Brown is responding to reports that the Respect for Marriage Act or RMA will be attached to the 2012 Defense Authorization Bill. You know, like how they pass dozens of laws every year. You know, like how they passed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Brown is only upset over this because, well, it would mean that his side would lose.

Their frantic email states that “Senator Feinstein admits she doesn’t have the votes to repeal DOMA on an up-or-down vote. So she’s trying to attach it to a piece of “must-pass” legislation, forcing Senators to choose between voting against marriage and voting against our military and national defense. It’s no wonder the American people are fed up with Congress.”

Actually, they are fed up with the fact that Congress passes laws that benefit the rich, screw the poor, and hurt the economy. Brown, though, is far more concerned about same-sex marriage than he is about the number of kids starving in the streets these days.

Brown also does not know how legislation works, from the looks of it. He states “urge your Senator to filibuster any effort to use the Defense Authorization to force same-sex marriage on the American people.” Two problems there, if it is put into the bill in committee by say Senator Kirsten Gillibrand or Armed Services Committee Chairman Senator Carl Levin, then the Republicans do not get to filibuster it. What is also a problem here is that the majority of Americans now support same-sex marriage.

But wait! There’s more!

If you go here, NOM has this wonderful form that you can use at no cost to you (but cost of their server fees) that lets you email your Senators. You can then ask your Senators to support marriage equality. After you send that, of course, they will then add you to their mailing list and you can laugh at their idiocy any time of the year.

Or you can call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask for your Senators and ask them to support the bill.

If this is what the Senate Democrats are planning, that is not surprising. According to one military analyst that we have spoken to, this would put the Republicans into a delicate situation where they would either have to repeal DOMA or look like they do not support the troops. Given that, right now, the repeal of DOMA is fairly popular, but not supporting the troops is unthinkable, it is likely that this could pass, especially if this is kept fairly quiet going forward.

Yes, and some of those referenda are, what, a decade or more old. Even the people of Maine now regret their voter veto of the marriage law. Currently, 51% of Americans favor the repeal of DOMA…

Brown also whined that “DOMA is the one federal law that protects marriage as the union of husband and wife, and protects every state constitutional marriage amendment in the nation.” Even though it is unconstitutional. That is correct, it violates the Full Faith and Credit clause of the United States Constitution as well as several other key provisions.

Brown went on to kvetch:

Together, we can stop this repeal of DOMA dead in its tracks, and stop Senator Feinstein and her liberal friends in the Senate from imposing their values on the entire nation, but only if we act now!

Please tell your Senators to vote NO on Senator Feinstein’s (D-CA) DOMA Repeal Bill right now!

Tell your senators, “I oppose the repeal of DOMA, and I vote!” And please tell your friends and family.

Together, we can draw a line in the sand for marriage. It’s time to fight back!

Of course, Brown is upset that we want to have equal rights. I mean, so far no one is holding a gun to his head and forcing him to marry a man. Of course, this on the road dad just might want to consider what effect he is having on his own children….Oh, and if you are going to attack the children of my friends and family, just know that I plan on bringing up that you are a dead beat dad, Brown because you are always on the road worrying about other people’s lives.

Signatories to the letter include: Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York; Gov. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island; Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut; Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland; Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts; Gov. Peter Shumlin of Vermont; Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, NY; Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. of New Haven, CT; Mayor Bill Finch of Bridgeport, CT; Mayor Vincent C. Gray of Washington, DC; Mayor Edwin Lee of San Francisco, CA; Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, MA; Mayor Jerry Sanders of San Diego, CA; Mayor Pedro E. Segarra of Hartford, CT; and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, CA. California Gov. Jerry Brown – whose state recognizes a limited amount of same-sex couples married before the passage of Prop 8 – submitted a separate letter to the committee in support of the RMA.

The governors and mayors write in the letter that “[t]he federal government should not be in the business of picking which marriages it likes and which it does not, but that is exactly what DOMA does. We urge you to pass the Respect for Marriage Act and ensure that all families are afforded equal protections and equal dignity.”

Currently, fifty-one percent of voters favor the repeal of DOMA, and a large number of businesses are starting to push back against marriage inequality.

This puts these seventy employers in direct opposition to House Speaker John Boehner, who has hired Paul Clement as his pet lawyer to do the dirty work of defending the unconstitutional.

Peter J. Reilly over at Forbes noted that:

DOMA creates a few problems for employers in states like Massachusetts where same sex marriages are allowed under state law. The act creates unnecessary cost and administrative complexity and forces companies to discriminate. There are over 1,000 benefits of marriage under federal law, several of which are effectively delivered through employers. Among those are the exclusion for health insurance and the right to make a penalty free withdrawal from a 401-k for a spouse’s medical expenses. The brief cites a study that indicates that the average W-2 of the spouse with a same sex partner will, on average, show $1,069 more in federal tax than that of a similar employee with an opposite sex spouse. DOMA also complicates the hiring of highly skilled foreign employees since the employers cannot offer visas to same sex spouses.

The feeling is that the companies are forced by DOMA to become the discriminators and the companies know that they need to keep their employees happy in order to make a profit. If it were not for the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which states that Federal laws take precedent over state laws. The discrimination that these companies are forced into is illegal under Massachusetts law.

In the end, business is becoming a big problem for the Republicans when it comes to same-sex marriage. In Minnesota, businesses are sternly against the attempt to ban same-sex marriage in that state.

Shaheen, like many Democrats, is finding that her position on marriage equality has changed over time. While she was governor of New Hampshire, she opposed efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in that state, but today, she finds herself dismayed over the push by a small fraction of social conservatives in the New Hampshire legislature who are pushing to end that right. ThinkProgress quotes her as saying “I’m very disappointed with the actions of the legislature — and I’m hopeful that they will not be successful. These people represent the extreme right wing within this country. … I don’t think they represent the majority of the public.”

And she is correct in that assessment. The majority of New Hampshirites support marriage equality at this point, and a strong majority oppose repeal.

As for DOMA, she states that the repeal of DOMA would provide an opportunity for the states to address the issue as that law actually, she believes, “currently acts as a disincentive for states to act independently.” With regards to her own position, she stated that “I do think [marriage rights for gays and lesbians] should be the case in every state. But I also think it’s important for states to decide the issue.”

Shaheen is a co-sponsor for the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA. This would allow for the federal government to recognize same-sex couple’s legal rights. The bill is not suppose to compel individual states to recognize same-sex marriage. That part of DOMA is likely to go down in the courts as it is unconstitutional for one state to not recognize a legally entered into contract that is recognized by another state.

The Bank of America is moving to equalize the cost of health care for same-sex couples on bank-sponsored health-care plans.

Presently, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) forbids the federal government from recognizing the validity of same-sex marriages. So under federal law, employer-provided health benefits for same-sex partners are counted as taxable income, if the partner is not considered a spouse or dependent. Additionally, gay employees cannot use pretax dollars to pay for their premiums — unlike their opposite-sex married counterparts.

However, starting next year, B of A employees with same-sex partners will begin receiving reimbursements for the extra taxes they pay for health insurance.

According to the New York Times:

The banking giant will provide the reimbursement once a year, and it will be calculated for each employee on an individual basis. “We regularly review our benefits plans to ensure they meet the diverse needs of our employees,” said Ferris Morrison, a spokeswoman for the bank.

Bank of America also says  this option will only be offered  to gay couples,  since heterosexual domestic partners have the option to marry and avoid the extra taxes.

Related articles

• Bucks: Bank of America Equalizes Health Costs for Gay Employees (bucks.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Pres Obama: Months Not Years Until DOMA Struck Down In The Courts (lezgetreal.com)

The memos are similar to the guidance that was offered by the Navy’s Chief of Chaplains last April.  Of course, the FRC claims that the “guidance which was suspended less than a month later after a public outcry by critics who, like FRC, argued that such a policy would violate the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA forbids the federal government from recognizing anything other than the union of one man and one woman as a marriage.”

Of course, it is not a violation of DOMA or anything else, but that matters little to the likes of Perkins who is more concerned about protecting the lies that he holds dear than actually dealing with the reality.  Of course, the FRC also said “The new memos also directly contradict language, the so-called “military DOMA” amendment, which was adopted by the House of Representatives in the Defense Authorization bill. That bill currently awaits action in the Senate.”

What they seem to forget is that the bill is not law, so the language of the memos contradicts absolutely nothing.  Given that this language is not likely to make it past the Senate, it seems unlikely that it will ever be a problem.

Of course, dripping with outrage, FRC President Tony Perkins issued this rather froth laden statement:

“It is outrageous that only ten days after repeal of the law against homosexuality in the Armed Forces, the Defense Department is already pushing the military further down the slippery slope. The repeal law passed by the lame-duck Congress last year said nothing about authorizing same-sex ‘weddings’ on military bases or by military chaplains.

“The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) remains the law in America, defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman for all purposes under federal law.  One House of Congress has already taken action to reinforce DOMA, which clearly repudiates the policy announced today.

“I urge the Obama administration to end its multi-front attack upon marriage, and I urge the Senate to act upon the legislation which would forbid this further exploitation of our military to advance a radical social agenda.”

How about the FRC stop trying to force people to believe in their form of Christianity?  Oh, and how about they stop perpetuating lies about how same-sex marriage destroys marriage as a whole, and homosexuality will lead to crime and the end of the world.

After all, if you have the truth behind you, why bother protecting it with a bodyguard of lies?

Lui and Ernest married in Massachusetts in 2009, and the two sued the government after US Citizenship and Immigration Services denied the couple’s marriage-based petition for permanent residency for Lui. The lawsuit argued that the USCIS violated the Immigration and Nationality Act’s wording regarding discrimination on the basis of sex and that the immigration officials interpreted the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional.

House Speaker John Boehner’s pet anti-LGBT lawyers moved to dismiss the case. Judge Stephen V. Wilson dismissed it saying that immigration officials did not err in their decision. The problem is that he went further. He relied upon a 1982 case involving a gay male couple that were denied immigration sponsorship rights. In that case, the rejection of the petition was based upon the fact that the attorneys for the couple had “failed to establish that a bona fide marital relationship can exist between two faggots.”

Of course, contemporary evidence has shown that marriage between two people of the same sex is no different than marriage between people of the opposite sex. LGBT immigration rights advocates argued that the case Adams v. Howerton should not be relied upon due to the number of cases that have come since then. Victoria Neilson, legal director of Immigration Equality, stated “We’re disappointed that the court relied on a thirty-year-old decision to dismiss Mr. Lui’s case when the world has changed so much in the last three decades. This case provides another example of why we need a permanent solution for all LGBT immigrant families.”

The Obama administration’s Justice Department earlier this year announced that it would not be defending DOMA cases because he argued that the law should be found unconstitutional.

The Advocate noted:

That brief followed an August Homeland Security announcement that the agency will conduct a case-by-case review of pending deportations to better handle high-priority cases, such as those involving convicted felons. An administration official later clarified that same-sex binational couples may be considered among lower-priority cases, though it’s unclear whether such guidance has been applied in the field.

However, Judge Wilson wrote that the administration is walking “a fine line” by arguing that it must continue to enforce DOMA by denying green card petitions from married same-sex couples while “simultaneously arguing that Section 3 of DOMA, which excludes same-sex couples from the definitions of marriage and spouse for purposes of federal law, violates equal protection.”

Lavi Soloway, cofounder of Stop the Deportations stated about the ruling:

“Judge Wilson’s ruling dismissing this challenge to DOMA by a gay binational couple is a setback in the fight to win equality for all lesbian and gay Americans married to foreign citizens and a rejection of the Obama administration’s strong arguments in support of the plaintiffs in this case. Crucially, it sets up a likely appeal to the Ninth Circuit on the question of whether lesbian and gay binational couples in that jurisdiction have the right to challenge DOMA in federal court.

“The Judge sided with the arguments made by House Republicans that discrimination against binational couples is permissible and found that DOMA does not violate the equal protection provision of the U.S. Constitution in the immigration context. This is a surrender to explicit, indefensible discrimination that should outrage any fair-minded person.

“The Judge, a 1985 Reagan-appointee, relied on nothing more than the 30 year old case of Anthony Sullivan and Richard Adams, and refused to consider compelling arguments that the court must consider DOMA’s constitutionality based on current legal and social context. Wilson essentially states that no married same-sex binational couples should be allowed to challenge DOMA in federal court in this jurisdiction, a proposition that should concern all Americans greatly. Conservative judges must not be in the business of blocking access to the federal courts because of outdated decisions.

“Judge Wilson’s poorly-reasoned decision is an important wake-up call that the momentum toward full equality cannot be taken for granted, even with the Obama administration coming into court on the side of lesbian and gay plaintiffs. We must keep up the fight to end DOMA through the legislative process, in our federal courts, and most importantly in the court of public opinion. Unless DOMA is repealed or struck down by the Supreme Court, lesbian and gay binational couples will not achieve equality.”

There is no word if they will appeal the order.

Obama is answering a question from someone who is in a binational relationship. He lays out his course of action which includes deprioritizing those cases of binationals where there have been no crimes committed, and that he has ordered that the defense of DOMA not be undertaken. It is an interesting to hear him discuss this particular issue.

This video is a must watch and a must forward to anyone who thinks DOMA is NOT unconstitutional. When a law robs innocent citizens from fundamental rights or from being treated equally under the laws of their country where citizenship is shared – while some  people can  reap the full benefit from the law and others are ostracized – we must cry foul -”Un-American foul play.”

Recently President Obama gave a speech in Texas and in giving an immigration reform speech omitted to mention the forgotten group of bi-national same-sex couples, where the American spouse / partner is unable to sponsor a spouse for a green card…  or maybe he purposely did not mention this group who have struggled for decades for equality, often resulting in the unusual class of exiled Americans.

There are two reasons he may have failed to mention the plight of the binational same-sex couples, albeit so horribly discriminatory.  First, perhaps mere strategy by not drawing attention to the issue for fear that in Republican driven Texas it may overshadow the Immigration reform issue and veer from the need for immigration reform as a whole; or secondly perhaps President Obama does not (and by the way I subscribe to this view) believe that denying same-sex couples greencards is an immigration issue per se, but rather one of Equality – one where the American has lost the right of parity – where the American partner is the victim.  After all the American partner is unable to sponsor the person who they want to spend the rest of their lives with – in the same manner that straight Americans are able.

Thus the real answer would be the repeal of DOMA (Defines marriage as between a man and woman only). Where if enacted all couples will enjoy full equality under the Federal law of the USA.

Legislation is before Congress to repeal the insidious DOMA; as well as a stand alone Bill – the Uniting American families act, (UAFA) which used to be attached to immigration reform during the last congress, but got nowhere.

What you have in a same-sex relationship is no different from a heterosexual relationship; – two people loving each other, in committed relationship,

Photo by Kathy Drasky 2009

willing to love and support each other ’till death do them part’ – even adding children to their families.

Out4Immigration is an all volunteer group – consisting mostly of core key players who direct others across the USA and the globe, bringing the harsh reality of life in exile, life in fear of deportation, life without rights, life without dignity, life without fairness, life without EQUALITY to the American consciousness.
They have done an amazing job by simply revealing the raw emotion of the couples presented in this video. I take my hat off to  the core and very dedicated group led by Kathy Drasky, Amos Lim , Gina Caprio and all the volunteers at OUT4Immigration.

Considering this group is unfunded and all volunteer, I venture to assert that Out4Immiugration has done more for public and congressional awareness, grass-root unity and impression than any other that deals with this issue.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Melanie Nathan, May 16, 2011

The Washington Post Opinion has published a post about PAUL WILSON DORMAN, a citizen of the United Kingdom, who came to the United States on a visitor’s visa in 1996 and never left. He met an American man who became his partner of 15 years. They have jointly purchased property and made out wills with the other as beneficiary. In 2009 they entered into a civil union in New Jersey.

During a time of increasing visibility exposing the plight of  the American same-sex partner  who cannot  petition for a foreign spouse, domestic or civil union partner, for a green card and lawful residence to the USA, we are seeing changes in process and challenges to the law that must ultimately pave the way for equality in the USA for binational gay and lesbian couples.

Mr. Dorman was targeted for deportation after a chance encounter with an immigration agent at an airport. Mr. Dorman, 52, does not dispute that he has been in the country illegally but argues that he should be allowed to stay because of his relationship with his partner.  However because of the Defense of Marriage Act – he cannot be sponsored for a green card, ultimately leading to citizenship, in parity with heterosexual counterparts.

