge Walker should have recused himself from this case since he is a practicing homosexual,” wrote Bryan Fischer of the American Families Association. “His own personal sexual proclivities utterly compromised his ability to make an impartial ruling in this case.”

So the question for Gallagher and Fischer, et. al., is: If a gay judge who rules against Prop 8 must be biased, wouldn’t a heterosexual judge who rules for Prop 8 be just as biased?

“I think it’s profoundly offensive to suggest that a judge who is not of the sexual orientation of the majority or the race of the majority or the religion of the majority is unfit to hear cases,” said Larry Levine, a professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento.

Levine added that judges of all races and creeds are legally bound to render impartial verdicts, and that Walker’s only reverence in his ruling was to the law.

“Are they saying that an African American judge can never rule on an affirmative action case and a Muslim can never rule on a case dealing with religious expression? If you follow their logic, that’s exactly what they’re saying.”

Which goes back to the question of “rational basis” for Proposition 8 and Judge Walker’s ruling:

“The evidence at trial shows that gays and lesbians experience discrimination based on unfounded stereotypes and prejudices specific to sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians have historically been targeted for discrimination because of their sexual orientation; that discrimination continues to the present.”

The claim that only a gay judge’s ruling would be biased, but a straight judge’s ruling would not, is nothing more than the same fear and hate mongering discrimination that fueled Prop 8 to begin with.

How many witnesses will they call to the stand to prove this theory?

Walker, by the way, didn’t seek out the Proposition 8 case – it was assigned to him at random.

[fbshare]

The federal judge who struck down California’s voter-approved ban on gay marriage must now decide whether the ban should remain in tact while the ruling makes its way through the appeals process.

Prop 8 opponents at a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn the gay marriage ban.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled Wednesday that Proposition 8 was in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantees of equal protection and due process of law.

But shortly after issuing his ruling, Walker issued a temporary “stay,” effectively leaving Prop 8 in tact while he considers whether his ruling should remain on hold as the case moves to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The stay prevents gay couples from marrying while the case is being appealed, but legal analysts speculate it is unlikely that Judge Walker would maintain the stay — judges often hesitate to do so after they have found people’s fundamental rights are being infringed.

On Thursday, Proposition 8 supporters filed their motion for an appeal one day before the Friday’s deadline. Walker asked both sides for written arguments on whether he should extend the stay.

If Walker decides to lift the stay, his ruling can take effect immediately, allowing California to resume issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Officials in several counties have already signaled they are ready to start issuing marriage licenses to gay couples should the stay be lifted.

That decision could create a new window of opportunity for same-sex couples to marry, similar to May 2008, when the State Supreme Court overturned California’s ban on same-sex marriages. About 18,000 couples were married before Proposition 8 was passed by 52 percent of the vote that November.

Already, Prop 8 supporters have said they would ask the appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency stay if that happens.

Ted Boutrous, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys in the case, said, “No one is harmed by people getting married. Our clients are hurt every day that Prop 8 is in effect and their constitutional rights are violated.”

If a stay is granted, same-sex couples could be in store for another long wait while the legal battle wages on. The appeals court posted a schedule Thursday for filing briefs in the case that extends through late December, meaning that it will not hold a hearing until early 2011.

While gay rights advocates from across the country celebrate Wednesday’s historic ruling in which U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, California’s 2008 voter approved ban on gay marriage, political groups, elected officials and activists on both sides issued reaction, ranging from jubilation to furiously denouncing the court’s ruling.

Following are excerpts from today’s statements; full text available by clicking the respective links:

Statement from Chad Griffin, Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights:

The lawsuit was initiated by the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), a nonprofit organization created to support the plaintiffs in the case.

“This decision follows the founding constitutional principle that every American is to be treated equally under the law. No law may violate the U.S. Constitution, and our courts were established to protect against unfair laws. Today was an example of our nation living up to its founding ideals.”

Protect Marriage.com Statement:

Andy Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponents of Proposition 8, said “Today’s ruling is clearly a disappointment. The judge’s invalidation of the votes of over seven million Californians violates binding legal precedent and short-circuits the democratic process. But this is not the end of our fight to uphold the will of the people for traditional marriage, as we now begin an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“It is disturbing that the trial court, in order to strike down Prop 8, has literally accused the majority of California voters of having ill and discriminatory intent when casting their votes for Prop 8.”

Evan Wolfson, Executive Director of Freedom to Marry:

“Today’s federal ruling strikes down a cruel and unfair constitutional amendment that should never have become law and affirms that the freedom to marry belongs to every American. As the first court to strike down race restrictions on marriage said in 1948, “the essence of the right to marry is freedom to join in marriage with the person of one’s choice.

“There is no gay exception in the Constitution to personal choice and the right to marry, and there is no good reason to continue excluding same-sex couples from marriage.”

National Organization for Marriage statement:

“Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial,” said Brian Brown, President of NOM.

“With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman. This ruling, if allowed to stand, threatens not only Prop 8 in California but the laws in 45 other states that define marriage as one man and one woman.”

HRC Statement:

The Human Rights Campaign – the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization – praised Wednesday’s historic decision:

“After hearing extensive evidence in support of marriage equality, and essentially no defense of the discrimination wrought by Prop 8, Judge Walker reached the same conclusion we have always known to be true – the Constitution’s protections are for all Americans, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese.

GLAAD Statement:

“The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the nation’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) media advocacy and anti-defamation organization, joined same-sex couples across the nation in applauding today’s historic decision to overturn Proposition 8.”

“After hearing extensive evidence in support of marriage equality, and essentially no defense of the discrimination wrought by Prop 8, Judge Walker reached the same conclusion we have always known to be true – the Constitution’s protections are for all Americans, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community,” said HRC President Joe Solmonese.

Maggie Gallagher, Former President of NOM:

“Did our Founding Fathers really create a right to gay marriage in the U.S. Constitution? It is hard for anyone reading the text or history of the 14th Amendment to make that claim with a straight face, no matter how many highly credentialed and brilliant so-called legal experts say otherwise.

“Judge Walker has added insult to injury by suggesting that support for marriage is somehow irrational bigotry, akin to racial animus. The majority of Americans are not bigots or haters for supporting the commonsense view that marriage is the union of husband and wife, because children need moms and dads.

“Judge Walker’s view is truly a radical rejection of Americans’ rights….”

Statement from California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger:

Schwarzenegger, named as a defendant in the case, commended today’s ruling. He opposed Proposition 8 and declined to defend the ballot measure in court.

“For the hundreds of thousands of Californians in gay and lesbian households who are managing their day-to-day lives, this decision affirms the full legal protections and safeguards I believe everyone deserves. At the same time, it provides an opportunity for all Californians to consider our history of leading the way to the future, and our growing reputation of treating all people and their relationships with equal respect and dignity.

“Today’s decision is by no means California’s first milestone, nor our last, on America’s road to equality and freedom for all people.”

Statement from California Attorney General Jerry Brown:

Brown was also named as a defendant in the case, and as with Governor Schwarzenegger, declined to defend the ballot measure in court.

“In striking down Proposition 8, Judge Walker came to the same conclusion I did when I declined to defend it: Proposition 8 violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution by taking away the right of same-sex couples to marry, without a sufficient governmental interest.”

