You are here: Home » News » Crime » DC Attorney General Files Asking US Supreme Court To Not Hear Marriage Bigotry Case

DC Attorney General Files Asking US Supreme Court To Not Hear Marriage Bigotry Case

12/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Bishop Harry Jackson is still demanding that marriage equality be put before the voters of Washington DC despite the fact that there it is not required that such a ballot initiative happen. It has been pointed out that, had the issue of inter-racial marriage been put to the voters of the Southern states in 1970, Whites and Blacks would still not be allowed to marry there. Most of the time, when civil rights for a minority group are put to the ballot, those who gain the most from ensuring the second-class status of a minority group vote against it.

DC Attorney General Peter Nickles and other attorneys in the city have urged the US Supreme Court to not take the case seeking to force a vote on the issue. Nickles notes that the DC Court of Appeals has ruled earlier this year that the District has the authority to prohibit a voter initiative or referendum with regards to the Religious Freedom and Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, or any other referendi or initiatives.

The brief was filed on 17 December, and is thirty-five pages long. The case is known as Jackson v. the DC Board of Elections and Ethics.

Jackson and his allies want to overturn the law using a voter initiative into which they would plan on pouring millions of dollars in order to poison the minds of people so that they could overturn the law that grants equality to lesbians, gays and transpeople. The law of DC is that ballot measures cannot violate the city’s Human Rights Act, which includes protections based on sexual orientation.

Most legal scholars are pointing out that the Supreme Court often does not interfere with local cases if it the case has no national standing, and since Jackson does not show who any nationally compelling reason to take on the case, but Jackson’s lawyers feel that the Supreme Court can take on the case because the ruling was reached through an “egregious error.” Nickles points out that “in fact, the appeals court decision is correct.” He does not feel that the egregious error argument applies. It usually applies only when there is an error reached through the interpretation of the law, and that does not appear to be the case, according to Nickels.

In order to be taken up, the Court needs four of the nine justices to be willing to accept the petition. Typically, they defer to the US District Court for DC as if it were Supreme Court of a state, and it would be atypical for them to get involved in this debate. Arthur Spitzer, the legal director of the ACLU’s DC area office has said that the Supreme Court is likely to decide whether or not to accept or reject the case in January.

Source