Additionally WAPO notes:- The law allows foreign nationals to fend off deportation by proving they have been in the country continuously for at least 10 years; substantiating a relationship with a “qualifying relative”; and showing that deportation would inflict an “extraordinary and extremely unusual hardship.” Two immigration courts concluded that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) precludes recognition of his same-sex partner as a spouse.

DOMA has been an impediment to the rights of gay men and lesbians since its inception in 1996. It withholds from same-sex couples the legal protections, obligations and privileges enjoyed by their heterosexual counterparts. Repeal appears out of reach, but Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced in February that the Justice Department would no longer defend DOMA in court, after concluding that it is unconstitutional.

The attorney general has vacated the court decision and asked the Board of Immigration Appeals whether Mr. Dorman’s civil union makes him a “spouse” under New Jersey law and whether, absent DOMA, he would be considered a “spouse” under immigration law.

source http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-penalize-undocumented-gay-immigrants-in-civil-unions-with-us-citizens/2011/05/10/AF7FbQ4G_story.html

ALSO SEE PREVIOUS ARTICLE ON

Attorney General Eric Holder Vacates Deportation Order For BIA review of DOMA -

lezGetReal  http://lezgetreal.com/2011/05/attonrey-general-eric-holder-vacates-henrys-deportation-order/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Today, Attorney General Eric Holder has vacated the  deportation order of an individual,  Paul Wilson Dorman, that is in a same-sex civil union with a United States citizen. General Holder has specifically ordered the case to be remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) for the purpose of determining the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), as it relates to obtaining benefits under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

On February 23, the Obama Administration announced that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court, believing it to be unconstitutional.  One month later, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it would put a hold on all deportation proceedings of bi-national same-sex couples, since the constitutionality of DOMA was in question.

Forty Eight hours later the reprieve was over!  USCIS announced that it would begin processing those deportation proceedings once again, throwing the lives of these couples into turmoil yet again.

and now this…….

Attorney General Holder’s office provided LezGetReal with the following statement, noting that this case has been given special treatment.

While this does not help ALL same-sex couples cases it certainly shows that there is a measure of consideration to the issue of deprivation of  immigration privileges to foreigners in same-sex unions with American Citizens and residents. It is tantamount to an indication by the AG office, that perhaps USCIS should halt all deportations.

Perhaps this case can be used as precedent for others – time will tell- ..

But deportations form only a small part of the angst and discrimination suffered by same-sex binational couples in the USA, and many who are living exiled from the USA.  It surely is indicative of the fact that the law must change via a special visa process for same-sex spouses – to include Fiance Visas – pending the repeal of DOMA.

While this deportation may be halted, it is still the American spouse who is denied the same RIGHTS as different-gender spouses in the USA -

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Surely, If President Obama could swoop into a mansion in a foreign country and put a bullet between the eyes of one Osama Bin Laden – he can find a way to keep our US LGBT families in tact; STOP THE DEPORTATIONS !!!!

While the country focuses on recent international events, this Friday a married bi-national couple may be ripped apart from one another by the U.S. government. Josh is an American citizen. Henry is from Venezuela. They married in Connecticut in August 2010. But because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Josh can’t sponsor Henry for a green card like any heterosexual American can. SDGLN -

Because of DOMA, Henry risks being deported THIS FRIDAY.

On February 23, the Obama Administration announced that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court, believing it to be unconstitutional.  One month later, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it would put a hold on all deportation proceedings of bi-national same-sex couples, since the constitutionality of DOMA was in question.

Forty Eight hours later the reprieve was over!  USCIS announced that it would begin processing those deportation proceedings once again, throwing the lives of these couples into turmoil yet again.

Now plans by the Obama administration to deport Henry Velandia will likely move forward. Henry is in a same-sex marriage. His marriage is legal.  However he will deported back to Venezuela, having to leave behind  his beloved husband, Josh Vandiver of Colorado.

Henry will have a hearing before a Judge of the United States. This week  in Newark, New Jersey, his fate will be decided and he is just one of many who are going through similar hell. The Judge is not empowered to  offer mercy – to take cognizance of  Henry’s love for his partner. The Judge mill ignore his legal marriage, his love, and he will be deported and  banned ifrom the United States forever.

Lest we forget Josh, the American spouse. What about him? Josh has no standing before the immigration court.  He is an American who has no legal right to sponsor his husband for a green card – in parity with different gender Americans who marry a foreigner.  The greatest tragedy here is that our American spouses – like Josh – are being forced into exile.

Exile is when you leave your own country because you are compelled to do so – unwillingly yet voluntarily. Gina Caprio is one such American citizen. Gina has been forced to leave the USA for the United Kingdom so she can be with her wife. Despite years of trying to find a legal way for her spouse, and being active in the out4immigration community, Gina, ran out of options.

In her partner’s case, they kept up a relationship literally traveling between continents and keeping Visa alive and legal.  They did not get into a situation where Gina’s wife would be deported.  Either way – this is a great great wrong to Americans and their families and its being perpetrated on President Obama’s watch.

In  a framework where the  Defense of Marriage Act, that in essence bars same-sex couples from green card sponsorship via marriage,  has been acknowledged by the Administration as unconstitutional,  that piece of legislation is in Congressional limbo, and hence so are LGBT families.

GetEQUAL: “While many LGBT couples are wrestling with what repeal of DOMA would mean for them, bi-national same-sex couples are seeing the impact of DOMA’s continued reign each day — and many are being torn apart from one another in the meantime. ”

We don’t have time to wait on Congress to make things right — we need you to show courage now stop the deportations that are tearing apart our families. USCIS halted deportations of bi-national couples for 48 hours — we need to halt these deportations permanently!”

President Obama has the power to stop these deportations,  he did it for 48 hours; He can use unusual means to stop this degrading and discriminatory debacle.

There are solutions  such as a special visa process for same-sex spouses – to issue an executive order, or  for a Senator  to  introduce a Private Bill via Congress that would pend all deportations of  same-sex couples who can provide marriage certification from any Jurisdiction. The beauty of such Bill would be that its mere introduction could pend all such deportations, without in effect having to be voted upon during this Congress. This is a temporary solution- and can be done in a similar fashion to Senator Feinstein’s  Private Bill Number 867 – introduced for Shirley Tan, back in April 2009.  Such Bill would not have to be voted upon it would simply have to languish in Congress for the duration of this 11th Congress – by them perhaps we can get DOMA repealed in the next Democratic Congress.  The Private Bill could operate for a class of persons therein described.

SIGN PETITION AT:-

see http://www.change.org/petitions/special-visa-for-binational-lgbt-spouse-perma-partners#comments

Article: http://lezgetreal.com/?p=24121

So this is the quest – to support Josh and Henry and others in exile or to be deported:

JOIN THE RALLY -  PROTEST (FaceBOOK)

Time: Friday, May 6 · 11:00am – 12:00pm
Location

Department of Homeland Security/Newark Immigration Court:
– Peter Rodino Federal Building
970 Broad Street
Newark, NJ

TRAVEL:
It’s very easy to get to the Court from Newark Penn Station, which is on the NJTransit line between NYC and Princeton. Coming from Newark Penn Station, walk 2 blocks up Market St., turn left at Broad St. and go 4 short blocks. There is also ample street parking near the Court.

WHY:

You have asked how you can help us STOP the deportation of Henry. Now is the time you can help. We have to stand up together and force the Obama administration to immediately STOP DEPORTING the spouses of gay and lesbian Americans. We are fighting for all couples like us.  Together, we have to stop Henry’s deportation!  We are rallying on Friday in front of the courthouse where Henry’s fate will be decided later that day and want to make sure that everyone inside knows that Henry has community support.

Please join us on Friday and bring friends — we’ll have signs there, but please feel free to make and bring your own!
- Josh & Henry

Sponsored/supported by: Stop The Deportations, All Out, Courage Campaign, Garden State Equality, GetEQUAL,  Marriage Equality USA, Out4Immigration, and the Princeton Equality Project

WRITE at Contact@JoshAndHenry.com to let us know you are coming! We can answer questions and help you get to the rally!

Surely, If President could swoop into a mansion in a foreign country and put a bullet between the eyes of one Osama Bin Laden – he can find a way to keep our US LGBT families in tact!!!!

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

We need this lesson in the context of bigotry. We on the side of what is right and constitutional may understand better when we look at how LGBT equality can be used against basic  rights by bigots and sadly this view of same-sex immigration has been given the open door by Immigration Equality Activists who have messaged that same-sex greencards is an immigration issue, when it is in fact an equality issue.  It is an issue where those same sex couples who are living apart, in exile or in detention/ deportation proceedings have been targeted by their own activists for new immigration law  reform rather than for equality to which they are already entitled.

For the best part of twenty years LGBT activists have been touting immigration equality for same-sex couples.  There have been various incarnations of the current Uniting American Families Act,  now reintroduced into this unfriendly to progress Congress – previously introduced into Congress as the Permanent Partners Immigration Act.   In simple terms the Bill seeks to amend the current Immigration & Naturalization Act, so that same-sex couples are in parity with heterosexual couples – allowing for green card sponsorship from a same-sex partner-spouse.

However as well all know anything gay will be fought with rancor and vicious opposition by right wing bigots who think that gays and lesbians and transgender people will disappear off the face of the earth if they have no legal rights.  The fact remains that no matter what they say or do – this will never happen. So while de facto can never be changed and hence – de jure – civil rights – implemented through law and in conformity with for the US Constitution must prevail.

Binational same-sex  couples are victims of severe discrimination when it comes to immigration and what people like William Gheen of ALIPAC do not understand is that the same-sex couple right to sponsor a foreign born spouse for a green card is entrenched in the constitution via parity to the American partner who ought to have the same  rights as heterosexual American spouses.

This is not an immigration issue it is a discrimination against  fellow Americans issue!  That has been the problem in the advocacy of the issue.  LGBT organizations, by attaching this LGBT equality issue to Immigration Reform, have trapped us in a phony and inaccurate position- UAFA has little to do with Immigration and everything to do with Equality.  Advocated for LGBT immigration have failed in this messaging.

This is the mission of the anti- immigration stance of Mr. Gheen, who now gleefully attaches parity for  gay and lesbian / same-sex couples  to the immigration issue:-

“Illegal Immigration must be stopped and reversed! Join Americans for Legal Immigration Today! OR so says the bigoted blog site of one

Tired of illegal immigration? Americans for Legal Immigration PAC ALIPAC has formed to address the disparity between the public’s desire for more control of illegal immigration and the actions of lawmakers.

News about illegal immigration, illegal aliens, terrorism, national security, border patrol, crime, immigrant gangs, Americans, Congress, laws, and campaigns are Updated here Daily!

Here is the quote from  William Gheen in the Article in OneNewsNow the  bigoted perspective ofan ignoramus who does not have a clue how to truly be an American -  as you can see in his mind he infers that people who have same gender attraction are mere chattels – “imports” things – that can be simply tossed to the wind- and he makes the cardinal mistake of  of … relying on his version of Christianity – denying the faith and belief of so many LGBT Christians. and members of other faiths – who have the same right as he does to revel and enjoy in their own versions of their faiths.

“Targeting anybody for importation into the country based on their sexuality doesn’t sound like something that Congress should be messing with at all,” contends William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration (ALIPAC).

But he says this legislation fits right into the left’s agenda of changing the traditional values that made America great.

“They’re looking to bring in anybody challenging the established culture inside the United States that they want to bring down,” Gheen suggests. “And though the majority culture of the United States for the last 200 years has been predominately European Christian…they are looking for anybody that would take issue with that. And, of course, Christianity preaches against sodomy.”

Exposing the radical arguments of bigots – in the context of a civil rights perspectives and basic equality- in my opinion illustrates just how un-American these people are – as they cower behind organizations named to hide what they truly represent.

If you are going to take anything away from this piece – I would like it to be an acknowledgment and understanding that same-sex green cards is a matter of American equality – and is not an immigration issue, per se.

This is why, contrary to the strategy of the LGBT Organization purportedly at the helm of this activism,  Immigration Equality,   UAFA should be separated from Immigration reform and its a crying shame that we lost the opportunity to  pass it during the full house in the last Congress.

Now UAFA may well be a waste of time, while support for the bill is divided across party lines, and Democrats are  seeking the Repeal of DOMA – which in event will allow for same -sex couples to sponsor foreign born partners.

“Today thousands of committed same-sex couples are needlessly suffering because of unequal treatment under our immigration laws, and this is an outrage,” said Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution. “Our Constitution guarantees that no class of people will be singled out for differential treatment — and LGBT Americans should not and must not be excluded from that guarantee.”

Under current law, one member of a married couple may sponsor their partner for U.S. citizenship, but same-sex couples have no such rights, and are often forced to live thousands of miles apart.

“It’s cruel,” said Nadler of the current policy. “It’s gratuitously cruel.”

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

(San Francisco, CA, April 25, 2011)—Today, King & Spalding LLP, the law firm hired earlier this month by the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, announced it is withdrawing its representation because the vetting process was “inadequate.” The move prompted the lead King & Spalding lawyer in the case, Paul Clement, to resign from his position at King & Spalding.

A Statement by NCLR Executive Director Kate Kendell:

“The Defense of Marriage Act is indefensible and King & Spalding’s withdrawal from its defense is a clear illustration that on occasion a law is so repellent and contrary to our values and ideals, no self-respecting lawyer or law firm can defend it. DOMA does not deserve a lawyer. The Sixth Amendment guarantee of the right to counsel applies to individuals in criminal cases. That critical right assures that when individuals face a loss of liberty through imprisonment, they are entitled to an attorney to argue their defense. But this guarantee has no application to unjust laws. The withdrawal of King & Spalding is a critical tipping point in the legal fight to win freedom and equality for LGBT people. It is now clear that no law firm deserving of the respect and support of the mainstream legal and political community will stand on the side of discrimination. We applaud the decision to withdraw and mark this day as a landmark moment in the history of our nation’s commitment to realizing the democratic ideal of equality under the law.”

###

The National Center for Lesbian Rights is a national legal organization committed to advancing the human and civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. www.nclrights.org

Melanie Nathan- April 23-2011

The firm represents half of the Fortune 100 and, according to a Corporate Counsel survey in August 2009, ranks fifth in its total number of representations of those companies.

ATLANTA 1180 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta, GA 30309 T: +1 404 572 4600 AUSTIN 401 Congress Avenue Suite 3200 Austin, TX 78701 T: +1 512 457 2000 CHARLOTTE 100 N Tryon Street Suite 3900 Charlotte, NC 28202 T: +1 704 503 2600 DUBAI Al Fattan Currency House Tower 2, Level 24 DIFC | Dubai International Financial Centre P.O. Box 506547 Dubai United Arab Emirates T: +971 4 377 9900

FRANKFURT Taunusanlage 1 60329 Frankfurt am Main Germany T: +49 69 257 811 000 GENEVA 7 Quai du Mont Blanc CH-1201 Geneva Switzerland T: +41 22 591 0800 HOUSTON 1100 Louisiana Street Suite 4000 Houston, TX 77002 T: +1 713 751 3200 LONDON 125 Old Broad Street London, EC2N 1AR T: +44 20 7551 7500 NEW YORK 1185 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 T: +1 212 556 2100 PARIS 65-67 avenue des Champs Elysées Paris 75008 France T: +33 1 7300 3900

RIYADH Kingdom Centre 20th Floor 2239 Orouba Road, Olayya Unit 5 Riyadh, 12214-9597 Saudi Arabia T: +966 1 211 0034 SAN FRANCISCO 101 Second Street Suite 2300 San Francisco, CA 94105 T: +1 415 318 1200 SILICON VALLEY 333 Twin Dolphin Drive Suite 400 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 T: +1 650 590 0700 SINGAPORE 9 Raffles Place #31-01 Republic Plaza Singapore 048619 T: +65 6303 6000 WASHINGTON, D.C. 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20006 T: +1 202 737 0500

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

About To Exile to be with Partner

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — Protesting the failure to Provide Same-Sex Spouse Green Cards:  This evening, Out4Immigration, GetEQUAL, and Marriage Equality USA are teaming up to draw attention to the need for urgent passage of the Uniting American Families Act — legislation that would solve the problem that binational same-sex couples face because LGBT American citizens are unable to “sponsor” their partner to stay in the country. Over and over again, binational same-sex couples are forced to flee the country in order to keep their relationships intact, while heterosexual Americans face no problem at all sponsoring partners who are not yet American citizens. IT must be noted that currently The Defense of Marriage Act that prevents the same-sex couples from obtaining green cards is also up for repeal,; Whichever  occurs first will be a matter of strategy on the part of the Democrats and a matter of the usual opposition by Republicans.

