Category: Hawaii
Gay couples sue Hawaii over Governor’s veto of civil unions bill
A group of same-sex couples are suing the state of Hawaii, alleging violations of constitutional rights in the wake of Governor Linda Lingle’s veto of civil unions bill that would have given same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples.
The complaint filed in circuit court by the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii and Lambda Legal argues that the state violates the constitution by denying same sex couples the rights and protections currently available to heterosexual couples through marriage.
“It’s tragic that something needed so badly by so many Hawaii families was derailed with a stroke of the governor’s pen,” said Jennifer C. Pizer, Lambda Legal Senior Counsel.
“We had hoped we’d never have to file this lawsuit but the political process has failed the thousands of families who need the protections civil unions would have provided. Every Hawaii family should be treated equally under the law, but because the state refuses to do that, we’re forced to go to the courts.”
Previously from LGBTQ Nation:
Hawaii veto fallout: The fight for equal rights in the Aloha state is far from over
The once-progressive Aloha state seems doomed for Republican takeover, following lame duck Governor Linda Lingle’s veto yesterday of a same-sex civil unions bill passed last month by the state legislature.
Lingle was certain to make the pending veto as agonizing as possible for LGBT couples in the state, who anxiously waited weeks for her to “carefully consider” the bill, then put it on a list of potential vetoes, then slam down the hammer last night.
Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed the state's same-sex civil unions bill
Many were hopeful Lingle would simply ignore the bill, making it become law by default. But she took a different approach altogether, calling her decision “well-reasoned,” and seizing the opportunity to use typical GOP speak, blaming the mostly Democratic legislature for passing the bill without giving the people of Hawaii a chance to vote on it. Sorry, Lingle, but in a Republic like the United States, the civil rights of a minority are not a matter for the tyranny of the democratic majority to decide. That’s what our elected representatives in the legislature are there to prevent, and a true Republican should know better.
Just look at what’s happening right now in California following the disastrous 2008 passage of Proposition 8 – it’s left 18,000 married couples in the state in legal limbo, and is the subject of a landmark federal case, Perry v. Schwarzeneggger, which is expected to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Connecticut School of Law professor John C. Britain wrote a rather compelling article regarding the use of ballot initiatives to decide civil rights. In it, he notes that “the [Supreme] Court, in a truly Madisonian fashion, guards the interests of the minority against the will of the majority” when considering the use of “direct democracy”, which is espoused by so many conservative Republicans today.
Of course, Lingle’s veto has been applauded by her conservative supporters and counterparts. Hawaii News Now reports that the two Republican gubernatorial candidates – Lt. Governor James “Duke” Aiona and Honolulu mayor Muffi Hanneman – support Lingle’s decision. Both agree with Lingle that the people of Hawaii should have the opportunity to vote on the issue.
Abercrombie
However, Democratic candidate Neil Abercrombie, who left Congress to run for Hawaii Governor, issued a statement saying:
“Civil unions respect our diversity, protect people’s privacy, and reinforce our core values of equality and aloha. It will be up to the next governor and legislature to ensure that all people of Hawaii receive equal treatment.”
The ACLU and Lambda Legal are already preparing lawsuits. Staff attorney Laurie Temple of the ACLU told the AP, “We’re obviously disappointed that Governor Lingle has, once again, used her power to deny the people of Hawaii their civil rights. Luckily for the people of Hawaii, however, our constitution prevents discrimination based on sexual orientation. If the Governor won’t honor her oath to uphold the constitution, the courts will.”
But it’s going to be a long, uphill battle. The state legislature has already indicated it will not attempt to override Lingle’s veto, and Aiona, the front-runner in the Governor’s race, came to Lingle’s defense, saying, “To put that kind of pressure on one person, especially during an election year, and knowing how this issue is falling, that’s just totally unfair.”
The San Francisco Chronicle is wondering if gay and lesbian (or all) travelers should boycott the state. But contributor Jeanne Cooper noted, “Recently I wrote about wedding sites and package providers in Hawaii, and all but one of the representatives I interviewed said they welcomed same-sex couples for commitment ceremonies, and would do the same for same-sex marriages, as soon as those became legal (the other made referrals to a specialist in same-sex ceremonies.)”