Statement from Geoff Kors, Executive Director for Equality California:

“We are thrilled with today’s ruling, which affirms that the protections enshrined in our U.S. Constitution apply to all Americans and that our dream of equality and freedom deserves protection. Judge Walker has preserved our democracy by ruling that a majority cannot deny a minority group of fundamental freedoms. This is as much a victory for the soul of our nation as it is for the thousands of same-sex couples and their families who will be directly impacted.

“We are truly indebted to Ted Olson and David Boies and to the American Foundation for Equal Rights. We owe Governor Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown a great deal of gratitude for their unprecedented decision not to defend this discriminatory measure.”

Follow our complete coverage on Wednesday’s historic decision here.

For achived coverage on the trial, including opening and closing arguments and day-by-day reporting coverage during the trial, browse our extensive coverage here.

[fbshare]

A federal judge on Wednesday struck down California’s Proposition 8, the 2008 voter approved ban on gay marriage, ruling it “unconstitutional” and fails to “advance any rational basis” to deny gay men and lesbians a marriage license.

In his 136 page ruling, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker wrote:

“Plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Each challenge is independently meritorious, as Proposition 8 both unconstitutionally burdens the exercise of the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation.”

“Plaintiffs seek to have the state recognize their committed relationships, and plaintiffs’ relationships are consistent with the core of the history, tradition and practice of marriage in the United States.“

“Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians. The evidence shows conclusively that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite sex couples.”

Read the complete ruling here (PDF).

Walker presided over a 13 day non-jury trial earlier this year on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the first in federal court to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married without violating the U.S. constitutional guarantee of equality.

Judge Walker

Walker’s decision is expected to be appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Attorneys for the Proposition 8 defense team, anticipating the decision against them, filed court papers Tuesday night, asking Walker for a stay of his ruling. The motion indicated that the Proposition 8 lawyers will immediately ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the ruling.

In fact, within hours of handing down his decision, Walker issued a ruling granting a temporary stay of his order until Friday, allowing opponents of same-sex marriage time to file appeals, appearing to bar an immediate resumption of weddings between gays and lesbians in California.

To win a permanent stay pending appeal, Proposition 8 proponents must show that they are likely to prevail in the long run and that there would be irreparable harm if the ban is not enforced.

Plantiffs (left to right) Paul Katami, Jeff Zarillo, Kris Perry and Sandy Stier before the start of their trial in San Francisco. Photo credit: Reuters

The trial was instigated by a lawsuit filed by two same-sex couples — Kristin Perry, Sandra Stier, Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo — who said that Proposition 8 violated their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process.

“For our entire lives, our government and the law have treated us as unequal. This decision to ensure that our constitutional rights are as protected as everyone else’s makes us incredibly proud of our country,” Perry said.

“Kris and I have raised four children, own a home and have professional careers. But because of Proposition 8, our family is still not complete. For us, equal rights are about our family having the recognition and protections that other families have,” Stier said.

“We just want to get married, just like our friends, family and relatives can. We are thankful to live in a nation of equal laws,” Katami said.

“We hope this decision brings us closer to the day when Americans no longer have to fight in court for the rights the Constitution says we all already have. We are grateful that the American Foundation for Equal Rights, Ted Olson and David Boies came together to fight for us, and millions of others, so that finally, every American will truly be equal under the law,” Zarrillo said.

The lawsuit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, was initiated by the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), a nonprofit organization created to support the plaintiffs in the case. To represent the plaintiffs, AFER retained former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson and David Boies (who worked on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that gave George W. Bush the presidency in 2000).

AFER was founded by political consultant Chad Griffin, and counts Hollywood powerhouses Bruce Cohen, Dustin Lance Black and Rob Reiner among its board members.

Olson (left) and Boies

During the trial, Olson and Boies called 16 witnesses to testify against Proposition 8, including professors and historians from the nation’s top universities, experts in the fields of marriage, sociology and politics, and presented emotional testimony from gays and lesbians about why marriage mattered to them.

“Through its decision today, the court has acted in the best traditions of a legal system established to uphold the Constitution and the principles of equality upon which this nation was founded,” said attorney Theodore B. Olson. “On no less than 14 occasions, the Supreme Court has held that marriage is a fundamental right. This decision recognizes that Proposition 8 denied the plaintiffs, and tens-of-thousands of other Californians, that fundamental constitutional right and treated them unequally.”

“The Supreme Court has long held that marriage is a fundamental right. Equal protection under the law is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and this ruling affirms that universal right of every American,” plaintiff’s attorney David Boies said. “Depriving the fundamental right to marry causes grievous harm to millions of Americans and their children.”

The backers of Proposition 8 called only two witnesses, both of who made concessions under cross-examination that helped the plaintiff’s case.

Proposition 8, which outlawed gay marriages in California five months after the state Supreme Court legalized them, passed with 52 percent of the vote in November 2008 following the most expensive campaign on a social issue in U.S. history.

Wednesday’s ruling comes just weeks after a federal court in Boston ruled that a key part of the government’s Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional and took away a state’s right to define marriage.

The ruling came after Massachusetts sued the federal government over the law, saying it forced the state to discriminate against its citizens.

Walker’s ruling is the first in the country to strike down a marriage ban based on federal constitutional grounds — previous cases have cited state constitutions.

More on the Prop 8 ruling, including reaction from both sides, from LGBTQ Nation as it develops.

For achived coverage on the trial, including opening and closing arguments and day-by-day reporting coverage during the trial, browse our extensive coverage here.

This photograph is one of the few mementos Clay has left of his 25 years together with Harold.

[fbshare]

California’s Sonoma County has agreed to pay $600,000 to settle a lawsuit by an elderly gay man who claimed he was separated from his dying partner, accused of abuse, and left penniless when county officials auctioned the contents of their home.

Clay Greene, 78, of Guerneville, CA, filed the lawsuit earlier this year, claiming the county’s Public Guardian program discriminated against him because of his sexual orientation.

It began in 2008, when Greene’s partner of 25 years, Harold Scull, 88, was injured after falling down the front steps of the couple’s home and was taken to a local hospital.

Greene said that when Scull was in the hospital, Sonoma County officials denied visitation for the couple, contending they were mere “roommates,” despite signed wills, medical declarations and powers of attorney.

Three months later, Scull died alone and Greene was left with nothing.

The lawsuit also alleged that after Scull’s death, social workers forced Greene into a nursing home and sold the couple’s property, including art and heirlooms. The county’s lawyer, Gregory Spaulding, denied the discrimination claims but admitted mistakes in selling the couple’s property.

With his share of the money, which amounts to about $350,000 including an additional $50,000 from a Glen Ellen nursing home named in the suit, Greene will be able to live out his retirement in comfort.

“He’s very pleased,” said Greene’s attorney, Anne Dennis of Santa Rosa, who will receive half of the county settlement. “He thought he’d be dead before the county ever gave him money. And he’s relieved he doesn’t have to go to trial.”

In settling the suit, Greene agreed to drop allegations that county officials actions were the result of discrimination.

“What Clay and Harold lost can never be replaced, but this settlement brings a measure of justice to their story,” said Amy Todd-Gher, senior staff attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which represented Greene in conjunction with Davis.

[fbshare]

David Thompson, an attorney saddled with the unfortunate task of representing Prop 8 defendants, remarked in court during the federal trial that supporting the Prop 8 campaign was” political kryptonite,” according to the Washington Post.