NOTE: TIME CHANGE 7:00 PM at  Nob Hill Masonic Center (1111 California Street) from 7pm-8.30pm

While couples are forced to fight court case after court case to avoid being deported, more and more couples are growing weary of the legal battles — and legal fees — they must incur in order to remain in the United States. American citizens like Gina Caprio, who is leaving the country next week to be with her partner in the United Kingdom, are forced to choose between the person they love and the country they love. Gina has spent thousands of dollars in unfair and unjust expenses to spend time with her partner, all the while keeping well within the confines of the law – never breaking it – only to be expelled via this injustice – by her own Country’s inept laws.

President Obama has a clear pathway to solve this problem. By either putting presidential power behind the recently-introduced Uniting American Families Act or by issuing an Executive Order to halt deportations while the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is in question, the President could take action to allow same-sex bi-national couples relief from the impossible choice between love and country. Just a few weeks ago, deportations were halted for a few days before being picked up again — the advocacy community hopes that the President will again halt these deportations…this time, permanently.

“The Obama administration has already indicated that DOMA section 3 is unconstitutional and that they will not defend it in court,” said Amos Lim, founding board member of Out4Immigration. “However, until that issue is settled, LGBT families are still needlessly suffering and being torn apart because we are being treated unequally under the law. We urge President Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to stop the deportations and stop separating LGBT binational families until the issue of DOMA is resolved. We also hope that President Obama will urge Congress to finally pass the Uniting American Families Act as soon as possible!”

Gina Caprio, an American citizen in a binational relationship, said, “Immigration reform must include a focus on what is happening to Americans in same-sex binational relationships and the Federal government must stop tearing families apart or, as in my case, must stop forcing U.S citizens to choose between love or country. As an American citizen in a same-sex binational relationship who is about to leave her country to be with the person I love because I cannot legally sponsor her to immigrate to the U.S., it saddens me to think how my country has turned its back on me by denying me and my partner access to the same Federal immigration rights granted to heterosexuals in binational relationships.”

“The Uniting American Families Act has been introduced in Congress over and over again — with bi-partisan support — but has never made it over the finish line,” said Dennis Veite, an activist with GetEQUAL. “It’s time for the President to say, once and for all, whether he supports the right of couples to remain in the United States in order to build their lives here together, or whether he and the Department of Homeland Security will continue to force American citizens into exile simply because of the person they love. Enough is enough.”

I personally take the stand that the Repeal of DOMA is the answer and that the focus of advocacy groups and the President must  be on it repeal , while pushing for urgent remedy via a definitive plan to provide for a special interim visa process for same-sex spouses – while DOMA cases are being pursued and while DOMA pends repeal.  I do not think our families who are forced to make life changing decisions should be expected to wait any longer.  It is not enough to advocate for STOP THE DEPORTATIONS without also providing for those who are currently stranded on other continents or leaving the USA to start new lives abroad.

Tonight’s event will take place outside the Nob Hill Masonic Center (1111 California Street) from 7pm-8.30pm Pacific. More information can be found at http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=114167805332846.

Out4Immigration is a volunteer grassroots organization that addresses the widespread discriminatory impact of U.S. immigration laws on the lives of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and HIV+ people and their families through education, outreach, advocacy and the maintenance of a resource and support network. For more information, go to www.out4immigration.org.

Founded in 2010, GetEQUAL is a national grassroots organization whose mission is to empower the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community and our allies to take bold action to demand full legal and social equality, and to hold accountable those who stand in the way. For more information go to www.getequal.org. For more information, go to www.getequal.org, www.facebook.com/getequal, or www.twitter.com/getequal.

Founded in 1998, Marriage Equality USA is a national grassroots organization whose mission is to secure legally recognized civil marriage equality for all, at the federal and state level, without regard to gender identity or sexual orientation. For more information, go to www.marriageequality.org.

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

President Obama will arrive in San Francisco today on his California Fund-raising endeavor, to raise big money from hefty donors. At least that is the hope of his recently launched campaign in the bid for re-election- 2012.  But the question is to what is the same as 2008 and what is different.  Will the President receive the laud and accolade he enjoyed last campaign? The  money needed – or will his  donations reflect the wrath of those bitter by the failures at the lost opportunities when the Democrats had both houses and the President’s Pen?

Money came from high tech, movie and music moguls and celebs in general.  What will this California trip yield?  I know that here in San Francisco we expected the passage of UAFA, the Repeal of DOMA, ENDA and the repeal of DADT. We wanted the DREAM ACT and the better part of immigration reform.  While The Don’t Ask Don’t tell Policy was  repealed – much was missed while the President and Speaker played volleyball with HealthCare – now though dubbed Obama-care is rolled  around in a batter of desperate compromise!

The  President has sold out venues at $38000 per plate – and that should bring a chunk of change – but will hands reach as deeply into pockets as in 2008 when Obama seemed to hail the dawn of a new era….. and that he did … but lets look at the score card – Equality is barely nigh for us gays, lesbians, transgender and queerish people. We are sick of being second class citizens – but we must still apply our cash to the slaughter of the Republicons.

Three years after a campaign that featured actors fanning out across the country to stump for Obama, and employees from Google and other high-tech companies joining his team, there have been some signs that fervor for Obama in Hollywood and Silicon Valley has ebbed.” Reports the Washington Post.  “Political strategists say his base of supporters is more sober, perhaps fatigued by recent high-profile state elections.

Certain Hollywood progressives have also been disappointed by the President’s handling of issues such as same-sex marriage.

His packed, star-studded two days on the West Coast include six fundraisers and two town halls, including one Wednesday at the Palo Alto headquarters of Facebook.

On Wednesday evening, he will attend a small dinner hosted by Salesforce.com chief executive Marc Benioff in San Francisco’s regal Pacific Heights neighborhood that will require each guest to donate $35,800 to Obama’s reelection campaign.

The next morning, Obama will attend another expensive fundraiser, fly to Reno, Nev., for a campaign-style speech in that swing state before going to Los Angeles for three fundraisers, including one at Sony Pictures Studios featuring actor Jamie Foxx.

Also on his schedule is a dinner at the Brentwood restaurant Tavern, which film producer Jeffrey Katzenberg and recording executive Berry Gordy are expected to attend, according to the Hollywood newspaper Variety.

While all this is going on, we the people will show up holding our signs saying – what about us? STOP the deportation of same-sex partners? Do not let Boehner wast tax money on defending DOMA cases.  Let the Bush tax cut for the rich die!  Give our kids their DREAMACT – repeal DOMA.

However let me make it clear fellow dissatisfied ‘s we must we must support this President while we speak our our signage – we must raise the requisite billions – because I truly believe and I make this predication – that by the very seating of the 112th Congress, President Obama’s entrenchment in a second term is ensured – AS LONG AS WE GIVE the MONEY!!! So we must because rest assured the Republicans may well have stewed their final goose and guess where – at A TEA PARTY!

There is no option but to support the President – as I believe there may be a good chance we could recoup the House as Tea Party madness impacts even the Republicans who hoped they could make something of their time in Congress. However as they continue to obstruct, Boehner is unable to move the hard right,  and while they try outrageous ploys – such as the Boehner attempting to use DOJ money to fund HIS Defense of the Defense of Marriage Act – we can be assured he is  knocking nails one by one into the coffin of the Republican Majority – for a very long time to come….

That said when the day comes the Democrats must be ready for the repeal of DOMA and issues well developed for the completion of the promise of the “Yes We Can”!

I have always said give the Republicans enough rope and they will… you know the rest of the cliché’ and they are well on their way.

So lets get out our purses while we shout from the street –  to hope for the very least or dare we say YES WE CAN?

PS – Despite holding the President’s feet to the fire – I have resolved to support him to the maximum of my capacity; I will be unwavering.  That does not mean I will not continue to critique his tardy equality record.  I do see that he can be influenced and I predict that he will repeal DOMA in a second term…

PRESIDENT OBAMA LGBT FAMILIES ARE IN EXILE AND PAIN
HERE IS MY DONATION
CAN YOU PLEASE MAKE
A PLAN!!

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Have you ever thought to ask your Senators:  AND especially do if they are one of these…..
Al Franken, Patrick Leahy,  Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Robert Casey (D-Pa.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.);

all sponsor the newly introduced UAFA into the current :

The QUESTION:-

• Why are you bothering to co-sponsor UAFA?
• Do you Co-Sponsor the repeal of DOMA?
• Why Both?WHY not Just DOMA?

Yes, READ all About It – The REINTRODUCTION of the 16 year old UAFA (Former incarnation “Permanent partners Immigration Act”):-  Sen. Al Franken is the newest co-sponsor of legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate late last week that would give binational same-sex couples the same rights as married couples for immigration purposes. The Uniting American Families Act is authored by Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont and is sponsored by 18 other Democrats. Even though same-sex marriage is legal in seven jurisdictions in the United States, couples in which one partner is not a citizen do not have any right under current federal law.

The bill would make immigration laws equal for same-sex couples, including allowing same-sex partners of refugees and asylum seekers to immigrate to the United States. It also provides for the same penalties for same-sex couples who misrepresent their relationships for immigration purposes as current law does for married couples. The bill makes provisions for same-sex couples to provide documentation of their partnership.

“A core tenet of our immigration policy is preserving family unity. Yet gay and lesbian Americans are still forced to choose between their country and being with those they love,” said Leahy in a statement. “I hear from Vermont couples who face this difficult decision every year. No American should face such a choice. I hope that my colleagues who supported this important civil rights reform will join me in calling for fairness and equality in our immigration laws.”

LOOKING FOR REASONS:-

1. The Repeal of the Defense of Marriage ACT  (DOMA) is currently in both the House and Senate.
2. DOES UAFA stand a better chance of passing than DOMA in this republican majority House of representatives?
3. DOMA’s repeal will enable gays and lesbians – same-sex spouses – to sponsor foreign spouses for green cards so why do we need both bills before an unfriendly house at the same time?
4. Does UAFA derogate from the force and attention of the repeal of DOMA
5. Does UAFA introduction make DOMA more attractive?
6. Are we dividing resources and donor monies?

THE ANSWERS: (fill in the blanks) Senators-
Al Franken, (D-MN)_____________________________________
Patrick Leahy, (D-VT)_____________________________________
Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)_________________________________
Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)______________________________
Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)___________________________________
Ben Cardin (D-Md.)_____________________________________
Robert Casey (D-Pa.)_____________________________________
Christopher Coons (D-Del.)________________________________
Richard Durbin (D-Ill._______________________________________
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)___________________________________
Tom Harkin (D-Iowa),_______________________________________
John Kerry (D-Mass.)_______________________________________
Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)______________________________________
Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)__________________________________________
Patty Murray (D-Wash.)_______________________________________
Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)______________________________________
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)____________________________________
Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) _________________________________________

While I am grateful for the support of any and all LGBT legislation – do not get me wrong – I still want to know why!

THE REAL  QUESTION ?
1. is this ultimately about the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill and the attachment of UAFA thereto?
2.Who is playing who?

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

HELP! Wednesday 20th of April, President Obama will be in San Francisco for a Fundraiser for his Presidential Campaign. This is an important visit and we on the street will make our priorities and concerns known.  Gays and lesbians cannot sponsor their foreign born spouses causing untold hardship. It is time to end the suffering!

This is going to be a big event and we want you there San Francisco; join Melanie Nathan, Michelle Meow, Swirl Radio, Molly McKay of MEUSA, Amos Lim, Kathy Drasky, Out4Immigration and their amazing grass roots teams for an imperative – essential- critical Protest.  It is time for all LGBT people and our entire community to come out and speak up for our same-sex married couples who cannot sponsor the foreign partner for a green card.

This is a Protest to repeal DOMA, Pass UAFA, and to scream for immediate Visa relief – including the stopping of deportations of our married spouses.

OUT4Immigration, GetEQUAL and MEUSA are now on board as cosponsors of the event.

The Facebook event is located here https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=114167805332846.

The event is on April 20^th from 4 to 6 PM at the Masonic Center in San Francisco located at 1111 California Street between Jones and Taylor.

I look forward to seeing all of you at the Masonic Center on Wednesday and let’s try to give this as much attention as we can.

Anonymous Binational foreign partner:  “It is time Please come and tell President Obama that we expect swift action.  We have too many couples suffering. Our friends are leaving for exile this month, – our kids wanna come home…- we are the most horrifically impacted by the Defense of marriage Act- no one knows how desperate we are. It is so sad for me to see my American partner in so much pain because she does not have the same right to sponsor me, her lawful sppouse, for a green card, like other Americans who are married!”

Every Gay San Franciscan -LGBTQI – and allies – Must Come to this Protest We can tell Obama we love him and we can tell him what he needs to do for us. Please comment in ideas for signs…. – PLEASE be there.  !!! SPREAD THE WORD…..

If you are a binational couple wear a mask or cover your face to show who you are… if you are an ally wear a mask or cover your face to show you support same-sex green  cards

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Thank you think Progress for putting this together. How does excluding Gays help protect marriage? Watch Maggie Gallagher incur the wrath of Congressman Jerold Nadler. Watch Rep. Conyers. Watch the Republicans and their anti-gay hate and ignorance!  Do you think the President’s actions on Defense of Marriage Act are appropriate?

Okay its hard to watch – for me it is – because I want to jump into that screen and grab those idiots by their respective collars and shake some reality into them.  Come and have dinner with me and my children Maggie and then tell me I am not good enough to share your my civil right – just because of your RELIGIOUS beliefs?   It is sickening that the America of Toady would even give this pure hate fear and ignorance its draconian drum roll!

An Aside – Maggie is not wearing her wedding band.

We asked her why not and you can see her answer on our post at…….. http://lezgetreal.com/2011/04/national-organiztion-for-marriage-nom-is-maggie-gallagher-divorced/ where Maggie herself showed up to comment!

VIDEO CREDIT to “Think Progress”

“Rabbi Gershon Steinberg-Caudill In response to gay bashing incident -” In my youth it was White gangs attacking Blacks. The Civil Rights issues change but the ignorance just seems to continue on. I think it would help if the preachers would just teach LOVE and stop with the homosexual bashing. God DOES NOT hate gays. THERE IS NOTHING AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS IN THE HEBREW BIBLE!”

Melanie says: “Maggie your religion is your religion – but you are using it to preach hate  – cause and effect-  of your beliefs being slammed at our nation – and I believe you did use the words “I believe”  -  That gay kid who got beat up yesterday, my friend who has to exile the USA to be with her wiife, and the mother of the child who committed suicide last month do not give a rats piece of turd about your beliefs.  We are on Earth! Come down to Earth! The shaming of LGBT people and inciting of hate all in the name of your beliefs are counter productive to a free and democratic society where church and state have no relationship other than to co-exist in harmony. You Maggie Gallagher are in flagrant breach of that harmony.  Now lay off my life and beliefs and I will get out out of your face.

Or have the courage to debate me……I challenge Maggie to a debate on SWIRL RADIO!  She responded to me via e-mail and now I have challenged her via email too…..

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

WASHINGTON, DC: As millions of Americans file their income taxes, hundreds of LGBT Americans will participate in National Tax Day Protests on April 15 and on April 18. These protests are being organized to call attention to tax inequities facing same-sex couples as a result of the state and federal laws that deny civil marriage protections to same-sex couples. These actions highlight the ongoing moral and financial costs of marriage discrimination—as well as the consequences paid by all Americans as a result of these unequal state and federal laws. In addition to on-the-ground actions organized by Marriage Equality USA and GetEQUAL, a campaign called “Refuse To Lie” has been launched to challenge the IRS’ requirement that gay married couples file as single.

“We are encouraged by the recent successful legal challenges to Section 3 surrounding the so-called ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ (DOMA) and the introduction of the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ in Congress. However, same-sex couples are sitting down at their dining room tables to figure out how to file their taxes as ‘single’ in good conscience – despite spending decades together,” said Molly McKay, Marriage Equality USA Media Director. “Even in the six states in which marriage equality is the law of the land, the IRS does not allow same-sex couples to file as married, despite having a valid marriage license.”

“The IRS is awkwardly trying to recognize community property law for same-sex couples while not recognizing the rest of our relationships, resulting in mass confusion and more expensive tax preparation costs. Even Turbo Tax has thrown up their hands and confirmed they can’t figure out how to create software that can comply with the disparity in how the government treats same-sex couples,” said GetEQUAL Director Robin McGehee. “This is a ridiculous way to treat law-abiding Americans who simply want to share their lives together, file their taxes together, and be recognized as full citizens of this country.”

“More people are refusing to lie on those forms, even though the government is telling them to,” said Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, who plans on filing as married with her wife, Andrea. “It would be both dishonest and deeply humiliating to now disavow each other or our marriage and declare ourselves single on our tax form.”