Would a boycott of Hawaii really help the LGBT couples who live there and are affected by this decision? Most of them work in the hospitality industry, which depends heavily on tourism. A boycott would simply cause them to lose their jobs on top of keeping them second-class citizens in the eyes of the state. They are the ones we should be thinking about, because they have the most at stake in Hawaii’s already-ailing economy and political environment.
Stay tuned for more as this story develops.
Previously from LGBTQ Nation:
Allowing gay marriage might reduce divorce rates
Gay couples sue Hawaii over Governor's veto of civil unions bill
Saving LGBTQ youth should be our top priority
Republicans more likely to be involved in (gay) sex scandals
Brian: Please don't let Proposition 8 take away my dreams
Why Shelly supported Proposition 8
Hawaii governor vetoes civil unions legislation
Lingle
Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a civil unions bill Tuesday that would have given same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples, saying the issue needs to be put to a referendum.
Lingle said the bill was equivalent to marriage, which she believes should be reserved for a man and a woman.
“There has not been a bill I have contemplated more or an issue I have thought more deeply about during my eight years as governor than House Bill 444 and the institution of marriage,” Lingle said at a news conference.
“I have been open and consistent in my opposition to same-sex marriage, and find that House Bill 444 is essentially same-sex marriage by another name.”
The bill, approved by the state Legislature in late April, would have granted gay and lesbian couples the same rights and benefits the state provides to married couples.
Lingle called the issue too emotional and too important to be decided solely by the governor or the state Legislature, and recommended a state constitutional amendment be placed on the ballot for voters in 2012.
Lingle’s veto comes on the last day she had to take action, otherwise it would have become law without her signature.
Previously from LGBTQ Nation:
Hawaii state House postpones vote on civil unions — indefinitely
The Hawaii state House, conflicted by emotion and election-year politics, voted yesterday to indefinitely postpone action on a civil-unions bill, reports the Honolulu Advertiser.
The voice vote, which came after no debate, essentially kills the bill this session, since it would require a two-thirds majority to bring the bill back for consideration.
Gay rights activists in the House gallery shouted for a roll-call vote on the motion, and when lawmakers quickly moved to other items on their agenda, several screamed “Shame!” as they walked out of the chamber.
The state Senate approved a civil-unions bill last week that would give same-sex and heterosexual couples the rights, benefits and responsibilities of marriage under state law. The vote reached the two-thirds majority needed to overcome a potential veto, a signal to the House and Gov. Linda Lingle.
Reaction, video courtesy the Honolulu Advertiser:
Friday’s move was met by catcalls from some in the crowd who packed the House gallery, with some screaming for a roll call vote. The gallery was mostly filled with opponents of HB 444 who wore white T-shirts.
Opponents say the measure amounts to legalizing same-sex marriage, while supporters see it as a civil-rights issue and say the bill only simply extends reciprocal benefits to all who form a civil union.
“We’re sorely disappointed that the Hawaii State House refused to take action on the civil unions bill,” Equality Hawaii Co-Chair Tambry Young said in a statement. “Today, the House put its own political interests before the interests of Hawaii’s families and that’s bad policy and bad politics. We pledge that this fight is not over and we will continue in our efforts to see true equality in our state.”
Previously from LGBTQ Nation:
Hawaii state Senate OKs civil unions bill, measure heads to the House
The state Senate voted 18-7 on Friday to approve a bill recognizing civil unions in Hawaii, giving gay and opposite sex partners the same rights and benefits as married couples.
The bill now goes back to the House, which passed it last year, but has yet to decide if it will vote on the bill.
House leaders say they will take up the bill if they have a veto-proof two-thirds majority but may let it die if they have only a small majority.
The Senate’s Democratic majority has enough votes to override a possible veto from Republican Gov. Linda Lingle.
Lingle has urged the Legislature to drop the issue but hasn’t said whether she would reject the bill if passed.
Sen. Roz Baker, a Maui Democrat, said the issue is “about equal treatment … how the law views individuals who may look at things differently than we do.”
“There are all kinds of families and all kinds of relationships and they all deserve to be treated equally,” Baker said.
If passed in its current form, the effective date is retroactive to January 1st. The state attorney general advised lawmakers this was not a fatal flaw but lawmakers say it could end up being a technicality over which the governor could veto if not on the issue itself.
More from the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
This article may be reposted in its entirety with credit and all links intact.