Thompson, while cross-examining Stanford professor Gary Sergura, attempted to show that Prop 8 supporters “had been assaulted, gotten death threats and been subjected to economic boycotts,” and that the gay rights movement had suffered because of it.

In other words, Thompson was saying Prop 8 (a.k.a. “traditional marriage”) supporters are the victims here, not gay people. And that gay people have brought negative backlash upon themselves by standing up for their equal rights.

Sergura countered that he considered boycotts an acceptable political tool, but “organized violence or even broad disorderly behavior certainly has a negative impact.”  He said such behavior was “a cry for help or expression of frustration, or maybe the ultimate expression of powerlessness” by those whose lives were affected by the passage of Prop 8.

What would Thompson have the LGBT community do in response to having our equal rights stripped away? Sit back and take whatever hate-filled bigotry so-called “traditional marriage” supporters dish out with no repercussions?  Does he honestly believe his side would do the same if the shoe were on the other foot?  Judging from the hate speech [unpublishable here] that Prop 8 supporters were spewing out at Prop 8 rallies and during the trial, the answer seems to be a resounding “no”.

Lawrence King

[fbshare]

A California judge has denied a request by defense attorneys to delay the trial of a teen accused of murdering a gay classmate.

Ventura County Superior Court Judge Charles Campbell turned down the request from Brandon McInerney’s attorneys who were seeking more time to interview witnesses for the high-profile school shooting case.

McInerney, 16, who is being tried as an adult, is charged with first-degree murder and a hate crime in the Feb. 12, 2008, shooting death of 15 year-old Lawrence King.

“We can’t respond. We are not prepared,” McInerney’s lawyer, Robyn Bramson, said. “We have no case to put on.”

“We have no defense,” added McInerney’s other lawyer, Scott Wippert.

Brandon McInerney, charged with first-degree murder.

King, who dressed in a feminine style and told friends he was gay, was allegedly shot the back of the head by McInerney in a computer lab at E.O. Green School in Oxnard, CA.

The two boys had been sparring in the days before the killing, allegedly because King had expressed a romantic interest in McInerney, who was 14 at the time.

McInerney faces a maximum prison sentence of 50 years to life if he’s convicted of first-degree murder.

Prosecutors have offered to agree to a sentence of 25 years to life if McInerney pleads guilty to first-degree murder and a hate-crime allegation.

Prosecutors said they will be ready with testimony and evidence. Jury selection is expected soon, with opening statements later this month.

This photograph is one of the few mementos Clay has left of his 25 years together with Harold.

[fbshare]

The county of Sonoma, California is renowned for its beautiful rolling hills of wine vineyards and spa resorts, but it also has an ugly side.  This month, a jury there will begin hearing the case of Harold Scull and Clay Greene, an elderly couple who endured the worst nightmare imaginable at the hands of health care workers and county officials two years ago in the small town of Sebastopol.

A lawsuit accuses the county’s office of the public guardian/conservator of forcing the two men into separate nursing homes, auctioning off the contents of their home, and carting off choice heirlooms for themselves.

Sitting in his cramped studio apartment in Guerneville, CA, where he lives alone, Greene told PressDemocrat.com:

“They stole my furniture, put me in a retirement home and told me to shut up.  They took my cats. They took everything.”

It all started when Scull, 88, was injured after falling down the front steps of the couple’s home in 2008 and was taken to a local hospital.  Greene, 78, said that when Scull was in the hospital, Sonoma County officials denied visitation for the couple, contending they were mere “roommates”, despite signed wills, medical declarations and powers of attorney.

Greene said he and Harold were then forced by public officials to live in separate nursing homes.  Three months later, Harold died alone, and Greene was left with nothing.  Only with the help of dedicated and persistent court-appointed attorney Anne Dennis was Clay released from the nursing home following Harold’s death.

County attorney Gregory Spaulding said the case is “about domestic abuse, not gay rights.”  Spaulding alleges that Scull was hospitalized after he was attacked by Greene, and their belongings were sold for about $35,800 to cover expenses for their care.

“When the facts come out, the story that’s being thrown out will be found inaccurate in a number of respects,” Spaulding said. “The case came to the public guardian when Scull reported he had been assaulted by Clay Greene.”

However, NCLR  executive director Kate Kendall doesn’t see it that way. She told the Windy City Times, “In the 33 years of our organization’s history, this case is perhaps among the most tragic NCLR has ever been involved in. Clay and Harold had taken all of the necessary precautions to protect them in a time of crisis. Not only were their relationship and legal documents ignored, Clay and Harold literally lost everything.”

“Because of the county’s actions,” Kendall continued, “Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 25 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.”

Stu Maddox, director of a new documentary called Gen Silent, about the plight of elderly LGBT people, said, “Here we are in California, where the state has required sensitivity training for LGBT elders, where we have some measure of legal protections as LGBT citizens, and yet here is my worst fear staring me in the face.  We discovered in the film this kind of disaster happening no matter how progressive the community or the laws. It made me realize how important it is to have LGBT involvement in the oversight of the actual places and the people caring for us.”

Anne Dennis, along with Stephen O’Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O’Neill, Barrack & Chong, will represent Clay in the lawsuit against the county, the auction company, and the nursing home, with technical assistance from NCLR.

The case is Greene v. Sonorma County. Gen Silent premiered May 8th in Boston.

Want to help?

• Sign the petition demanding justice at Change.org
• Join the Facebook group
• Support the work of NCLR

Editor’s Note: The trial in the case of Greene v. Sonoma County is scheduled to commence on July 27, 2010 in Sonoma County Superior Court in Santa Rosa, CA. The Courtroom View Network (CVN) will webcast gavel-to-gave coverage.

Perkins arrested shortly after Castro shooting.

The man arrested on suspicion of opening fire on a crowd attending a San Francisco gay pride event Saturday night is no longer believed to be the gunman responsible for murdering 19-year-old Stephen Powell and injuring two others.

According to the San Francisco Examiner:

The gun found on the man arrested in connection with the shooting death of a 19-year-old during Pink Saturday festivities does not match the bullets used in the slaying.

Stephen Powell died Saturday after being targeted at the San Francisco Pride celebration in the Castro district. A gunman approached the young man and fired four bullets into his chest. Two other bystanders were injured.

The San Francisco Appeal reports:

Police arrested Ed Perkins, 20, after he was found near the crime scene in possession of a .357-caliber revolver, and he was initially charged with one count of murder and several firearms violations.

Investigators, however, have determined none of the seven shots fired into the crowd were from Perkins’ weapon, and no witnesses were able to put Perkins at the scene, the district attorney’s office said.

Police are still looking for a suspect in the shooting.

Photo via twitpic @sharayray

Updated: 2 p.m PDT.

[fbshare]

One man was fatally injured and two other people wounded in a shooting in San Francisco’s Castro District late Saturday night during the “Pink Saturday” gay pride events.

Police arrested a 19-year old man in connection with the shooting, though it’s not clear what prompted the violence, reports KNTV.

Investigators say it is too early to know if the shooting was motivated because of anything related to Gay Pride weekend. So far they are not calling the shootings a hate crime and pride celebrations were scheduled to continue as planned for Sunday.