The awkward situation created by this disparity between federal law, state law, and tax code has been covered at the national level. The New York Times reported Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, as saying, “As a lawyer and a legal advocate for the L.G.B.T. community, I am often in a position to advise people to exercise great caution and to comply in most cases with the letter of the law, even when that means denying who we are. This is my small way of saying, where we can, we are not going to play the game anymore.”

Founded in 1998, Marriage Equality USA is a national grassroots organization whose mission is to secure legally recognized civil marriage equality for all, at the federal and state level, without regard to gender identity or sexual orientation. For more information go to www.marriageequality.org.

Founded in 2010, GetEQUAL is a national grassroots organization whose mission is to empower the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community and our allies to take bold action to demand full legal and social equality, and to hold accountable those who stand in the way. For more information go to www.getequal.org. For more information, go to www.getequal.org, www.facebook.com/getequal, or www.twitter.com/getequal.

Refuse to Lie is a grassroots campaign that aims to make visible the impossible choice gay married couples have in choosing between the truth and the law. In addition to highlighting this injustice, the Refuse to Lie campaign provides resources on what other couples might face if they to “refuse to lie” on their tax returns. The campaign also provides an opportunity for individuals and gay or straight married couples to sign a petition and stand in solidarity with those who are risking their freedom to demand their equality.

###

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

OUTSERVE the ultimate FaceBook enigma – an underground group of servicemembers – risking all – to participate  within the ranks, to effect the repeal of the anti-gay military Policy – Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  They made a huge impact.  Now San Francisco – we have an opportunity to show support for their work, to meet the courageous founders and to hear how OUTSERVE plans to continue to serve LGBTI servicemembers.

In October of 2009 an email was sent by an active duty officer to several friends regarding harrassment he was receiving under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.  Within a week, the same friends had launched a website, citizensforrepeal.com which focused on sharing personal stories of people affected by the policy.  The same group started an online facebook group that was growing by several hundred a day.

Up to the repeal signing by the President in December, OutServe continued to aggressively push active duty in the media and launching new campaigns such as videos that featured straight servicemembers deployed speaking on why DADT needed to be repealed.   OutServe’s staff was invited to the Presidential signing of the bill in December.

Currently OutServe is the leader in providing public information regarding the implementation training. It will continue to grow as a social and professional support organization for LGBT active duty. OutServe has now connected over 2,600 LGBT servicemembers via hidden social media and has over 40 worldwide chapters including Afghanistan and Iraq.

There is much to be done.

Our underground heroes JD Smith and TY Walrod will speak publicly for the first time, since hiding while advocating within the military  to help repeal  Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. (DADT)

If one reads the articles on LezGetReal, site at http://lezgetreal.com/?s=OUTSERVE, one will note the extent of the risk and service of the founders and members of  OUTSERVE; an extraordinary journey and contribution.

Now it is our turn to maintain their ability to stay the course to ensure that the repeal of DADT is implemented and our LGBT service members  continue to receive the support they need.  There is no other group that can provide the “inside story” in the same way as OUTSERVE – having built a large network of LGBT military membership in the service.

OUTSERVE is imperative allies for the equality battles ahead, even beyond the realm of the repeal and its implementation.  They will serve as a unique outlet for the Stories that must still be told – the stories that will expose he continued inequity that military servicemembers will continue to suffer for as long as all LGBT people in the USA are second class citizens.

The Military stories  will expose and shed an imperative light on the effect of The Defense of Marriage Act on military couples when it comes to matters such as housing and immigration (green cards for same-sex spouses,) thereby adding impetus for the repeal of the former and necessity for interim solutions for the latter.

This Saturday evening is the big Fund raising event in the San Francisco Bay Area, – If you cannot attend – you are encouraged to make a contribution of whatever size to keep this extraordinary group going strong.  They are needed for our gays and lesbians serving in the Military and also in the National quest for full equality.

Note: Melanie Nathan of LGR and Michelle Meow of Swirl Radio will be there on Saturday night to interview JD SMITH and TY WALROD- we hope to meet you too.

Please note RSVP as soon as possible because tickets are limited…

OutServe San Francisco Reception & Benefit

April 16, 2011 6-8 PM

TY Walrod & JD Smith
Co-Founders of OutServe & Co-Hosts for the EveningRequest the pleasure of your company at the first annual San Francisco reception and fundraiser benefiting OutServe

The Association of more than 3,000 Actively-Serving LGBT
Members of the United States Armed Services

Saturday, April 16, 2011   6 – 8 PM

Complimentary Open Bar
Featuring Artisan Cocktails & 13 Local Draught Beers

At
The Orbit Room
1900 Market Street
San Francisco, California

While at the party, enjoy delicious Neapolitan style pizza made with the freshest local ingredients.
50% of kitchen proceeds directly benefit OutServe

Suggested Contribution Levels
$250 Patron
$100 Friend
$50 Individual Attendee

OutServe, Inc. is a non-profit, non-partisan organization.
All 2011 contributions are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

RSVP HERE; http://outservesf.weebly.com/rsvp-for-the-event.html

Amongst the work OUTSERVE does is act as a representative to highlight and promote the service of Gays in the Military such as in the case of fallen gay heroes:

To date, nearly 6,000 Americans have been killed in the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to Corporal Wilfahrt, at least three LGBT soldiers have died in combat since “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’s” conditional repeal was signed into law on December 22, 2010.

“Corporal Wilfahrt epitomized the courage, dedication and selflessness that gay and straight troops alike have shown in battle since our nation’s founding,” said Jonathan Hopkins, OutServe spokesperson and gay combat veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Ultimately Corporal Wilfahrt’s story is not about differences or politics, but the values that unite all who wear the proud uniform of our nation—loyalty to eachother, love of country, and the willingness to give their lives in its defense.”

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Some same-sex married couples are refusing to file their federal tax returns separately this tax season, as part of a movement demonstrating that they’re no longer content to quietly comply with the federal law that does not recognize same-sex marriage. And in some cases, these taxpayers will pay Uncle Sam more when they do so. Prior to recent developments in the Courts and introduction of Defense of Marriage Act repeal legislation, same-sex couples have yet been as bold; now it seems the time is right!

Same-sex couples who have married, or who have a legal status equivalent to marriage in certain states, must still file separate federal returns because the government — and therefore the Internal Revenue Service — defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman. Say the Article by By TARA SIEGEL BERNARD in a NY Times BLog Post.

“Using that definition, federal tax returns ask taxpayers to check one of five options under their filing status: single, married filing jointly, married filing separately, head of household or qualifying widow(er) with dependent child. Married same-sex partners typically file their own federal returns either as single or, if they qualify, as head of household, which has more favorable rates than the single filing status.

But many same-sex couples contend that filing as single amounts to lying about their marriage status, and that’s the message behind the “Refuse to Lie” campaign created by gay activists, which is timed to coincide with tax season.

“More people are refusing to lie on those forms, even though the government is telling them to,” said Nadine Smith, executive director of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender advocacy group Equality Florida, who plans on filing a joint return with her wife, Andrea. “It would be both dishonest and deeply humiliating to now disavow each other or our marriage and declare ourselves single on our tax form.”

Nina E. Olson, the national taxpayer advocate who acts as an ombudsman for the I.R.S., acknowledged the uncertainty surrounding federal taxation of same-gender spouses in an annual report to Congress. In the report, she said that taxpayers may take a filing position without penalty if there is “substantial authority” to do so, such as a court case that hasn’t been overruled by the United States Court of Appeals. And there happen to be two such cases, which are currently on appeal.

In July 2010, the Federal District Court in Massachusetts declared the Defense of Marriage Act — the federal law known as DOMA that defines marriage as between a man and a woman — as unconstitutional in two cases; now being appealed in the First Circuit. “Thus, there may be substantial authority for same-gender spouses to take certain tax positions as married as long as the Massachusetts district court’s opinions stands,” Ms. Olson said in the report.

The Impetus clear and different to past years and now quite tempting!

The “Refuse to Lie” Web site warns same-sex couples of the risks of filing jointly, and explains different options to both adhere to the law while expressing that they disagree with it. One way to do that would be to put an asterisk by the “single” box, and then indicate at the bottom of the tax form that you are “only single under DOMA.” Another option, the site says, is to attach a note with a similar message.  Read the rest of the article here….

While at LezGetReal we assert the caveat  “Dont Try this at Home “  – and “buyer beware” and we suggest “contact your lawyer and CPA” – we do love the idea of this form of Financial (civil) disobedience!

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

“We have never been so close to victory, and our expert advice and analysis has never been more needed. Our legal team is fielding 20 times as many calls and emails as usual, from families who want to know: Are we finally safe? We wish that the answer were yes, because we know that every day of separation or uncertainty is too long to wait to move forward with your lives.” (Rachel Tiven 3/30/2011)

I would like to do a montage of e-mails, blogs, webposts, conference calls where these words have been used by Rachel Tiven, and the other staff   over and over again -  how many years the same – ImmigrationEquality.org is singing the same tune – but now their relevance is at stake.

Again the mantra re-delivered   – and what an outright irresponsible lie it is – yet again!

Immigration Equality Organization will hold one of its Controlled Conference Calls this Tuesday, April 05, to push an Agenda for its continued  relevance as an advocacy group on Capitol Hill.

But  for the introduction of  repeal legislation for the Defense of marriage Act (DOMA) and the Stop the Deportations Project, we are no closer to Victory than we were on June 04, 2009, the day after Shirley Tan testified on UAFA in the Senate Judiciary Committee – when Immigration Equality decided to let go of pushing for UAFA as a stand alone Bill – in favor of the comprehensive Immigration reform – notwithstanding UAFA’s extraordinarily high number of sponsors during a time when we had a majority via the Democratic  Congress, Senate and Presidency, that could have provided the traction if pushed at the time.  Their strategy failed and as predicted killed UAFA!  Now they are asking victims to continue their support of an irrelevant and failed mission.

If Ms. Tiven did not have me blocked from comment I would ask: ” How are ” we” closer to Victory than ever -  when now the Republicans rule the venue and the menu and UAFA needs to be reintroduced?   Further – if we are  closer how relevant is UAFA to that “closer to victory call when the impetus is on the Repeal of DOMA, via pending Legislation and the Courts?

Yes, indeed, we may win our rights to immigration equality via the repeal of DOMA and via the Courts – but that has nothing to do with Immigrationequality.org’s work on UAFA; past present or future!

Immigration Equality’s Julie Kruse once told me “I am in it for the win!”  Yes they really want to win and winning will not be accomplished for Immigration Equality unless they throw UAFA into the mix and claim ownership to it. They will not win if DOMA is repealed – we will –   – unless they add UAFA to the mix now, under the guise perhaps of an “in case of” strategy.

What you are NOT being told is that the repeal of DOMA does not need UAFA for Immigration rights to confer on same-sex spouses.

So is the perception of victory the only reason  Immigration Equality is pushing so hard now for your support of UAFA’s reintroduction – while the repeal of DOMA is already on the table for this Republican non/un- supportive of gay issues Congress?

Nope, there is another compelling reason and that is pure relevance for their ACTION FUND, so recently established and providing the revenue stream for added staff and actions to maintain their DC relevance:-

“Immigration Equality Action Fund advocates on Capitol Hill for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive immigrants and their families. To end discrimination in U.S. immigration law, Immigration Equality Action Fund works to pass the Uniting American Families Act and LGBT-inclusive Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The Action Fund lobbies legislators and other policy makers, builds coalitions, and empowers LGBT immigrant families around the country to fight for change.”

Without pushing for UAFA – the Action Fund will see its demise; because its very existence depends on it.  Unless IE will continue its course without the power to lobby as this is what the Action Fund was designed to mission.    While DOMA is pending repeal, unless UAFA is reintroduced, IE loses its lobby arm for LGBT families.   It also loses its relevance to lobby for Immigration Reform per se.

So again Immigrationequality.org is asking you to trust in their strategy for your rights – while in truth it’s the DOMA lobby that may be closer to victory and Immigration Equality, has by virtue of its own bad policy, rendered itself irrelevant as an LGBT lobby for our same-sex green card  immigration rights!

NOTE: It is still very important for same-sex binational couples to stand up and tell their stories and to support the REPEAL of DOMA as that is the one battle we can all fight in unison. UAFA had its time – and that was when Repeal of DOMA was not an option.  But now it is and we should all unite with all our might behind it.  Binational couples should tell their stories to Congress and their reps non stop so they can see how DOMA impacts us a a group worthy of full civil rights.  The Courts are on our side….  The days of piecemeal and fragmented legislation are dimming and we must unite to  fight for full civil rights.

* UAFA -   he Uniting American Families Act (UAFA, H.R. 1024, S. 424) is a U.S. bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate discrimination in the immigration laws by permitting permanent partners of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents to obtain lawful permanent resident status in the same manner as spouses of citizens and lawful permanent residents and to penalize immigration fraud in connection with permanent partnerships.^[1][2]
*DOMA -  The Defense of Marriage Act (Pub.L. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419, enacted September 21, 1996, 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C) is a United States federal law signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996 whereby the federal government defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. Under the law, also known as DOMA, no state (or other political subdivision within the United States) may be required to recognize as a marriage a same-sex relationship considered a marriage in another state. The law passed both houses of Congress by large majorities.

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

More Stories Finally Receive Mainstream Press: An example of upping the ante for same-sex green cards  is the publicity and strategy now afforded a  gay Long Island couple who have played by the immigration rules for more than a decade are stuck in a Catch-22 that could tear them apart just when they need each other most. This is yet another example of the latest in a push from advocates around the USA, who are asserting same-sex couple’s rights denied by federal Law, despite legitimate marriages under state law in the USA as well as according to State recognized foreign law.

New Yorker Edwin Blesch, 70, and his South African husband, Tim Smulian, 65, have been spending six months on Long Island and six months abroad to comply with Smulian’s tourist visa.  But Blesch, who has HIV, suffered several mini-strokes and other complications and is now unable to travel safely,  According to  the NY Daily News.

Smulian is his primary caregiver – but has no way to stay here permanently. The men were married in South Africa in 1999, a union that is recognized by New York State and Suffolk County.  While many may ask – well why do they simply not live in South Africa where the Constitution protects such couples, including sexual orientation and gender identity therein, this is merely one of tens of thousands of cases, that highlights this extreme inequity in the US law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman only.  It is clear that this law must finally change as we reside in a World where so many are starting to recognize that same-sex relationships are as equally valid legally as they are factually.

” They filed last month for a green card, which immigration officials normally would deny. But they’re asking U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services to use the power of discretion and make an exception for them, especially since the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which does not recognize gay marriages, is being challenged in court. (AND in respect of which Repeal legislation has been introduced)

It is a long shot. After the White House announced in February it was no longer defending the 1996 law, immigration officials put decisions on green card applications from the same-sex spouses of U.S. citizens on hold. But Homeland Security lawyers told them this week to keep following the act even as the legal challenge continues.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/04/03/2011-04-03_gay_couples_immig_plight_ailing_nyer_married_to_s_african_may_be_torn_from_spous.html#ixzz1ITre6Wab

Suspect Tiven and Congressman Nadler -Think IE had some Lobby going here?

So Guess who is asking for more support for the same thing they screwed bi-nationals over and  over again previously?  Yes, It is Immigration Equality. They need your grassroots effort and/or money so you can get screwed yet again  – so they can mess with  our UAFA again and again and again – The question is this time do they plan on advocating for it or advocating for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the past modus operandi; the latter previously touted as the only way to achieve these rights.   But it did not work and now what crazy path will they explore with your hearts risking your soul mates?  Do they plan on placing UAFA and Binationals, same-sex green cards ahead of the DREAM ACT this time – because the latter may happen to include some gays and lesbians?

Julie Kruse, Policy Director has put out a call for you to tell your stories and to support UAFA!   Time warp 2009! Julie what have we been doing for ten years?

Buyer beware- what is wrong with this picture?

Kruse”s letter states “In just a few weeks, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) will reintroduce the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) — a critically important bill that would provide much-needed relief to LGBT families facing separation and exile under our discriminatory immigration laws. Will you help us build the support we need to ensure UAFA’s reintroduction is a success?”

AND WHY I ASK?

She continues ” As you know, UAFA would allow lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans to sponsor our foreign-born partners and children for residency in the United States. UAFA’s passage would immediately help all families with foreign-born partners. For families whose relationships aren’t recognized by state or local law – and for families currently living in exile — UAFA offers the only permanent solution for remaining together. ”

I have a feeling this jargon was copied from an email back in 2009 – c heck it OUT!  That said – when I was in DC with Shirley Tan, the lesbian mom saved from deportation under Private Bill #867, by Senator Feinstein two things did not occurred:-

1. Julie Kruse told us not to waste our time telling Republicans in Congress Shirley’s story – BUT now the Republicans have a majority and so should we still keep our stories from them Julie Kruse?