Update: The San Francisco medical examiner’s office announced Sunday afternoon that 19-year-old Stephen Powell had died from his injuries. The other two people were shot in the leg.

San Francisco police said that the shooting was not a hate crime, but the result of some sort of personal dispute.

SFPD spokesman Samson Chan said it appears that the shooter knew at least one of the three victims.

The shooting occurred on Market Street near Castro Street in front of Pottery Barn and The Cafe nightclub, according to witnesses.

This weekend is Gay Pride weekend in San Francisco. It marks its 40th anniversary this year.

Photo credit.

The Mormon Church has agreed to pay a $5000 fine for failing to report some campaign staff contributions it made in support of Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure in California that outlawed same-sex marriage.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been ordered a $5,539 fine to California’s Fair Political Practices Commission for failing to properly report contributions to help the “Yes on 8″ committee.

The fine comes in response to a complaint filed in November 2008 by Fred Karger, a gay-rights activist and co-founder of Californians Against Hate, who accused the Mormon Church of failing to report the value of the work it did to support Proposition 8.

“The investigation revealed that the church unintentionally failed to file daily reports detailing approximately $37,000 in non-monetary contributions,” a statement on the church’s website read. “The amount of contributions not reported represented the cost of staff time spent by church employees on activities to help the Yes on 8 committee during the final two weeks of the election.”

Karger said Tuesday the fine validates his allegations that the LDS Church tried to “cover up” its role in banning same-sex marriage in California.

Ashburn

Sen. Roy Ashburn, a Republican from Bakersfield, who came out in March after the DUI arrest placed him at a Sacramento gay nightclub, said he was “no longer willing or able to remain silent” on issues that affect sexual orientation and the rights of individuals.

In a remarkably candid interview Thursday, Ashburn called himself a “hypocrite.”

“My practice in my entire political career when it came to gay issues was to prevent any kind of spotlight from being shined my way, because I was in hiding. So casting any kind of vote might, could in some way, lead to my secret being revealed,” he said.

“That was terrifying to me. It was paralyzing. So I cast some votes that have denied gay people of their basic, equal treatment under the law, and I’m not proud of it. I’m not going to do that again.”

Ashburn’s previous voting record revealed he had voted against every gay rights measure in the State Senate since taking office, including Recognizing Out-Of-State Same-Sex Marriages, Harvey Milk Day, expanding Anti-Discrimination Laws, and a Senate resolution to declare Proposition 8 unconstitutional.

On Thursday, Ashburn was the only Republican senator to vote in support of allowing openly gay people to serve in the military; the resolution passed the state Senate on a vote of 24-7.

But Ashburn was among several Republicans who opposed SB 906, which was also approved by the state Senate and would clarify that clergy members would not be required to perform a civil marriage that was contrary to his or her faith.

Ashburn said it was “troublesome’’ that the bill also described marriages as “civil’’ unions. Proposition 8, approved by voters, gave a definition of marriage, and Ashburn worried the new definition in the bill could muddy the water and lead to new lawsuits on the issue.

Last year, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law the Harvey Milk Day bill, sponsored by Equality California and authored by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco).

Milk in the 1978 Gay Freedom Parade in San Francisco.

In honor of the day, Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors issued the following statement:

I am truly thrilled that after several years of hard work, we have succeeded in making Harvey Milk’s birthday an official State Day of Recognition, honoring his incredible legacy and invaluable contributions to our state and to our nation. We are going to celebrate the way Harvey would, by going door-to-door, sharing our stories across the state in neighborhoods that don’t yet support the freedom to marry for same-sex couples.

We will redouble our efforts to elect only those candidates who will be champions for complete equality, just as Harvey was. We will continue standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies fighting for social justice across the spectrum, just as Harvey taught us to.

As we celebrate his life on this historic day, we will draw strength and inspiration from Harvey’s courage in our ongoing struggle to achieve our collective dream of full equality.”

In honor of Harvey Milk Day, Equality California is hosting a day of action on Saturday, May 22, with more than 1,000 Californians expected at rallies across the state followed by door-to-door canvassing to build support for the freedom to marry for same-sex couples.

Milk was one of the first openly gay politicians to be elected to public office when he won a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977. He and Mayor George Moscone were shot and killed by former Supervisor Dan White at City Hall on Nov. 27, 1978.

While Milk served only 11 months in office, he was responsible for passing a stringent gay rights ordinance for the city.

Despite his short career in politics, Milk became an icon in San Francisco and a martyr for gay rights, and has been referred to as “the most famous and most significantly open LGBT official ever elected in the United States”.

Milk was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2009 by President Obama.

Saturday would have been Milk’s 80th birthday.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the lower house adopted a measure Monday to strike a line of state code that directed the Department of Mental Health to conduct research into “the causes and cures of sexual deviation” including “the causes and cures of homosexuality.”

Supporters say a change was long overdue in the law, which was written in 1950 in reaction to a series of sex crimes, including the molestation and murder of a 6-year-old girl in Los Angeles.

The bill, approved 62-0 Monday by the state Assembly, now goes to the state Senate.

Los Angeles-based Love Honor Cherish carried out a volunteer-driven signature-gathering effort after large groups decided there was not enough time to ensure victory this year, even with some polls showing more than 50 percent support for same-sex marriage, according to Reuters.

John Henning, who heads Love Honor Cherish, declined to say how many signatures had been gathered since the all-volunteer campaign got underway in late November. He said 694,000 valid signatures were required by Monday.

“There comes a point where the intake of signatures isn’t rapid enough to make up your deficit,” Henning told the Los Angeles Times. “We started to realize last week that we weren’t going to make it.”

Meanwhile, a constitutional challenge of Proposition 8 is pending in a federal court in San Francisco.

Closing arguments in the case, expected last month, have been delayed because of disputes over the production of documents sought by proponents of the initiative.

At issue is a 60-year-old section of the Welfare and Institutions code that classifies homosexuals as “sexual deviants” and directs the state Department of Mental Health to conduct research on “deviations conducive to sex crimes against children.”

The bill moved out of the Assembly Committee on Public Safety on a 4-0 vote, with one Democrat and two Republican members abstaining from voting.

They said the law’s reference to homosexuality should be removed but that they want the state to continue researching sex crimes.

Spahr
(Santa Rosa Press Democrat)

A retired Presbyterian minister faces prosecution by her own church — for the second time in four years — for officiating the marriages of same-sex couples.

The Rev. Jane Spahr, 67, presided over 16 other same-sex unions during the five-month period in 2008 when same-sex marriage was legal in California.

The Presbyterian church asserts that while the marriages may have been legal under state law, they were “expressly prohibited” by the church.

The constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) defines marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman. The church’s Supreme Judicial Council has ruled that ministers can bless same-sex unions as long as the ceremonies are not called a marriage and don’t mimic traditional weddings.

Spahr was previously acquitted by the church’s highest tribunal in 2008, capping a two-year disciplinary case.

“This is what we are called to do,” Spahr said, asserting, as she did before, that she conducted the marriages as a “matter of conscience.”

Spahr, a lesbian who lives in San Francisco, used to lead a ministry for gay Presbyterians until she retired in 2007.

Lopez
(Photo: Fresno City College Rampage)

Fresno City College officials said they plan to take action against an instructor accused of presenting religious-based and anti-gay views as fact in a health class.

Campus administrators have concluded that instructor Bradley Lopez violated a campus anti-discrimination policy when he told students that homosexuality is a mental disorder that should be treated with psychotherapy.

In a March 8 letter to three students who complained, the school said its investigation found that Lopez engaged in conduct that could create a hostile learning environment, reports the Fresno Bee.

The three students were part of a complaint filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in February.

The letter from Christopher M. Villa, Fresno City’s vice president of student services, said that Lopez’s conduct could have unreasonably interfered with students’ learning by making insulting comments directed at homosexuals.

A copy of the letter was posted on the website of the college’s student newspaper, The Rampage.

The college said it would “take appropriate action to address the violations policy and regulations and prevent them from recurring in the future.”

The parents of the boy targeted by the threatening and derogatory posts on his website, withdrew him from Harvard-Westlake School in Studio City and moved to Northern California to protect him from classmates who had incorrectly labeled him as gay and pronounced him “wanted dead or alive.”

The 2-1 ruling by the 2nd District Court of Appeal will allow a lawsuit to go forward that was brought by the 15-year-old boy’s father, reports the Los Angeles Times.

The 1st Amendment doesn’t protect hostile Internet banter if the messages can be taken as genuine threats of harm, the court ruled.

Legal analysts said the decision sends a warning signal that there are boundaries even on the Internet, and that the court ruling also appears to toughen standards for court intervention in cyber-bullying cases.

Campbell

A group that promotes traditional marriage is funding a new statewide ad campaign in California against U.S. Senate candidate Tom Campbell — a Republican who supports gay marriage.

The Washington, D.C.-based National Organization for Marriage began running the 30-second television ad Monday. Campbell openly opposed Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative that banned gay marriage in California.

In 2008, he wrote an editorial piece where he laid out “Why Republicans should vote no on Prop. 8.”

“Republicans believe deeply that government should be limited. Government has no business making distinctions between people based on their personal lives. That’s why, as a Californian and a Republican who has held elective office at the federal and state levels, I will be voting No on Proposition 8.” – Campbell

The NOM ad campaign links Campbell’s views to Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer.

Watch it here:

The San Francisco District Attorney’s Office said there were plans to file an amended complaint against the men — Shafiq Hashemi, 21, Sayed Bassam, 21, and Mohammad Habibzada, 24 — based on evidence from a videotape allegedly found with the men that appears to show 11 additional victims.

All three men were arrested the night of the Feb. 26 for allegedly shooting a 27-year-old San Francisco man in the cheek as he exited a Mission District bar.

At the time of the arrest, “The suspects did make a confession, basically stating that they came to San Francisco to target gay people,” police spokesman Officer Samson Chan said.

Prosecutors have charged all three men with assault with a deadly weapon, negligent discharge of a firearm, hate crimes and attempted mayhem, a charge relating to the possibility of a disabling or disfiguring injury.

“I am gay,” said state Sen. Roy Ashburn of Bakersfield, breaking his silence on a conservative AM talk-radio show. “Those are the words that have been so difficult for me for so long.”

Ashburn

The admission follows days of intense scrutiny and ended mounting speculation that began last week when Ashburn was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving on March 3.

A Sacramento television station reported that Ashburn was at a popular gay dance club that night and several people have said they have seen the senator at gay bars in the city.

Ashburn’s sexual orientation is at issue because he has one of the staunchest records of voting against bills that would expand rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Californians.

He defended his voting record, saying he cast votes that his constituents wanted.

“I felt my duty — and I still feel this way — is to represent my constituents, not my own point of view, not my own internal conflict,” Ashburn told KERN Radio host Inga Barks.

Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California, said Monday that he hopes the senator’s revelation will lead him to change his voting patterns.

“Equality California looks forward to working with the Senator to use his experience to educate the people in his district on why he deserves the same rights and privileges as a gay man as any other Californian,” Kors said in a statement.

Ashburn said he does not plan to run for any public office after his term ends this year.

The Feb. 26 incident took place at about 10 p.m. when the 27-year-old San Francisco man had just come out of a Mission District bar when he was shot once in the cheek by suspects in a nearby car, which then drove off, police spokesman Officer Samson Chan said.

Police arrested three assailants, Shafiq Hashemi, 21, Sayed Bassam, 21, and Mohammad Habibzada, 24. Inside their vehicle was a “rifle-style” BB gun and a video camera, which investigators later discovered had recorded the shooting.

“The suspects did make a confession, basically stating that they came to San Francisco to target gay people,” Chan said.

Ashburn

The California Highway Patrol pulled over (State) Senator Roy Ashburn at 2:00 a.m. Wednesday after an officer noticed a black Chevy Tahoe swerving at 13th and L Streets, reports KOVR- TV.

Ashburn, a father of four, is a Republican (State) Senator with an extensive history of opposing gay rights. A male passenger, who was not identified as a lawmaker, was also in the car but was not detained.

Ashburn issued a statement on the arrest Wednesday afternoon:

“I am deeply sorry for my actions and offer no excuse for my poor judgment. I accept complete responsibility for my conduct and am prepared to accept the consequences for what I did. I am also truly sorry for the impact this incident will have on those who support and trust me – my family, my constituents, my friends, and my colleagues in the Senate.”

According to Project Vote Smart, Ashburn’s voting record shows he has voted against every gay rights measure in the State Senate since taking office including Recognizing Out-Of-State Same-Sex Marriages”, Harvey Milk Day and Expanding Anti-Discrimination Laws.

Stay tuned for the next installment — you know, the one where the hypocrite goes to rehab and gets cured of his gay demons.

Perez

Democrat John A. Pérez, a first-term legislator representing parts of downtown L.A. and East Los Angeles, will face as one of his first tasks the challenge of preserving social programs for his political base as the state struggles with a roughly $20-billion budget deficit.

The Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles sang “God Bless America” and “Brand New Day” from “The Wiz.”

In his speech, Perez noted gay and lesbian politicians that came before him, and said his achievements would not be possible if not for “people like Elaine Noble, Harvey Milk and Sheila James Kuehl, who blazed a trail of pride and purpose for gay and lesbian Californians to serve our state.”

“Speaker Pérez is a role model and an inspiration to the LGBT community, especially to LGBT youth struggling to find acceptance at home and in school. We wish him the very best of luck as he embarks on this momentous journey and look forward to continuing our partnership with him in our mission to achieve full equality for LGBT Californians,” said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California.

Assembly Speaker is considered the second most powerful position in California politics. Democratic members of the House elected Pérez unanimously in December of last year.

From KOVR-TV:

Graphic anti-gay words and phrases were found spray-painted on the campus Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Resource Center on Saturday morning, the latest in a series of incidents on UC campuses across the state.

A Jewish UC Davis student found a swastika carved into her dorm room door late last week, and a series of racially-charged incidents — started by an off-campus party mocking urban stereotypes — have sparked an outcry at UC San Diego.

The graffiti at the Davis LGBT Center drew comment from students who said such incidents are rare on campus.

Normally an act like this would be painted over and cleaned up within hours. But the LGBT center wants the public to see what an attack like this looks like.

The University of California system has seen it share of tension in recent weeks. Protests erupted at UC San Diego on Thursday after a fraternity held a barbecue mocking black history month.

Ashley

A beauty queen hopeful vying to become Miss California is making headlines for her hatred of gays, and has the city of Beverly Hills is crying foul over her false representation of the city.