2. I informed Rachel Tiven and Julie Kruse in June 2009, after speaking with the Senator’s senior legislative staffer,  that the only way to get Senator Feinstein to sponsor and push  UAFA would have been for IE to acknowledge that the UAFA does not provide enough defining language demanding a CONTRACTUAL NEXUS between partners; and that mere evidence would not be enough to satisfy the Senator.   Understanding law the way I do the Senator’s requirement made complete sense to me.  But Immigration equality representatives fobbed me off.

a.  UAFA Language must change to  define Permanent Partner as someone who can prove a contractual nexus, via a DP or marriage document from a Jurisdiction or a written contract defining the relationship – beyond mere evidence of joint check accounts and rental agreements.   The impediment to UAFA has always been – not fear of fraud- per se- but rather the lack of provable contractual relationship or connection.  Roomates can share a bill but cannot a contract defining their relationship.

The language can and must work around this.  Immigration Equality basically told me I was wasting my time because and I quote “Senator Feinstein does not care about the  LGBT community.”  That was a horrible myth perpetuated by another organization which I care not to name as well as by Immigration equality.

b.  Senator Feinstein absolutely cares about gays  (LGBTI) and when I repeated that comment to a staffer in the Senators office two years ago, I was told it would break the Senator’s heart because she did care so much.  I believed that Senator Feinstein does care and did then and I deplore the fact that Immigration Equality failed to truly engage her office to provide the legislative solution for her sponsorship.

So much energy spent on fighting for so called immigration reform when all we wanted is equality.

c. Senator Feinstein is correct to go full out for the Repeal of DOMA at this point.  To split our advocacy once a repeal is on the table for DOMA is pure waste of of unity and advocacy time.    At this point IE should be asking for special visas and Private Bills to prevent deportations of a class to be named – pending the repeal of DOMA.   Instead they are trying to roll back the clock and hedge UAFA’s enactment  against DOMA’s repeal.

Yes Tell your stories and tell your representatives why you want your Federal benefits such as immigration. Tell them your stories.   But how can we do it in the name of UAFA which Immigration Equality may again hi-jack for their own invisible purposes.  Do it in the name of DOMA repeal.

Kruse  states then in her e-mail bvlast Help us honor those families by ensuring we have a strong coalition of lawmakers supporting UAFA in the new Congress.”  Yes, Julie Kruse, Rachel Tiven and Steve Ralls – et al – how are you going to regenerate support for UAFA in a Republican Congress when you failed in a Democratic one and took all binationals for the biggest ride of their life…. down CIR road to nowhere.   Do you plan on touting UAFA and switching to Comprehensive immigration Reform YET AGAIN?

How many times you take our community for suckers.

The Letter goes on to say: – “Ask your lawmaker to cosponsor UAFA, and add your personal story to your letter. Your story is the best, and most powerful, way to let Congress know how critical passage of UAFA is for our families.”

In case you were unaware OUT4IMMIGRATION has been doing just that since long before you let go of your grassroots respect and telling actual stories for UAFA.  But now its time to tell them our stories for the repeal of DOMA which will give same-sex spouses the same rights as gay spouses.

“We finished the last Congress with record support for UAFA.”   say Kruse with ultimate chutzpah – then why did you bandwagon and scurry after Immigration Reform and failed alliances?

“Help us begin this Congress by setting a new record again. With your help, we can take action to ensure LGBT families won’t be torn apart by unfair immigration laws.”    Does that sound familiar – like a pre immigration reform rewind?  A most disingenuous statement – do not expect support – we the grassroots are better off without your strategy mess ups and your inability to take responsibility – what you need to do is to be transparent.   This letter is another example of such lack of transparency , ignorance and the presumption that we are all a bunch of idiots.

UNLESS Immigration Equality shows the truth – and  tells same-sex couples what their FULL strategy and plan is – they have no place asking for Bi-national f support because same-sex couples who have been waiting for years and who you turn away when in need, do not trust Immigration Equality any longer.

What is Immigration Equality’s plan in the broad scheme of things? How is it addressing the repeal of the Defense of marriage Act  DOMA now that has strong support and has been introduced already – is UAFA a bey hedged against the repeal of DOMA and if it is what guarantee do we have that Immigration equality will not hijack the legislation yet again?

Will Immigration equality  chase the DREAM again or work for UAFA fully – or  CHASE comprehensive immigration reform with our UAFA stories and pleas for help.

Julie Kruse , If we want UAFA will you offer CIR  – again?    No one should follow this group without a fully transparent plan of intent and one that they honor.  No one should follow this group until they provide a financial disclosure of how money was spent over the past few years and how they plan to budget and allocate resources at this time.

Immigration equality-  the big glaring lie – is the offer that UAFA will provide a quick remedy. No it will not. It is simply not possible.   The only quick remedy will be a executive order by the President or some creative form of  Sunset Special Binat -VISA or Protocol to provide for the immediate relief suffered by our binational / same-sex couples – limited to those who are married – because marriage is now a relatively easy option, according to State and Foreign Laws.

Grassroots I ask you – are you going to allow your selves to be used again – like lambs to the slaughter ?

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

NOTE:-  An Aside: Who can depend on IE: If you have stories to tell please e-mail me – at nathan@privatecourts.com:

I recently sent an asylum seeker to Immigration equality who is within the small window of opportunity with a winning Asylum case.  They were excited to receive the case, my source informs me.   I then went to South Africa for a month and just arrived back – only to hear that the young person who is in great physical danger if returned home, is still waiting for a post interview call back.  She is panic stricken and under time constraints for filing.  It is a simple case to file and all they need is to find her an attorney to fill out the forms.

————————————————————————————–

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

————————————————————————-

For quite some time I have been writing about creative alternatives – I would like to see the organizations getting your money doing some of the creative out od the box work!!!!

Here is the Body of my Past work on this subject

http://lezgetreal.com/page/2/?s=Binational

http://lezgetreal.com/2010/12/same-sex-green-cards-the-case-for-a-presidential-executive-order-2011/

REPEAT  -  I WROTE THIS BACK IN DECEMBER,……   WRITTEN BEFORE INTRODUCTION OF REPEAL OF DOMA

Melanie Nathan, Dec 30, 2010. At the federal level of government in the United States, laws are made almost exclusively by legislation. Legislation originates as an Act of Congress passed by the Congress of the United States; such acts were either signed into law by the President or passed by Congress after a presidential veto.

Legislation is not the only source of regulations which have the force of law. There is also judge-made common law and constitutional law. The President can issue executive orders pursuant to a grant of discretion from Congress, or under the inherent powers that office holds to deal with certain matters of foreign policy.

When it comes to immigration matters, the standing law is that covered by the Immigration and Naturalization Act of the USA.  This law cannot be changed, without the involvement of Congress through an amendment process.  However I believe that when it comes to the regulations to effect the intent behind the law or something that unexpectedly and detrimentally impacts the law, the President of the USA can provide an executive order to adjust the circumstances, so impacted.

I do not believe that it was ever the intention of the Defense of Marriage Act to deny the de facto relationships of same-sex couples. I believe President Clinton who signed it into law would attest that it was never his intention to cause American citizens and Residents in same-sex relationships to have to exile the USA to pursue their Constitutional right to happiness. However Americans in the USA, in same sex relationships are denied the possibility to sponsor a partner for a green card.

Accordingly I believe that President Obama has the power to effect an Executive Order on behalf of same-sex couples who are specifically excluded by DOMA, from participating in the US Immigration laws.   This  quest would specifically denote a right by way of process to an American (citizen or resident) and not a right to an immigrant; the right of the American to Petition for a same-sex partner to reside in the USA, that is currently excluded via laws that simply fail to include the de facto situation, thereby causing extreme  hardship to American Families.

I do not believe the Immigration law needs to change for this to happen in the short term; I do not believe that this reflects in any way shape or form on the marriage equality debate.  It does not seek to change DOMA and nor does it impact the Immigration Act as we know it, at all.

There have been many early executive orders during all Presidencies;  the State Department began numbering executive orders in the early 20th century, starting retroactively from President Abraham Lincoln’s Executive Order Establishing a Provisional Court in Louisiana issued in 1862. An executive order is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government, generally to staff of the executive branch and not to the citizens of the country. Article I, Section 1 of the US Constitution specifically reserves all federal legislative authority to Congress, not the president.

However here what would occur would be the President ordering the inclusion of same-sex partners under existing law, based on the de facto existence of relationships, the anomaly caused by State law that endorse such relationships, while the Federal government fails to secure the right of the American to remain at home in a relationship of their choice.

Examples of prior Immigration related executive orders -

• Employment of aliens under Federal contracts: EO 12989
• Grenada; revocation of naturalization exemptions: EO 12913
• Persian Gulf conflict participants; expedited naturalization: EO 12939

The Case for an executive order is easily made:

Urgent Need; Immediate Harm;

Without the passage of a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act the exclusionary legislation that caused the harm, or the passage of the Uniting American Families Act, (UAFA) the pending Legislation – which would fix the problem, there is little else that can happen to right this immeasurable harm in the near future.

Same-sex couples have been watching the introduction of legislation come and go for the best part of 15 years to no avail

Americans are living in exile to be with partners – separated from extended families, children etc.  Some are getting ready to leave the USA as I write this; some partners have not seen each other in years- partners are deported, living  jobless in hiding; the expense to maintain an international relationship is prohibitive and I can go on….

The Dream Act failed – Do you think Republicans will give a damn about gay and lesbian couples?

Now that DADT is repealed Military also need to a mechanism to bring home foreign born partners after serving abroad.

Now I have never written an Executive Order or anything similar before and so please do not take this as my expectation of what one would really look like or entail. In fact I may even be coming at it from the wrong angle – there may be a more direct way to do it than to Order a Special Board charged with a duty as I have done below.   I thought of doig it that way so that the ORDER would not be a blanket order, but would have built in measure for responsible actions, where evidence and contractual nexus helm the process.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

PREAMBLE:- Same Sex couples are a de facto part of American Society. The Defense of Marriage Act. specifically excludes Same-Sex partners from being included under the Immigration & Naturalization Act of 1952.

Some de facto same-sex relationships impacted by the Law include children who suffer hardship if parents are forced to separate or leave the United States;

No US citizen should be forced into exile or to leave their homes, careers and countries to be able to pursue a relationship with a same-sex partner;

The intention of the Defense of Marriage Act was define marriage as between a man and a woman only. In No way does this order derogate from that concept nor does it attempt to re-define marriage;

Predicated on the fact that DOMA was never intended to divide unmarried couples (who did not have the legal option to marry in accordance with the Federal definition established by DOMA)  and families or prevent them from living together.

It remains the policy of this Administration to enforce the immigration laws to the fullest extent, for all cases that do not conform to this Order;  including the detection and deportation of undocumented aliens.

IT IS ORDERED:-

I. Establishment of Emergency Board, to be led by personnel appointed by the President of the USA and office of the Department of Homeland Security for the purposes outlined as follows:-

I. Investigating the separation of same-sex partners whose relationships are excluded from immigration rights and privileges under the Immigration and Nationality Act of  1952 as amended ; with the specific purpose of providing remedies and urgent relief to specific couples and through general regulations and remedies for couples at large:-

a. To establish a Special Visa Program (similar to Fiancé Visa/ R1 Visa) to facilitate the reunification of same-sex partners in relationships where a contractual nexus can be proved within six months of entry by foreign partner into USA; and to to provide a path to citizenship upon conditions to be determined.

b. To provide a mechanism for the adjustment of Status for same-sex foreign partners who are currently in the USA undocumented, whose Visa has expired, who enter into same-sex relationships while in the USA, including those in Asylum or deportation proceedings, or under ten year re-entry ban, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;

c. To define contractual nexus (I have prepared my own)

d. To define and detail evidence required to prove contractual nexus:- (I have prepared a list)

II. Circumstances to Investigate:

• circumstances of American citizens forced leave the USA to be in relationship
• and live with a foreign born partner, where there is proof of contractual nexus;
• to review immigration cases of foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US
  Citizen or  legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review deportation cases involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a
  US Citizen or Legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review asylum cases foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen and
  Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review Visa Applications

III Moratorium:

Immediate moratorium on all deportations involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;  to include a retroactive waiver of 10 year ban on re-entry to USA.

The Power shall be vested in the Board and All Regulations stemming therefrom shall be subject to the oversight of a duly appointed Staffer and ratification by the President of the USA.

—————————————————————————————————————-

CONCLUSION:

Maybe this is a pipe dream and I have written about this over a year ago – I hope to join with other advocates in the New Year to push for a creative remedy for the unconscionable and reprehensible inequity to same-sex couples and their families, immediate and extended.  This international community cannot wait any longer – not even for what it will take to repeal DOMA, Enact UAFA.  This is not an immigration reform issue – it is an immigration equality – as in parity- issue. Hence the bi-national same sex community which advocates, waits and prays for remedies should not be expected to wait any longer while an anti-immigrant weighted Congress plodders along with Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

A note from J. Bachelor  3/31/2011 : I had passed this on to others in the past, but the person to target is Obama and here is why:

A new strategy for helping out immigrants is outlined in a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) memo from last year. In that memo, staff members for USCIS catalogued the various options that are open to the President.

“USCIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations, exercising discretion with regard to parole-in-place, deferred action and the issuance of Notices to Appear (NTA), and adopting significant process improvements,” the memo reads.

The text of the memo asserts that USCIS’s discretionary power to use deferred action is unlimited. In order to suppress opposition to the flexing of this muscle, the USCIS staffers who wrote the memo suggest that deferred action be used to exempt “particular groups” from being subject to removal proceedings. In this memo, they explicitly admit that “deferred action” — or using prosecutorial discretion not to deport someone — would be “a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty.’”

Fox News notes that deferred action is a “suspension of deportation hearings for illegal aliens. With “deferred action,” illegals are allowed to apply for employment authorization cards,” (http://nation.foxnews.com/amnesty/2010/06/23/obama-granting-amnesty-executive-order).

The President has the power to sign an executive order to exempt “particular groups”, such as gay binational couples who are married, from being deported. This would not make them legal, but would allow them to remain in the country with their significant others.
- http://www2.nationalreview.com/memo_UCIS_072910.html

Monica and Cristina SOURCE "Stop the Deportations"

Amidst an historic ruling, we need  President Obama to take a bold move.  Lavi Soloway, an Immigration Attorney who has been working on “Stop the Deportations” a project to prevent deportation of the foreign partner of same-sex married couples, announced on his website that Monica Alcota and Cristina Ojeda, became the first married, same-sex, binational couple to successfully argue that deportation proceedings should be adjourned until their marriage-based immigration case had been fully adjudicated.

The post reads: “The Immigrations and Customs Enforcement attorney and the Immigration Judge agreed that the couple should be given an opportunity to fight for a green card on the basis of their marriage and generously adjourned proceedings accordingly.  During their brief appearance in court, the discussion centered on an acknowledgment that the couple may have a long road a head of them, but that they should be allowed to pursue their case with U.S. Immigration and Customs Services, the administrative agency that processes marriage-based petitions.  Monica and Cristina will report back to the Judge in December to notify the court and the government attorney of the status of their case.  This is a tremendous victory for The DOMA Project and we hope it will signal a shift in how similar cases will be handled in Immigration Courts across the country.”

An immigration judge in Manhattan made an historic ruling this morning, according to Lavi Soloway at Stop the Deportations:

“This morning, Monica Alcota and Cristina Ojeda, became the first married, same-sex, binational  (bi-national) couple to successfully argue that deportation proceedings should be adjourned until their marriage-based immigration case had been fully adjudicated. The Immigrations and Customs Enforcement attorney and the Immigration Judge agreed that the couple should be given an opportunity to fight for a green card on the basis of their marriage and generously adjourned proceedings accordingly.

During their brief appearance in court, the discussion centered on an acknowledgment that the couple may have a long road a head of them, but that they should be allowed to pursue their case with U.S. Immigration and Customs Services, the administrative agency that processes marriage-based petitions.  Monica and Cristina will report back to the Judge in December to notify the court and the government attorney of the status of their case.  This is a tremendous victory for The DOMA Project and we hope it will signal a shift in how similar cases will be handled in Immigration Courts across the country.”

Gay City News interviews the couple:

For Alcota and Ojeda, the legal developments of the last eight months –– in Boston, Washington, and now Manhattan –– represent some respite from what has been “hanging over our heads,” Ojeda explained –– “that I would lose her.”