According to AP:

Beverly Hills Mayor Nancy Krasne said Wednesday she is outraged over a Miss California USA contestant who is claiming to represent the city in the upcoming pageant and who spoke out against same-sex marriage in recent media interviews.

Krasne said in a statement that 23-year-old Lauren Ashley does not live in Beverly Hills or represent the city in any capacity. Krasne said she was shocked to see statements made by a beauty pageant contestant under the name of Beverly Hills, “which has a long history of tolerance and respect.”

The issue became a sore point for city officials after Ashley was quoted extensively as saying same-sex marriage goes against God and the Bible.

Ashley recently told Fox News and other outlets that “in Leviticus it says, ‘If man lies with mankind as he would lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.’ The Bible is pretty black and white.”

In a statement Wednesday, the city said it was “shocked” by Ashley’s description of herself as “Miss Beverly Hills.”

The city “does not sponsor a beauty pageant and has no association with Miss California USA,” the statement said. “As such, there should be no individual claiming the title of Miss Beverly Hills.”

In fact, there is no proof that Lauren Ashley ever lived in Beverly Hills. There is no listing for her in the city and she had provided no documentation showing she currently resides in the area. According to Beverly Hills officials, Ashley lives in Pasadena.

Representatives at the Miss California USA pageant told TMZ that contestants are allowed to choose which area they represent — and as long as they add the letters “USA” to the end of the title, it doesn’t have to be approved by the city.

The American Civil Liberties Union charged Monday that instructor Bradley Lopez is wrongly presenting religious-based and anti-gay views as fact in an introductory health class, and demanded the campus ensure health-science classes teach unbiased and medically accurate information.

According to the Fresno Bee:

Elizabeth Gill, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, said Lopez is teaching his personal views as science — neglecting the established facts that he should present to students. “Instead of teaching about abortion as an option for women and about the actual health implications, he’s teaching that abortion is murder based on the Bible.”

Gill charged in her letter that Lopez has presented homosexuality as a “biological misapplication of human sexuality” that can be treated with counseling or hormone supplements. He also used Bible passages as empirical evidence that life begins at conception to support his assertion that abortion is murder, she said.

In a section on environmental health, Gill alleged, Lopez offered a biblical quote about the world ending in flames as “the real global warming we should be worried about.”

In a statement released Monday, Fresno City College President Dr. Cynthia Azari said, “The College takes its non-discrimination and prohibition of harassment policies seriously, investigates alleged violations and takes appropriate actions to enforce compliance. Beyond that, we don’t comment on personnel matters for confidentiality reasons.”

Azari said officials are conducting an investigation into allegations by students filed in December.

Because the class is taught at a publicly funded college, the ACLU contends that such lectures violate federal and state constitutional protections that guarantee the separation of church and state.

Cole White, 24, surrendered a day after a judge signed a $50,000 arrest warrant charging him with assault and a hate crime allegation.

“He provided a brief statement and said he would like to speak to an attorney,” Santa Cruz police spokesman Zach Friend said.

White is accused of beating up a Santa Cruz man in his 30s at the Blue Lagoon, a gay-friendly nightclub in downtown Santa Cruz early Sunday, according to police.

The attack happened after White allegedly yelled gay slurs at the man, calling him a “fag.”

Watch the report from KGO-TV:

Cole White, 24, is wanted for assault and a hate crime enhancement, according to Santa Cruz police.

Cole White

The Blue Lagoon is a popular gay-friendly bar. The victim, identified only as Chris, says he was near the bar when Cole White started aggressively yelling profanities at him.

“Right in front of the Blue Lagoon, the person started yelling ‘fag’ at me,” Chris said, adding that he took a photo of White on his cell phone, which made the suspect even angrier.

“This is a very disappointing thing to hear that in our community, in this day and age, that we would have this kind of issue, this kind of intolerance, that someone would be attacked exclusively because of their sexual orientation. It is inexcusable and unconscionable,” says Zach Friend with the Santa Cruz Police Department.

White is no stranger to Santa Cruz police. He was arrested six times last year — most of which were for public intoxication.

Anne Marie Schubert

At her campaign Web site, Anne Marie Schubert, a deputy district attorney for Sacramento County, promotes herself as a law and order and victim’s rights candidate with several endorsements from local law enforcement organizations.

According to voter records, Anne Marie Schubert is a registered Republican.

Anne Marie Schubert, 45, doesn’t mention her family or sexual orientation on her campaign Web site. But Sacramento County tax records show that she purchased her home with Julie Greenberg in March 2005, where the women live together raising two children.

Frank Schubert told the Bay Area Reporter the two women are in a registered domestic partnership.

“She and Julie are in a domestic partnership, and they have two wonderful children,” he said.

Anne Marie Schubert declined to discuss same-sex marriage or Proposition 8, citing judicial code.

Asked specifically about her position on the marriage equality issue, Anne Marie Schubert replied, “In all honesty, I do not believe it would be appropriate for me to give you my personal opinion on Prop 8.”

“What I can tell you about myself is simple: I have the knowledge, skill and ability to be a well qualified judge,” she said, adding that a person’s sexual orientation is irrelevant to being a judge.

Frank Schubert ran both the Yes on 8 campaign in California in 2008 and the Yes on 1 campaign in Maine this year, which repealed that state’s marriage equality law.

Full story from Dan Aiello at the Bay Area Reporter.

Among the new laws, each sponsored by Equality California, include a bill that recognizes the marriage of thousands of same-sex couples regardless of when or where they were married, a bill increasing services to LGBT survivors of domestic violence and a third recognizing the contributions of slain civil rights leader Harvey Milk.

The Marriage Recognition and Family Protection Act, introduced by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), holds that same-sex couples married in any state or nation anytime before the passage of Proposition 8 must be recognized as married spouses in California, regardless of whether they married in California or in another state or nation.

In addition, the new statute also confirms that same-sex couples married outside of California after November 5, 2008, must be given all of the rights, protections and responsibilities of married spouses under California law, with the sole exception of the designation of “marriage.”

“This vital bill will provide much needed protections for same-sex couples who have legally married out of state, or will in the future, and who deserve to be treated like any other married couple,” said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California.

“This bill will allow same-sex couples to get married in other states and countries and ensure they are treated equally under the law when they return to California. Ultimately, however, restoring the freedom to marry is the only way to ensure that all Californians receive the dignity and respect that come with marriage,” said Kors.

Also becoming state law is the LGBT Domestic Violence Programs Expansion Bill, which was authored by Speaker-Elect Assemblymember John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles).

The bill expands access for LGBT service providers to a state fund within the California Emergency Management Agency, which supports LGBT-specific domestic violence programs across the state. The fund, originally established as part of another EQCA-sponsored bill in 2006, is subsidized by a $23 fee on domestic partner registrations.

The new bill would also allow for more than four organizations to apply for programmatic funding each fiscal cycle and eliminates the requirement for providers to offer shelter – impediments to many smaller LGBT organizations that inadvertently keep several California communities from providing any services for LGBT survivors of domestic violence.

Harvey Milk Day, which will be celebrated on May 22, 2010, marks the first time in the nation’s history that a state will officially recognize and celebrate the contributions of an openly LGBT person with an annual “day of special significance.” The bill was also introduced by Senator Leno.