That’s exactly what happened to Ojeda –– for three months at least –– in 2009. As the couple traveled through upstate New York by bus to bring Ojeda’s belongings from Buffalo, where she had just finished up a master’s degree in social work, to Queens, where the two women now live, a spot border control check resulted in Alcota being detained by immigration officials. She ended up in a privately-run detention center in Elizabeth, New Jersey, from which she could have been deported at any time.

Finally, an Immigration Judge saw Alcota and determined she had “a reasonable fear” of persecution should she be returned to Argentina. She had fled her home country, where she lived in a region near the Chilean border, with her then-partner because the two believed their lives were at risk.

PRESIDENT OBAMA ITS UP TO YOU WE WANT OUR FAMILIES TO BE TOGETHER – WE WANT THE SAME RIGHTS AS YOU!!

My Opinion: This may be precedent setting.  There are other couples in the same predicament as I am writing this -  foreign same-sex  spouses who have cases before the Immigration Judges.  Perhaps if these couples  who are married, were to file such Petitions with Department of Home Land Security, based on Alien relative petitions for green cards, they too may enjoy such suspensions of their deportation orders.

However some may prefer to continue with their asylum proceedings so that their positions are declaratory and reach conclusive results.   This may or may not be advisable depending on the case.  I can attest to the fact that when one goes through a detention period of any length,  deportation hearings, asylum proceedings all the while scrambling to find willing pro bono attorneys,   it gets to a point where one simply wants to live life without the ongoing  drama of uncertainty.

Clearly until the  DOMA law repeals, the law changes via special visas,  or UAFA is passed, the situation of the Couple in this story remains open ended and they are still at great risk.

It is time for President OBAMA to issue an executive Order for these couples and all couples who want to stay with their same-sex spouses in the USA.  If the President is challenged,   let the government be the ones to spend money on lawsuits not the individuals. That is the kind of leadership the LGBTI community expects of this administration.

PS.   I am Still in South Africa! Returning home soon…….

MORE ON SAME  SEX GREEN CARDS by Melanie Nathan

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Melanie Nathan, February 24-2011

In September 2009, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY),  together with Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO), along with Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA),  introduced the Respect for Marriage Act in the House of Representatives.

This legislation would have repealed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the 1996 law which discriminates against lawfully married same-sex couples.

Back in 2009, the Congressman noted that the 13-year-old DOMA  “singles out legally married same-sex couples for discriminatory treatment under federal law, selectively denying them critical federal responsibilities and rights, including programs like social security that are intended to ensure the stability and security of American families.”

At the time many activists were angered by the fact that some key democratic members of the House, sych as Rep. BarenyFrank,  had refused to sign on as a co-sponsor to the repeal legislation. At the time I was informed by a  Rep. Frank senior staffer, that the Congressman would not sign as he believed DADT and ENDA should be the focus and pass first, before DOMA’s repeal would be viable.

Since 2009, we have indeed accomplished the repeal of DADT, but not ENDA; we have a new Congress and now we no longer have a Democratic majority Congress.

Today, after the DOJ announced it will no longer defend DOMA, and after Senator Feinstein announced her commitment to sponsor a Senate repeal Bill,  I asked a spokesperson for Congressman Nadler whether we could expect the reintroduction of the 2009 Respect for Marriage Act, into the House of Representatives; and was happy to hear that it is in the works, and that the Congressman is  building co-sponsors and momentum now.

It is my hope that Rep Barney Frank will jump on board, if he has not done so already; and I also hope that some Republicans, will stand for equality and take the brave step to do the right thing.  The only way I believe this can happen is if the constituents defy traditional Gay Inc Style advocacy of “ignore the ‘enemy’ its a waste of time…” and bombard their representatives with their personal and family stories, imploring them to support the Repeal of DOMA.

The introduction on the Repeal is critical even in not so friendly a Congress, because it does open the hallway of the office buildings in D.C. and in local districts for constituents to show up and tell their Congress members “I have a story – this is my life- these are my kids- this is our plea for equality…” So let the dialogue begin.  You have to all show up because your Representative – whether gay friendly or not, had no idea you are out there until you shout out – “I am here and I am equal.”

The Respect for Marriage Act, as previously introduced, would ensure that valid marriages are respected under federal law, providing couples with much-needed certainty that their lawful marriages will be honored under federal law and that they will have the same access to federal responsibilities and rights as all other married couples.

The Act as it was then introduced- would accomplish this by repealing DOMA in its entirety and by adopting the place-of-celebration rule recommended in the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act, which embraces the common law principle that marriages that are valid in the state where they were entered into will be recognized.  While this rule governs recognition of marriage for purposes of federal law, marriage recognition under state law would continue to be decided by each state.

The Respect for Marriage Act did not tell any state who can marry or how married couples must be treated for purposes of state law, and would not obligate any person, church, city or state to celebrate or license a marriage of two people of the same sex.  It would merely restore the approach historically taken by states of determining, under principles of comity and Full Faith and Credit, whether to honor a couple’s marriage for purposes of state law.

Nadler noted when introducing the Repeal back in 2009 that “Supporters of DOMA argued in 1996 that the law is necessary to promote family structures that are best for children, but every credible medical, social science and child welfare organization has concluded that same-sex couples are equal parents.  Married gay and lesbian couples pay taxes, serve their communities and raise children like other couples.  Their contributions and needs are no different from those of their neighbors.  The Respect for Marriage Act would ensure that couples who assume the serious legal duties of marriage are treated fairly under federal law.”

The 2009 introduction statement further pointed out “The introduction of the Respect for Marriage Act responds directly to a call from President Obama for Congressional action on the issue.  As the President recently confirmed:  “I stand by my long-standing commitment to work with Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.  It’s discriminatory, it interferes with States’ rights, and it’s time we overturned it.”

“The full repeal of DOMA is long overdue,” said Rep. Nadler.  “When DOMA was passed in 1996, its full harm may not have been apparent to all Members of Congress because same-sex couples were not yet able to marry.  It was a so-called ‘defense’ against a hypothetical harm.  This made it easy for our opponents to demonize gay and lesbian families.  Now, in 2009, we have tens of thousands of married same-sex couples in this country, living openly, raising families and paying taxes in states that have granted them the right to marry, and it has become abundantly clear that, while the sky has not fallen on the institution of marriage, as DOMA supporters had claimed, DOMA is causing these couples concrete and lasting harm.  Discrimination against committed couples and stable families is terrible federal policy.  But, with a President who is committed to repealing DOMA and a broad, diverse coalition of Americans on our side, we now have a real opportunity to remove from the books this obnoxious and ugly law.”

Back in 2009 -“We must work to promote fairness, tolerance and justice for all Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation,” said Rep. Velazquez.  “The Respect for Marriage Act will help to ensure that the rights provided to married couples are extended across state lines and without prejudice.”   “The so called Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and unfair and denies fundamental civil liberties to countless families across America,” said Rep. Lee.  “Gay, lesbian and transgendered Americans deserve nothing less that equal protection under the law.”

“It is long past time for DOMA to go.  When DOMA passed in 1996 it was a gratuitous slap in the face.  But now, 13 years later, there are thousands of married same-sex couples who are hurt by this law.  We’ve come a long way in 13 years and the federal government shouldn’t be in the business of deciding that some married couples are worthy of federal respect and others are not.  Married same-sex couples pay federal taxes just like everyone else and have a right to the same important benefits and protections as everyone else,” said Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director at Lambda Legal.

It is indeed time and we must urge our representatives to support Rep. Nadler’s legislation now.  We must urge and push Republicans to note who their constituents are  and do parents of Gays and Lesbians and allies and couples themselves must descend on D.C. and home offices – make an appointment to see your Representative and tell them that the time is NOW!!

With that, I would like to thank Rep. Nadler for his unwavering support of Equality via UAFA  (green cards for same-sex couples) and Repeal of DOMA (marriage for same-sex couples.)

I would also like to restart the discussion about the impetus of the introduction of DOMA Repeal Legislation as a basis to thwart deportation of same-sex foreign partners who are married to USA Citizens or residents, via a moratorium.  It is simply unconscionable to deport spouses of Americans or expect the exile of an American married to a same-gender foreign spouse – while the Obama administration in essence now stands against DOMA’s defense, thereby noting its unconstitutionality.

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Related articles

• The Impact of the DOJ DOMA Decision on the Prop 8 Trial (lezgetreal.com)
• Statement of Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin on DOJ Not Defending the Defense of Marriage Act (lezgetreal.com)
• Edie Windsor, Litigant in DOMA Case Sees Promise in Obama Administration’s Decision (lezgetreal.com)
• Senator GILLIBRAND The Time for Congress to Repeal DOMA is Now (lezgetreal.com)
• DOJ Halts Defending DOMA (lezgetreal.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Melanie Nathan February 23, 2011

democratic openly lesbian Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin issued this statement today upon the news that the Department of Justice will refrain from defending two current cases which challenge the constitutionality of DOMA in the Courts.

“I welcome the news that the Department of Justice will not be defending the Defense of Marriage Act in two important cases in New England.  This represents a real shift in Department of Justice policy and is one step toward the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Some people wonder what difference this makes.  Today in the U.S., there are five states plus the District of Columbia that issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  That means there are thousands of same-sex couples across the U.S. with valid marriage licenses who are being discriminated against at the national level because of the Defense of Marriage Act.

So today, we have one small, but very significant, step in the ultimate effort to either see the Defense of Marriage Act repealed by an act of Congress or declared unconstitutional by a court in the United States.  This is progress and I’m delighted with the Attorney General’s choice.”

———————————————————————————————————

The Defense of Marriage Act denies to married same-sex couples hundreds of rights now enjoyed by heterosexual married couples.  These include medical proxy; inheritance; tax benefits; employee benefits for families, such as health and life insurance, bereavement, sick leave, child rights and custodial protection, among many others.

Related articles

• Senator GILLIBRAND The Time for Congress to Repeal DOMA is Now (lezgetreal.com)
• DOJ Halts Defending DOMA (lezgetreal.com)

Edie & Thea

ACLU client Edie Windsor reflects on the Department of Justice announcement that it would not defend the constitutionality of Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court.

Edith “Edie” Windsor, who shared her life with her late spouse, Thea Spyer, for 44 years, filed a lawsuit against the federal government for refusing to recognize their marriage. The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA), a federal statute that defines marriage for all federal purposes as a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife. Windsor and Spyer were married in Canada in 2007, and were considered married by their home state of New York.

TAKE ACTION: Tell Congress to repeal DOMA and stay out of Edie’s lawsuit!

Follow Edie’s case and all the ACLU’s work on LGBT rights. Follow the ACLU LGBT

www.aclu.org

Image via Wikipedia

Melanie Nathan February 23- 3.30 pm.

Imagine our delight – an impromptu lunch in the Castro- sitting at the table – Melanie Nathan (Executive editor LezGetReal), Rachel Wahba (Olivia Cruises and Resorts,) Molly McKay from Marriage Equality USA,  MEUSA Board Director,  Carole Scagnetti,   Matt Baum, Prop  8 activist, John Lewis without Stuart Gaffney,  (Prop 8 Litigants) and Dan Choi – eating Sushi – toasting three events in one – Dan’s 30th Birthday, Mel’s advocacy trip to South Africa and of course the impetus – the Department of Justice decision to refrain from defending DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) Cases – when suddenly we get a call and hear our Senator, Dianne Feinstein has just decided to sponsor the repeal of DOMA.

Mere hours before we wrote that the DOJ’s Press Statement signaled the end of DOMA.  That DOMA would be President Obama’s Berlin Wall  – little did we know that a few hours later Senator Feinstein would make her bold commitment.

No sooner than we received the call -  NBC channel 2 called Molly McKay for an interview and before we knew it they were filming us having lunch in Castro and toasting our ultimate celebration the hope of the repeal of Doma.  A group of committed activists – we toasted the President and our Senator.

After that we all signed a Rainbow Flag given to us as a gift from the HRC store in the Castro – as a gift to take with me to Cape Town Pride on March 3rd, when I attend the celebrations as their keynote speaker, in South Africa.

We sat around the table reflecting on who introduced who to whom and how we all cam to be there. Its was exhilarating – all the while Molly and John organizing a Rally to happen in the City at 5.00pm tonight.   Got to MEUSA site to see details and I will post same to my FaceBook page.

DAN CHOI at Lunch Today - Photo by Mel Nathan

Yes indeed U.S. senator Dianne Feinstein of California announced Wednesday that she will introduce legislation to repeal the 15-year-old law.

“As a member of the Judiciary Committee, it is my intention to introduce legislation that will once and for all repeal the Defense of Marriage Act,” she said in a statement. “My own belief is that when two people love each other and enter the contract of marriage, the federal government should honor that.”

We all noted that Feinstein had opposed DOMA when it was being decided upon in Congress in 1996.

Earlier Wednesday several Congress members, including New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, renewed their commitment to repealing DOMA.

Come Celebrate the Death Knell of DOMA at Castro and Market from 5pm – 6:30pm TONIGHT Come celebrate the good news today on DOMA repeal and more!    5-6:30pm at Harvey Milk Plaza, Castro and Market in SF   – Lt. Dan Choi and many others will be speaking.

“Note: In the Video we are celebrating the DOJ and Feinstein Announcements.  We were all so excited. While we were doing so, we were holding the flag signed by Lt. Dan Choi, and all of us in the picture for me to bring to South Africa as the MEUSA (Marriage Equality USA,  International Ambassador for Africa…mel”

http://www.capetownpride.org/news/news/66-pinkball

• Senator GILLIBRAND The Time for Congress to Repeal DOMA is Now (lezgetreal.com)
• DOJ Halts Defending DOMA (lezgetreal.com)

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Image via Wikipedia

Melanie Nathan – Feb 23-2011

Gillibrand:   PRAISES OBAMA ADMIN DECISION TO NO LONGER DEFEND DOMA IN COURT  and Statements by MEUSA

Washington D.C. – After U.S. Attorney General Holder’s announcement today that the Department of Justice, at the instruction of President Obama, will no longer defend Section 3 of Defense of Marriage Act lawsuits in court, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a leading voice in the Senate to repeal DOMA, released the following statement:

“Sexual orientation discrimination has no place in American law. I commend the Obama administration for upholding this American value today by concluding this statute is unconstitutional.

“The fact is that history is moving in a direction that ensures gay and lesbian couples are offered the same basic rights as everyone else – the right to get married, start a family and receive the full benefits that come with it, and be counted the same as everyone else.  I look forward to the day when New York and all states accept this basic principle of fairness.

“The time for Congress to repeal DOMA is now, and I will work hard to make sure marriage equality becomes a reality for all.”

Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act would extend over 1,000 federal rights and hundreds of additional state rights to lesbian and gay couples who are married in states that allow gay marriage – rights including medical treatment and hospital visitation; medical proxy; inheritance; tax benefits; employee benefits for families, including health and life insurance, bereavement, sick leave, child rights and custodial protection, among many others.  These rights would also have the potential to be provided to married gay and lesbian couples living in New York, which recognizes out-of-state marriages.

Senator Gillibrand believes lesbian and gay couples deserve the same rights, responsibilities, benefits and obligation that opposite sex married couples have – and that come only through marriage equality.  Senator Gillibrand is committed to ensuring the same basic rights for everyone, and that’s why she’s working to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Long time activist and Same-sex marriage litigant in California, Robin Tyler when asked if this is President Obama’s Berlin Wall moment, told  Melanie Nathan of lezGetReal – “Yes. This is one more step toward our rights. Activism in the streets, hand in hand with advocacy, in the courts and the political system, has cracked the wall. If we keep up the pressure, we will win.   It is our duty to our youth not just to say “it gets better”, but to make it better.”

Marriage Equality USA also commented stating:-

“Marriage Equality USA applauds President Obama’s historic decision to declare his support for a heightened standard of review and to stop defending the “Defense of Marriage Act” in pending lawsuits challenging DOMA as unconstitutional.  The Attorney General has confirmed that the Department of Justice will no longer defend the measure, which severely limits the potential of states to honor or carry out same-sex marriages, in court.

“This is a watershed moment as the President of the United States and the Attorney General have together taken a powerful stand against this unjust law.  We are overjoyed that President Obama has taken concrete measures to fulfill on his pledge to end DOMA.  The momentum is building to stop using taxpayers’ money to enforce laws that serve only to deny Gay Americans equality under the law.  The President and Attorney General have followed the example of California Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown and State Attorney Generals Bill Lockyer and Kamila Harris who have refused to defend Proposition 8 as constitutional.  President Obama will be remembered as standing on the right side of history and for ensuring that the enduring American principle of equality under the law is finally extended to include lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans,” said Molly McKay, Marriage Equality USA Media Director.