“We are grateful to the LGBT Caucus, our allied lawmakers, and the Governor for making these landmark measures the law in California, as these bills will dramatically improve the lives of LGBT Californians and their families,” Kors said. “We look forward to the year ahead and to advancing our mission of achieving true and full equality for LGBT Californians.”

Click for more information about EQCA’s legislation.

The Police Commission voted two months ago to end its relationship with the Scouts effective January 1, 2010, because of the organization’s policies barring gays, atheists and agnostics from being troop leaders.

The program had been operated by the Learning for Life Foundation, a subsidiary of the Boy Scouts.

LAPD Deputy Chief Earl Paysinger said the department will run the youth program under a different name independent of the Boy Scouts, with the program being funded in part through donations.

Police Commissioner Robert Saltzman, who is openly gay, said that since he cannot support the Boy Scouts, he has invested a lot of time to ensure the new youth program is “as good or — I’m confident — better than the program it replaces.”

“The Boy Scouts are clear that they discriminate based on sexual orientation, gender identity and religion, and the result of that is I could not be active on the Boy Scouts,” Saltzman said.

The Boy Scouts started the Explorers program in 1949 as a career-oriented program for boys; the LAPD began participating in 1962.

The biggest U.S. gay rights battle next year is brewing in a California federal court as raucous fights over same-sex marriage in state legislatures and at state ballot boxes subside.

In part, 2010 will reflect a growing move by same-sex marriage advocates to building support for their civil rights cause outside of the election process.

The federal challenge to California’s ban may be the only conflict in clear sight after a mixed 2009 that saw Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire legalize gay marriage and Washington, D.C., vote for legalization, while there were setbacks in other states that had been expected to follow.

Trial is set to start January 11 in San Francisco. David Boies and Ted Olson, lead lawyers in the federal case, argue that marriage is a U.S. constitutional right too fundamental to limit and that gays and lesbians are a discriminated group that deserve special court protection.

Opposing attorney Charles Cooper says restricting marriage to a man and a woman reflects a reasonable government position that heterosexual couples are best for families. It is not a question of hate, and gays and lesbians have plenty of political power, making special court protection unnecessary.

Thus far every success for gay marriage has come in court or by legislators — never in a referendum.

Read the full story at Reuters.com.

The changes are in response to a demand letter by American Civil Liberties Union and the National Center for Lesbian Rights on behalf of a lesbian who was barred from visiting her partner and giving advice about her treatment at the hospital.

On May 29, 2009, Kristin Orbin was rushed to the emergency room after suffering from an epileptic seizure. She and her partner of four years, Teresa Rowe, had traveled from the Bay Area to Fresno to attend a rally in support of marriage for same-sex couples.

Although Rowe, who grew up in nearby Clovis, California, was well aware of Orbin’s medical history and how she responded to various medications, hospital staff refused to allow her to speak with the doctors treating Orbin or to visit with her.

As a result, Orbin was given medication she didn’t need and which caused her unnecessary pain. After the couple had been separated for several hours, Orbin finally saw her doctor. She complained to him, and Rowe was eventually allowed to be with her.

“While an apology would have been nice, we are pleased that this incident will help put an end to unfair treatment of LGBT patients and their family members,” said Rowe.

“But while the policy changes are extremely welcome and necessary, this incident has also underscored that, ultimately, allowing same-sex couples to marry is the only way to guarantee the respect and recognition that will prevent this kind of treatment,” she said.

According to the letter Community Medical Centers sent to the ACLU and NCLR, the hospital is in the early stages of reviewing all its policies dealing with LGBT patients and foresees further changes in addition to the promised training and policy changes. It has also agreed to keep the ACLU and NCLR apprised of its progress.

Adam Bouska (left) and Jeff Parshley with the West Hollywood proclamation

The WEHO city council made the declaration on December 8 that Sunday, December 13 would be “No H8 Day” to mark the 1 year anniversary of the NO H8 Campaign, a photo project and silent protest created by celebrity photographer Adam Bouska and his partner Jeff Parshley.

The campaign launched last year following the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which amended the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

The campaign started with portraits of everyday Californians who support marriage equality and soon rose to celebrities, military personnel, law enforcement, politicians, and more.

The photos feature subjects with duct tape over their mouths symbolizing their voices not being heard and “NO H8″ painted on one cheek in protest.

In the year, NO H8 has compiled over 2,200 solo photographs, and 350 group photos.

In celebration of its 1 year anniversary and the “NO H8″ Day proclamation in West Hollywood, Bouska and Parshley are hosting a party and photo shoot at the Marbella Night Club in Hollywood tonight. Details are on their website at NO H8 Campaign or on their Facebook fan page.

John Perez

Pérez, a freshman lawmaker who is expected to be formally voted in as the 68th Assembly Speaker in January, will become the body’s first openly gay leader in California history.

The Los Angeles-raised, University of California Berkeley graduate will inherit a mountain of challenges, in particular the state’s staggering $20.7 billion deficit.

Advocates for the gay community immediately praised Pérez’s election, calling it a historic moment for not just the state but for the nation.

Equality California director Geoff Kors – whose group fights for gay rights – noted the significance of a gay, Latino man rising to a position of power so quickly.

Kors said the visibility of the speaker coupled with his penchant for building coalitions could have wide-ranging impacts on civil rights in the state.

“To have an openly gay Latino heading the largest legislative body, that represents the most people in the country, in and of itself is going to have a significant impact on advancing LGBT rights,” said Kors.

Full story at SFGate.com

The law school, Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, part of the University of California, was sued in October 2004 by the Christian Legal Society, which requires voting members to sign a statement committing to “orthodox” evangelical Protestant or Catholic beliefs.

A student is ineligible, the group says, if he or she “advocates or unrepentantly engages in sexual conduct outside of marriage between a man and a woman.”

Hastings cited a campus policy barring discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, religion and sexual orientation when it refused to recognize a chapter of the Christian Legal Society in 2004.

The school withheld $250 that had been set aside to help officers travel to their organization’s national conference. The group then sued in federal court.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White ruled in the law school’s favor in 2006, and his opinion was upheld earlier this year by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which had filed a brief supporting the law school in the Ninth Circuit, issued a statement on Monday urging the Supreme Court to rule in favor of the law school.

“Groups that wish to engage in discrimination should not expect public subsidies,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the organization’s executive director.

Full story at SFGate.com.

Glasspool

Clergy and lay leaders, meeting in Riverside for their annual convention, chose the Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool, 55, who has been in a committed relationship with another woman since 1988, from a field of six candidates. She is a canon, or senior assistant, to the Diocese of Maryland bishops.

Glasspool’s election to fill one of two openings for suffragan, or assistant, bishop followed the selection Friday of the Rev. Canon Diane M. Jardine Bruce, 53, the rector of a San Clemente church.

The two became the first women elected as bishops of the diocese in its 114-year history.

Last July, the Episcopal Church voted at its national convention in Anaheim to open the top echelons of the church to gays and lesbians.

Home to 70,000 Episcopalians across six counties, the diocese is widely viewed as one of the most liberal in the U.S. church. Its primary bishop, the Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, is an outspoken advocate for the rights of gays in the church.

Full story at the Los Angeles Times.

John Perez

Democratic Assemblyman John Perez of Los Angeles is about to become the California’s first openly gay speaker of the Assembly.