“There are thousands of same-sex couples legally married across the country.  DOMA stands in the doorway of recognizing and honoring those marriages and denying same-sex couples access to the 1,138 federal rights of marriage.  This injustice cannot and will not stand.  President Obama’s decision restores our faith and our hope that he will be the President who brings our country on par with our allies across the globe and ensures fairness and justice for all its citizens,” said Molly McKay, Marriage Equality USA Media Director.

“As plaintiffs in California’s historic marriage equality lawsuit, we are excited to see the President step forward to usher in marriage equality beyond a state by state momentum.  His decision brings closer the day when America will ensure equality from sea to shining sea,” said Stuart Gaffney, plaintiffs in the Strauss v Horton lawsuit who married his husband John Lewis in California prior to Proposition 8’s passage.”

Related articles

• Senator Gillibrand Wants To Prioritize Marriage Equality Going Forward (lezgetreal.com)
• Kirsten Gillibrand Asks N.Y. Lawmakers to Pass Equal Marriage Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• President Obama Signs DADT “Repeal,” Yet No Equality for ServiceMembers (lezgetreal.com)

Image via Wikipedia

Melanie Nathan. Feb 2302011

Statement of the Attorney General on Litigation Involving the Defense of Marriage Act

WASHINGTON – The Attorney General made the following statement today about the Department’s course of action in two lawsuits, Pedersen v. OPM and Windsor v. United States, challenging Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage for federal purposes as only between a man and a woman:

In the two years since this Administration took office, the Department of Justice has defended Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act on several occasions in federal court.   Each of those cases evaluating Section 3 was considered in jurisdictions in which binding circuit court precedents hold that laws singling out people based on sexual orientation, as DOMA does, are constitutional if there is a rational basis for their enactment.   While the President opposes DOMA and believes it should be repealed, the Department has defended it in court because we were able to advance reasonable arguments under that rational basis standard.

Section 3 of DOMA has now been challenged in the Second Circuit, however, which has no established or binding standard for how laws concerning sexual orientation should be treated.   In these cases, the Administration faces for the first time the question of whether laws regarding sexual orientation are subject to the more permissive standard of review or whether a more rigorous standard, under which laws targeting minority groups with a history of discrimination are viewed with suspicion by the courts, should apply.

After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny.   The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional.   Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases.   I fully concur with the President’s determination.

Consequently, the Department will not defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA as applied to same-sex married couples in the two cases filed in the Second Circuit.   We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation.   I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option.   The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.

Furthermore, pursuant to the President ’ s instructions, and upon further notification to Congress, I will instruct Department attorneys to advise courts in other pending DOMA litigation of the President’s and my conclusions that a heightened standard should apply, that Section 3 is unconstitutional under that standard and that the Department will cease defense of Section 3.

The Department has a longstanding practice of defending the constitutionality of duly-enacted statutes if reasonable arguments can be made in their defense.   At the same time, the Department in the past has declined to defend statutes despite the availability of professionally responsible arguments, in part because – as here – the Department does not consider every such argument to be a “reasonable” one.   Moreover, the Department has declined to defend a statute in cases, like this one, where the President has concluded that the statute is unconstitutional.

Much of the legal landscape has changed in the 15 years since Congress passed DOMA.   The Supreme Court has ruled that laws criminalizing homosexual conduct are unconstitutional.   Congress has repealed the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.   Several lower courts have ruled DOMA itself to be unconstitutional.   Section 3 of DOMA will continue to remain in effect unless Congress repeals it or there is a final judicial finding that strikes it down, and the President has informed me that the Executive Branch will continue to enforce the law.   But while both the wisdom and the legality of Section 3 of DOMA will continue to be the subject of both extensive litigation and public debate, this Administration will no longer assert its constitutionality in court.

Melanie Nathan- Jan 21-2011 – CA REP. CEDILLO INTRODUCES CALIFORNIA DREAM ACT  WITH COALITION OF BUSINESS, EDUCATION AND LABOR LEADERS

The proposed law would grant qualifying undocumented college students access to financial aid from the University of California, California State University and Community Colleges. Assemblymember Gilbert Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), will be introducing the California DREAM Act in the California State Assembly.

The California DREAM Act, first introduced by Cedillo in 2006, will be introduced in two bills.  The first bill would allow students that meet the in-state tuition requirements to apply for and receive specified financial aid administered by California’s public colleges and universities.  The types of aid these students would be eligible for include: Board of Governors (BOG) Fee Waiver and Institutional Student Aid:  Student aid program administered by the attending college or university (i.e. State University Grant, UC Grant).  The second bill would allow students that meet the in-state tuition requirements to apply for and receive Cal Grants by California’s public colleges and universities.

Given this level of creativity in the California Legislature – perhaps LGBT groups and pro-LGBT legislators would be willing to keep an eye on how this idea could be used  for legislation to help gays and lesbians in bi-national same-sex relationships, who are subjected to exorbitant student fees if one has International student status; whereas if the federal law did not discriminate against same-sex marriages, they would not have such high fees.

The law in California prescribes that gays and lesbian couples must be treated equally under CA law if married legally (during prop 8 window of opportunity) and also if married in a jurisdiction outside of California at any time.  But that is State specific to California.  The same-sex couples in California who are involved in binational relationships – with a foreign partner who happens to be in the USA on a student visa, would be better off if their partners were admitted into the USA pursuant to a green card petition.  However same-sex partners are denied this right under the Immigration law because DOMA designates that on a Federal level marriage can only be between a man and a woman.  Heterosexual married couples in California do not need to have student visas to study in the USA; clearly they are best served by green cards and can convert from student visas if that is how they first enter the Country.  The  benefit of the green card gives the foreigner residency status for all financially beneficial purposes under the State law.

The Cedillo CA Dream Act – would include qualified  “undocumented” students who come out of a US high school, and are here in the USA through no fault of their own (so to speak.)   However when a foreign partner or spouse from a same-sex relationship arrives in the USA on an international student visa (often the only means to enter the country) such foreigner is not undocumented and will not qualify for student financial benefits, even if married to a US citizen, not under this new proposed CA DREAM ACT nor any existing law.

If this law is  approved, California would be the third state to offer financial aid to undocumented students after Texas and New Mexico. [ha - the Texas you righties love to drool over - Z.] Gay rights are not covered  under the proposed legislation as it stands and advocates should be lobbying for parity, for same-sex equality, when it comes to paying tuition fees in the State of California.

WHAT: Assembly member Gilbert Cedillo announces the introduction of the California Dream Act with a coalition of business, education and labor leaders including Kelly Candaele, Los Angeles Community College Board of Trustees, Javier Nuñez, President, Executive Board, Laborers International Union, Local 300, Kent Wong, Director, UCLA Labor Center, National Council of La Raza, Nancy Ramirez, Western Regional Counsel, MALDEF, Angelica Salas, Executive Director, CHIRLA, LA Dream Team and NAKASEC (National Korean American Service & Education Consortium), Korean Resource Center, Marvin Andrade, Executive Director, CARECEN, Evan Bacalao, Sr. Director of Civic Engagement, NALEO and David Huerta, Regional Vice President, SEIU United Service Workers West.

by Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles

• Judge Says CalPERS DOMA Suit Can Proceed (lezgetreal.com)
• Green Cards for Same-sex Couples – Lowest Priority by LGBT ORG and Congress (lezgetreal.com)
• My “Sophie’s Choice” and other “Give A Damn” Same-Sex Immigration Stories (lezgetreal.com)

Melanie Nathan – Jan 13, 2010 – 6.30 PM – nathan@privatecourts.com -
The government just filed its opening brief in the appeal of the DOMA cases out of Massachusetts. Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management is a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (case number 1:09-cv-10309-JLT). The plaintiffs in the suit challenge the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the section that defines the terms ‘marriage’ as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” and ‘spouse’ as “a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”The trial began on May 6, 2010, and was heard by District Judge Joseph Louis Tauro.^[2] On July 8, Tauro ruled section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in a summary judgment.^[3] He later stayed the implementation of his decision pending appeal and the Department of Justice entered an appeal on October 12, 2010.

Mass DOMA Cases – Govt Opening Brief

Related articles

• Thirty years’ of LGBT Historic Documents Donated to Yale University (lezgetreal.com)
• Second Major Multi-Plaintiff Lawsuit Challenges DOMA (lezgetreal.com)

Here is my family story which is on The Give A Damn Site

During January of 2002, I went into an online chat room for the first time ever and developed a friendship with a woman from Israel. Coincidentally she was soon to arrive in the USA to study at a University in Texas. I invited her to stop in California, en route, so we could meet and soon I realized that this was the person with whom I wanted to spend the rest of my life.

Our relationship flourished while Dor was studying in Texas and soon she transferred to a college near my home in Marin County; and so we moved in together and married as soon as it was legal for us to do so. At the time, my daughter, HC, from my previous relationship was five years of age. Dor and HC developed a close relationship and they could not have loved each other more.

We were able to change Dor’s student Visa to a very limited R1 Visa. Notwithstanding the fact that California recognized our domestic partnership and subsequent marriage, I, the US citizen, could not sponsor Dor in the same way as a different gender couple could.

Dorit taught Jewish religious studies, Hebrew and Bible at a local congregation, and was qualified for the Religious worker’s Visa. We were luckier than many others in the same-sex bi-national community because we had found a way, albeit expensive and fraught with difficulties.

With Dor, the last in her family of Holocaust survivors, and biological clock ticking, we decided to extend our family and to inseminate so that Dor would carry a baby for us. The birth of Refael was one of the most exhilarating moments in our lives, with HC, the big sister ecstatic at the arrival of her new baby sister.

Our lives continued; and we were a tight family, notwithstanding our constant fear that we would have to part ways if Dor’s Visa did not lead to her intended immigration within the time constraints of the R1 termination date. We went through this process a few times over a four year period and it drained us, financially and emotionally.

During this time, Dor nursed me through breast cancer – imagine having to leave my medical care, my home, my extended family and one of my daughters or choosing to separate from my beloved because of my inability to sponsor her to remain in the US.

When the R1 sunset date was upon us; and again we advocated crazily for the renewal by Congress of the R1 Visa process. With mere days and then hours to the termination of the very law we had relied on for so long, and Dor’s process hanging severely in the balance, Congress did extend the Visa, setting yet another sunset date for March 06, 2009.

Dor’s lawyer informed us that our chances of success were remote as the timing was still not in our favor, as well as other aspects of the statute and rules that were so onerous and arbitrary on the part of DHS. We were given low odds and another huge legal bill and a decision to make – should we continue on this Visa path? The choices were dim; in fact there were no feasible choices. I could not face the Sophie’s choice that had been haunting me for so many years.

How could I leave my then 11 year old (due to shared custody agreement with my ex) and go with Dor and the baby to Israel? How could I say goodbye to the love of my life-my spouse, and my then three year old Refael. What if I got really sick again, how could I split the sisters?

I went to see my member of Congress and there was nothing that could be done for our situation. As an American citizen and with both children American citizens there was no law to prevent the high probability of Dor having to leave the USA. I had also determined that I would never prevent Dor from taking our baby with her; the attachment and bond between them would be forcibly broken and my baby would suffer irreparable harm. There were no choices, only extreme denial.

So we paid and prayed… and then before the final impending sunset date, DHS showed up at Dor’s work, the Congregation, with three official investigators to check that her basis for her Visa to immigrate was legitimate; and of course it was. They approved her application and we were able to submit the finalizing petition.

With 7 days to the final sunset of the R1 process, we received a letter stating that the R1 Visa Law was going to sunset and this time there would be no renewal by Congress. This would not give enough time to process the final piece of Dor’s approved application. Again, I spun into denial determined to fight and not willing to think of my ‘Sophie’s choice.’ There was no plan B.

It was then that I went to Senator Feinstein for help and with mere hours to the sunset of the law, Dor’s file was given a priority position and viewed just before the 11th hour. Dor was approved and received her green card about two weeks later. This four year hell cost us a great deal, emotionally stressful and financially debilitating.

I calculated how much more it had cost us compared to that of a straight couple who could simply petition because of their recognized marriage. I took into account legal fees, non-resident student fees, work limitation losses and Visa fees and renewals: A whopping total of $71,600 for us (over a six year period) compared to $1,500 for a straight couple over a six month period.

It was the spread of our good news that led to my introduction to Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado and my advocacy for them and other bi-nationals. This is a cause that is barely known to most of America and in fact, when we mentioned our plight to gay and straight people alike, many were clueless to this reprehensible aspect of our lack of Federal rights.

I hope that Give a Damn will draw attention to us and the 100,000 more in this invidious situation. Please come out in support of UAFA – The Uniting American Families Act. We should not have to make such choices in the short time we have in this life…

Melanie

Gay and lesbian same-sex coupled Americans in binational relationships are forced to exile the USA – their partners are forced to hide, lie – or they are forced to live across continents, separate from each other. Read more stories at… The Give A Damn Site –

by Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
@oblogdeeoblogda

Related articles

• BINAT Visa Process & Moratorium: Same-Sex Partner Green Cards (lezgetreal.com)
• Same-Sex Green Cards: The Case for a Presidential Executive Order 2011 (lezgetreal.com)
• Ireland: Same Sex Partners to be included in Immigration Laws (lezgetreal.com)
• DADT Repeal & Equality in Immigration: Impact on Same-Sex Green Cards UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• What does Sarah Palin’s ‘Don’t Retreat Just Reload’ have to do with ‘President Obama Forgets Green Cards for Same-Sex Couples’ (lezgetreal.com)
• Immigration Equality Interview Fails to Appease Same Sex Couples (lezgetreal.com)
• Robin McGehee Informs White House about Innovative BINAT Visa for Same-Sex Partner Immigration Sponsorship (lezgetreal.com)
• BINAT Visa Process and Moratorium: Same-Sex Partner Green Cards (pinkbananaworld.com)
• Robin McGehee of GetEQUAL Speaks up for Equality and Binational Same-Sex Couples – at White House Meeting (lezgetreal.com)
• The Shame: Tomorrow A DREAM but no UAFA! (lezgetreal.com)

Melanie Nathan, Dec 30, 2010. At the federal level of government in the United States, laws are made almost exclusively by legislation. Legislation originates as an Act of Congress passed by the Congress of the United States; such acts were either signed into law by the President or passed by Congress after a presidential veto.

Legislation is not the only source of regulations which have the force of law. There is also judge-made common law and constitutional law. The President can issue executive orders pursuant to a grant of discretion from Congress, or under the inherent powers that office holds to deal with certain matters of foreign policy.

When it comes to immigration matters, the standing law is that covered by the Immigration and Naturalization Act of the USA.  This law cannot be changed, without the involvement of Congress through an amendment process.  However I believe that when it comes to the regulations to effect the intent behind the law or something that unexpectedly and detrimentally impacts the law, the President of the USA can provide an executive order to adjust the circumstances, so impacted.

I do not believe that it was ever the intention of the Defense of Marriage Act to deny the de facto relationships of same-sex couples. I believe President Clinton who signed it into law would attest that it was never his intention to cause American citizens and Residents in same-sex relationships to have to exile the USA to pursue their Constitutional right to happiness. However Americans in the USA, in same sex relationships are denied the possibility to sponsor a partner for a green card.

Accordingly I believe that President Obama has the power to effect an Executive Order on behalf of same-sex couples who are specifically excluded by DOMA, from participating in the US Immigration laws.   This  quest would specifically denote a right by way of process to an American (citizen or resident) and not a right to an immigrant; the right of the American to Petition for a same-sex partner to reside in the USA, that is currently excluded via laws that simply fail to include the de facto situation, thereby causing extreme  hardship to American Families.

I do not believe the Immigration law needs to change for this to happen in the short term; I do not believe that this reflects in any way shape or form on the marriage equality debate.  It does not seek to change DOMA and nor does it impact the Immigration Act as we know it, at all.

There have been many early executive orders during all Presidencies;  the State Department began numbering executive orders in the early 20th century, starting retroactively from President Abraham Lincoln‘s Executive Order Establishing a Provisional Court in Louisiana issued in 1862. An executive order is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government, generally to staff of the executive branch and not to the citizens of the country. Article I, Section 1 of the US Constitution specifically reserves all federal legislative authority to Congress, not the president.

However here what would occur would be the President ordering the inclusion of same-sex partners under existing law, based on the de facto existence of relationships, the anomaly caused by State law that endorse such relationships, while the Federal government fails to secure the right of the American to remain at home in a relationship of their choice.