The position will make Perez the highest-ranking gay politician in California history. The speaker is generally considered the second or third most powerful position in state politics, after the governor and the Senate president pro tem.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Baldwin Hills (Los Angeles County), said Wednesday that Pérez has secured support of a majority of the Assembly’s Democratic Caucus – including herself – and will have enough votes (41 are needed) to become speaker.

Bass has said she plans to step down from the position early next year.

Perez has only served in the Assembly for one year, which means he likely will be speaker for five years, thereby allowing him to solidify his power base and influence over an extended period.

His long tenure also promises to increase the influence of the Assembly. He is the cousin of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and is chair of Assembly Democratic Caucus.

The California State Assembly is the lower house of the California State Legislature. The Speaker of the Assembly presides over the Assembly in the chief leadership position, controlling the flow of legislation and committee assignments. The Speaker is elected by the majority party caucus, followed by confirmation of the full Assembly on passage of a floor vote.

The full Assembly Democratic Caucus is expected to vote on the new speaker December 10.

Evan Low

“He’ll have his work cut out for him, but I think he’ll find his way,” said City Councilman Michael Kotowski, who twice served as Campbell’s mayor. “He’ll do a good job if he does the normal things, but he’ll be an exceptional mayor if he gets out in the community and reaches out to people.”

Low is working on his master’s degree in public administration from San Jose State University, where he also earned an undergraduate degree in political science. He also attended an executive program at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

A resident of Campbell for eight years, Low works full time as senior district representative to Assemblyman Paul Fong, D-Sunnyvale.

Low is a rising star among gay politicians, although sexual orientation is generally becoming less relevant, especially among younger voters, said Michael Mitchell, director of Stonewall Democrats, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit that promotes gay and lesbian political issues.

Full story at SFGate.com.

Davis was recently quoted as saying gays and lesbians won’t be welcome in heaven. Judging from the gathered crowd, the mayor’s remarks clearly have ignited a firestorm of controversy in the Solano County city.

Of the hundreds gathered at city hall, some supported the mayor’s right to his personal opinion while others were making a stand against what they called hurtful comments.

Outside city hall were members of Vallejo’s gay and lesbian community. They rallied against what they call Mayor Davis’ oppressive and homophobic speech.

At issue are remarks the mayor made during an interview published in the New York Times titled “Faith and Tolerance Collide in Vallejo.”

While talking about gay people Davis said quote “they’re committing sin and that sin will keep them out of heaven.

Tuesday night, Davis said he didn’t want to talk about his religion or the remarks anymore.

“This situation is already enflamed enough,” said the mayor. “Let’s just leave it alone.”

Full story at KTVU-TV.

In a movement that seems ripped from the pages of Comedy Channel writers, John Marcotte wants to put a measure on the ballot next year to ban divorce in California, reports AP.

The 2010 California Marriage Protection Act is meant to be a satirical statement after California voters outlawed gay marriage in 2008, largely on the argument that a ban is needed to protect the sanctity of traditional marriage.

If that’s the case, then Marcotte reasons voters should have no problem banning divorce.

“Since California has decided to protect traditional marriage, I think it would be hypocritical of us not to sacrifice some of our own rights to protect traditional marriage even more,” the 38-year-old married father of two said.

Since California has decided to protect traditional marriage, I think it would be hypocritical of us not to sacrifice some of our own rights to protect traditional marriage even more. Nationwide, about half of all marriages end in divorce.

Check out this report from KXTV (via CNN):

Marcotte said he has collected dozens of signatures, and the initiative’s Facebook fans have swelled to more than 11,000.

Marcotte is looking into whether he can gather signatures online, as proponents are doing for another proposed 2010 initiative to repeal the gay marriage ban. He needs to collect 694,354 valid signatures by March 22, a high hurdle in a state where the typical petition drive costs millions of dollars.

His campaign is funded primarily by the sale of $12 T-shirts featuring bride and groom stick figures chained at the wrists.

Full story from Associated Press, via NPR.

Rick Jacbos, the leader of the 700,000-member Courage Campaign said that after spending more than $200,000 on “qualitative research” into the issue in California that “We do not see a path to victory.”

The Courage Campaign sent a note to its supporters Monday calling for “for more research and time to change hearts and minds before returning to the ballot.”

Lambda Legal, a LGBT legal organization, said largely the same thing Monday.

Jacobs said the research — led by Obama confidante Steve Hildebrand — found that “The biggest hangup people have is that right wing has done a very good job of telling people that somehow children will be affected” should same sex marriage become legal.

It worked in both Maine and California, even though top public officials in both places said it would not.

The announcement by Jacobs means that a coalition of small gay rights groups that is gathering signatures to qualify a gay marriage measure for the November ballot will be working without support from established organizations.

full story at the San Francisco Chronicle.

Colleagues said Saturday that Penner was found dead at his Los Angeles home and that suicide was the suspected cause of death. He was 52.

“He was one of the most talented writers I’ve ever worked with,” said Times Sports Editor Mike James, adding that Penner covered numerous beats including the National Football League and sports media during his more than two-decade-long career at the paper.

In 2007, Penner made headlines by announcing in a column that he planned to live life as a woman named Christine Daniels.

“I am a transsexual sportswriter. It has taken more than 40 years, a million tears and hundreds of hours of soul-wrenching therapy for me to work up the courage to type those words.”

Penner blogged about his transitioning experience for several months, then took a leave of absence.

Last year, he returned to the newsroom as a man and began using his old byline.

Penner, who was taking female hormones but never had sex change surgery, didn’t publicly explain his decision.

More from the Los Angeles Times.

Davis (pictured, left) finds himself in the middle of a controversy after an interview published this weekend in the New York Times. The article, titled “Faith and Tolerance Collide in Vallejo,” quotes Davis talking about gay people, saying, “They’re committing sin and that sin will keep them out of heaven.”

He also calls Vallejo “a city of God.”

In a published report Wednesday in the local Vallejo newspaper, the mayor apologized in a prepared statement, saying that his words were taken out of context.

In response to the mayor’s remarks, the gay community is planning a demonstration on the steps of city hall next Tuesday.

Lou Bordisso, an openly gay priest, said public officials or community leaders who make inflammatory remarks against any minority group create an unsafe environment.

“It gives a sense of legitimacy to hate crimes,” said Bordisso.

Charles Legalos, a former planning commissioner and gay activist, told The Vallejo Times-Herald that he planned to ask the City Council to censure the mayor. “His comments were completely out of line,” Mr. Legalos said. “They have no place coming from a city official.”

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Reinhardt deemed the denial of healthcare and other benefits to the spouse of federal public defender Brad Levenson to be a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee of due process and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which is prohibited by California state law.

Levenson married his longtime partner, Tony Sears, on July 12, 2008, during the five-month period when same-sex marriage was legal in California. A ballot measure, Proposition 8, was passed a year ago defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

Reinhardt issued the ruling after the Office of Personnel Management overrode his earlier finding that denying health coverage to Levenson’s husband violated both the U.S. Constitution and the court’s own anti-discrimination rules. The office cited the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act in making the spouses of gay federal workers ineligible as dependents.

Reinhardt’s order applies only to Levenson.

Photo credit: Levenson and Sears, in a March 2009 The New York Times photo.
Full story at the Los Angeles Times.