Examples of prior Immigration related executive orders -

• Employment of aliens under Federal contracts: EO 12989
• Grenada; revocation of naturalization exemptions: EO 12913
• Persian Gulf conflict participants; expedited naturalization: EO 12939

The Case for an executive order is easily made:

Urgent Need; Immediate Harm;

Without the passage of a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act the exclusionary legislation that caused the harm, or the passage of the Uniting American Families Act, (UAFA) the pending Legislation – which would fix the problem, there is little else that can happen to right this immeasurable harm in the near future.

Same-sex couples have been watching the introduction of legislation come and go for the best part of 15 years to no avail

Americans are living in exile to be with partners – separated from extended families, children etc.  Some are getting ready to leave the USA as I write this; some partners have not seen each other in years- partners are deported, living  jobless in hiding; the expense to maintain an international relationship is prohibitive and I can go on….

The Dream Act failed – Do you think Republicans will give a damn about gay and lesbian couples?

Now that DADT is repealed Military also need to a mechanism to bring home foreign born partners after serving abroad.

Now I have never written an Executive Order or anything similar before and so please do not take this as my expectation of what one would really look like or entail. In fact I may even be coming at it from the wrong angle – there may be a more direct way to do it than to Order a Special Board charged with a duty as I have done below.   I thought of doig it that way so that the ORDER would not be a blanket order, but would have built in measure for responsible actions, where evidence and contractual nexus helm the process.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

PREAMBLE:- Same Sex couples are a de facto part of American Society. The Defense of Marriage Act. specifically excludes Same-Sex partners from being included under the Immigration & Naturalization Act of 1952.

Some de facto same-sex relationships impacted by the Law include children who suffer hardship if parents are forced to separate or leave the United States;

No US citizen should be forced into exile or to leave their homes, careers and countries to be able to pursue a relationship with a same-sex partner;

The intention of the Defense of Marriage Act was define marriage as between a man and a woman only. In No way does this order derogate from that concept nor does it attempt to re-define marriage;

Predicated on the fact that DOMA was never intended to divide unmarried couples (who did not have the legal option to marry in accordance with the Federal definition established by DOMA)  and families or prevent them from living together.

It remains the policy of this Administration to enforce the immigration laws to the fullest extent, for all cases that do not conform to this Order;  including the detection and deportation of undocumented aliens.

IT IS ORDERED:-

I. Establishment of Emergency Board, to be led by personnel appointed by the President of the USA and office of the Department of Homeland Security for the purposes outlined as follows:-

I. Investigating the separation of same-sex partners whose relationships are excluded from immigration rights and privileges under the Immigration and Nationality Act of  1952 as amended ; with the specific purpose of providing remedies and urgent relief to specific couples and through general regulations and remedies for couples at large:-

a. To establish a Special Visa Program (similar to Fiancé Visa/ R1 Visa) to facilitate the reunification of same-sex partners in relationships where a contractual nexus can be proved within six months of entry by foreign partner into USA; and to to provide a path to citizenship upon conditions to be determined.

b. To provide a mechanism for the adjustment of Status for same-sex foreign partners who are currently in the USA undocumented, whose Visa has expired, who enter into same-sex relationships while in the USA, including those in Asylum or deportation proceedings, or under ten year re-entry ban, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;

c. To define contractual nexus (I have prepared my own)

d. To define and detail evidence required to prove contractual nexus:- (I have prepared a list)

II. Circumstances to Investigate:

• circumstances of American citizens forced leave the USA to be in relationship
• and live with a foreign born partner, where there is proof of contractual nexus;
• to review immigration cases of foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US
  Citizen or  legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review deportation cases involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a
  US Citizen or Legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review asylum cases foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen and
  Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
• to review Visa Applications

III Moratorium:

Immediate moratorium on all deportations involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;  to include a retroactive waiver of 10 year ban on re-entry to USA.

The Power shall be vested in the Board and All Regulations stemming therefrom shall be subject to the oversight of a duly appointed Staffer and ratification by the President of the USA.

—————————————————————————————————————-

CONCLUSION:

Maybe this is a pipe dream and I have written about this over a year ago – I hope to join with other advocates in the New Year to push for a creative remedy for the unconscionable and reprehensible inequity to same-sex couples and their families, immediate and extended.  This international community cannot wait any longer – not even for what it will take to repeal DOMA, Enact UAFA.  This is not an immigration reform issue – it is an immigration equality – as in parity- issue. Hence the bi-national same sex community which advocates, waits and prays for remedies should not be expected to wait any longer while an anti-immigrant weighted Congress plodders along with Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

——————————————————————–

Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
@oblogdeeoblogda
@lezgetreal
www.visualcv.com/melnathan

_________________________________________________________________________________

Related articles

• BINAT Visa Process & Moratorium: Same-Sex Partner Green Cards (lezgetreal.com)
• Ireland: Same Sex Partners to be included in Immigration Laws (lezgetreal.com)
• DADT Repeal & Equality in Immigration: Impact on Same-Sex Green Cards UAFA (lezgetreal.com)
• The Shame: Tomorrow A DREAM but no UAFA! (lezgetreal.com)
• What next for Immigration Equality – Binationals are Concerned (lezgetreal.com)
• SCREAM: President Obama Act Now for Binational Same Sex Couples (lezgetreal.com)
• What does Sarah Palin’s ‘Don’t Retreat Just Reload’ have to do with ‘President Obama Forgets Green Cards for Same-Sex Couples’ (lezgetreal.com)

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Shirley Tan Giving Evidence at SJC for UAFA 6/03/2009

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT  FINAL ROLL CALL

Melanie Nathan; Dec 23-2010 – The repeal this week of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has opened the flood gates – its implementation will provide a vivid realm,, yet unseen by mainstream America, of the insidious inequality suffered by gay and lesbian couples who have no rights and privileges under the US Immigration law.

It is a well known fact that service members stationed abroad, return home to the USA with  fiancés, spouse and sometimes children as well. These service members can sponsor spouses for green cards, immediately, via a petition under the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

However, even if serving openly, the same will not and cannot apply for same-sex military personnel and service members who find love abroad.

One of the most onerous aspects of LGBT inequality is the fact that an American citizen or resident in a same-sex relationship has no recourse whatsoever under the immigration laws of the USA.   The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA,)  in effect, precludes gay and lesbian couples from sponsoring their foreign partners and spouses  for green cards.  DOMA is a Federal Law, and its purpose is to define marriage as being between a man and woman only.  Immigration is covered by the Immigration and Naturalization Act, a Federal Law. Thus same-sex partners are excluded from the Immigration & Naturalization Act.  There is no relief for this discriminatory law.

They will either have to return to the US without spouse/ partner (even if legally married abroad or in a civil union and even if they have had a child together who may be a US citizen abroad,) or they will have to remain in exile, unable to return.

Gay and lesbian Service members who remain enlisted and obligated to the military, will be forcibly separated from spouses.

The only chance of changing this inequity is the stand alone Bill, Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) introduced by Congressman Jerry Nadler into Congress in 2009.    However instead of pursuing this Bill as a stand alone Bill during the 2009/2010 year, its momentum was subdued by an improbably strategy – to include UAFA in Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR.)   UAFA, after being snubbed by Rep. Luis Guttierrez in the House version, and a later reversal with promise of inclusion (yet to be done) UAFA was included in the Senate version of CIR.

At this time gay and lesbian Americans, whether in service or civilians are forced to either part ways with spouses or partners, to choose between country and beloved, forced  into exile to be with one’s spouse/ partner or spouses / partners are turned away from US airports, sent home, or held in detention and facing deportations.

The one LGBT organization through self proclaimed domain, charged itself with the strategy and  lobby of UAFA. Instead its resources and time was devoted to supporting the  DREAM  ACT (which failed passage) and wooing Latino groups to support inclusion of UAFA into CIR.   This has failed to get UAFA much more than a burial in CIR.

The greatest mistake was to pursue UAFA as an Immigration Bill, when in fact it is an EQUALITY Bill.  Now it is tied up with asylum for 12 million undocumented foreigners living in the USA, as well as the complicated issues such as biometrics and border control.

The break needed for this invidious situation to change may be this week’s repeal of DADT and its ultimate implementation. Perhaps UAFA can be extracted from its grave and again stand  alone to be vigorously pursued as such.  Notably a few Republicans crossed over to repeal DADT.  When it becomes evident that same-sex military service members have no uniformity with heterosexual service members, service for country may be pitted again, against lack of rights, to yield a compassionate turn toward immigration equality and the passage of UAFA. That would then place the words “permanent partner” next to “spouse” in the Immigration and Nationality Act and same-sex marriage would not be the issue.

Then again President Obama has hinted at a change in his view on gay marriage. Whereas he has expressed favor for civil unions and equality, he acknowledges that the LGBT community sees Civil Unions separate and thus not equal and he is willing to “have the conversation.”

If the Defense of Marriage Act were to be repealed then there is no need for UAFA as same-sex couples would have equal treatment under the federal law. Perhaps then the only chance for immigration equality is indeed marriage equality.  The same argument may be applied as above to UAFA – that when Congress sees the acute inequity through the visual of service in the military, that being the micro – could well impact the macro – and cross over Republicans could make the vote.

However, given what we learned from this lame duck congress, the task is enormous. UAFA or DOMA’s repeal lies in the hands of a bunch of obstructionist bigots. What chance do we stand of getting either through the house until a new election alters the numbers and then we have no idea who will be President.

CIVIL RIGHTS

1. The visible morphing of the Gay movement into a LGBT Civil Rights movement – using every resource available to seize a one note mantra – CIVIL RIGHTS FOR LGBT.   This would require an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to include protection for Sexual Orientation and Gender identity.

That would involve grassroots, straight allies, civil disobedience, diplomacy, lobbying, strategies to win allies and tell our stories, introducing our families, creating our own TV channel, winning hearts and minds, encouraging positive media, uniform and universal messaging, the same talking points, focus on the BIG equal as opposed to limiting resources by focusing on piecemeal. I could go on and on…

BINATIONAL HELP URGENT:-

2. But what about now? What about the deportations, the exiles and the separations.   I believe I am the only person to explore and author the idea of a BINAT VISA.   An interim stop gap measure through DHS issuing special visas for same-sex couples with conditions that can be met and that would thwart fraud. It can be done…and I hope you will join me is to pursue it further in the new year.  I have already received a large amount of pledges to help pursue this action, but would need much more to make it a reality.

SO all said and done, DADT is much bigger than people may realize, because it sits at the helm of what is now RIGHT for the Military must translate into EQUAL….for the Military and through that lens we can perceive and attain the larger picture.

How you can help
TO SIGN PETITION

http://immigration.change.org/petitions/view/special_visa_for_binational_lgbt_spouse-perma-partners

TO MAKE A PLEDGE

Melanie Nathan
Nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles

• Ireland: Same Sex Partners to be included in Immigration Laws (lezgetreal.com)
• What next for Immigration Equality – Binationals are Concerned (lezgetreal.com)
• President Obama Signs DADT “Repeal,” Yet No Equality for ServiceMembers (lezgetreal.com)
• Nancy Pelosi please Include Same-Sex Greencards (UAFA) with ENDA (lezgetreal.com)
• Robin McGehee of GetEQUAL Speaks up for Equality and Binational Same-Sex Couples – at White House Meeting (lezgetreal.com)
• What GetEQUAL’s Robin McGehee Told the White House Today (lezgetreal.com)
• CALL TO ACTION “Greencards for LGBT Same Sex Foreign Partners” in Lame Duck NOW! (lezgetreal.com)
• Does Immigration Equality Really think Comprehensive Immigration Reform can pass in Lame Duck! (lezgetreal.com)
• Asking for Help Now- to Include UAFA – Green Cards for Same Sex Permanent Partners (lezgetreal.com)
• President Obama Talks DADT and DOMA Repeal (lezgetreal.com)

The Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy still has a way to go, needing the approval of the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of Joint Chief of Staff, followed by a 60-day waiting period. Aside from assuring it will be “months, not years, the White House has not given a time table as to how long the process will take or when exactly the policy will finally end. Until that time, organizations such as Servicemembers United have cautioned lesbian, gay, and bisexual servicemembers about coming out until the the law is finally repealed.

Some of those who attended today’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Repeal signing included: Senator Al Franken, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Mark Udal, Congressman Jared Pollis, and Congressman Barney Frank, as well as advocates such as former Lt. Dan Choi,First Class Petty Officer Autumn Sandeen (Ret), former Cpl. Evelyn Thomas, former Sgt. Justin Elize and Former West Point Cadet Katie Miller.  After promising to hold accountable President Obama until he repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Robin McGehee from GetEQUAL was in attendance along with Heather Cronk and Paul Yandura. Longtime activists David Mixner and Frank Karmeny were also in attendance and said they were overjoyed.

The occasion was especially emotional for former Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, the first Marine seriously injured in Iraq, who stood on stage with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid during the ceremony. In his remarks, President Obama said, “No longer will tens of thousands of Americans in uniform be asked to live a lie, or look over their shoulder, in order to serve the country that they love.”

The Don’t Ask Don’t Tell struggle is far from over as families of LGBT service members still do not have acknowledgment or legal equality. As the implementation of the repeal starts to happen there will be glaring holes, shedding light on the inequity for LGB(T )service members. This could result in the desired impetus for full equality to the entire country.

Although not included in the original DADT Act, Transgender and gender-nonconforming service members continue to be excluded through special medical designations from serving in the military, at all.  One wonders if a medical designation requires its own BILL or if such can be changed via policy or executive order.

Also until such time as The Defense of Marriage Act is repealed there will be no equality for Lesbian and Gays serving, as DADT repeal simply allows them to serve.Housing, medical, all benefits will be missing for same -sex couples.   In essence all DADT does is say that gays and lesbians can now serve openly.

For as long as the discriminatory laws remain in place, such as DOMA, in essence LGBT service members will not have parity with heterosexual servicemembers.

Another well known fact is that Servicemembers often fall in love while stationed on foreign soil.  Straight service members can marry and  sponsor spouses for green cards, with ease; yet even  if married (legally according to State law or foreign Country Law) Gay and Lesbian spouses/ partners do not share the same right.  There is no way for a gay or lesbian American citizen in the military or otherwise,  to bring their foreign partner into the USA.

The bill also does not regulate policy or address concerns regarding military academies providing welcoming safe spaces or allowances for lesbian, gay, or bisexual cadets and students. Former West Point Cadet Katie Miller said today that “although Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is making history today, I do not think students or cadets will be willing to come out in that setting. Much more work needs to be done to have safe schools.”

The hope of  the DADT repeal is its ability to provide a visible  micro of the macro; and hence  may well serve to jump start the emerging LGBT civil rights movement that will ensue for absolute full equality based also on gender identity and sexual orientation.

As President Obama finished signing the Don’t Ask Don’t Tel Repeal Act of 2010 into law, he stood up very proudly and said, “that is done”.

One part is done, Mr. President, but until the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal policy is certified and put in place, transgender and gender non-conforming service members are included, and all military cadets and students feel safe on campus, as well as marriage equality made law, this is a mere start – we still have a lot more work to do.

Picture by Shannon Cuttle©
DADT  Survivors:-
Evelyn Thomas and  Katie Miller,

Article Melanie Nathan and Shannon Cuttle
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles

• Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Makes Cloture! (lezgetreal.com)
• Out Lesbian Cadet, Katie Miller Wants Back in Military (lezgetreal.com)
• DADT Repeal Means Joy, Sorrow, And Still A Threat Of Discharge For Now (lezgetreal.com)
• President Obama Has Repealed ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ (lezgetreal.com)
• Rep. Baldwin: DADT Repeal “Is Long Overdue, But No Less Welcome” (lezgetreal.com)
• House Passes DADT Repeal Bill- On To The Senate (lezgetreal.com)
• NCLR Applauds “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Repeal (lezgetreal.com)

Melanie Nathan Nov 29-2010  Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) has pursued gay civil rights In New England  since the group was founded in 1978. Its precedent-setting legal victories include bringing marriage equality to Massachusetts in 2004 and Connecticut in 2008.  The group said Monday the donated materials include correspondence, legal documents and photographs from events spanning the HIV epidemic to the legalization of gay marriage in some states. Sterling Memorial Library Director of Manuscripts and Archives Christine Weideman said the university is grateful to be entrusted with preserving records from a vital part of history.  The documents show the course of marriage equality over the past 30 years in the State.

Amongst GLAD’s work is the latest challenge to DOMA; On November 9, 2010 GLAD filed  a second major, multi-plaintiff lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the government’s denial of protections and responsibilities to married gay and lesbian couples. This new action specifically addresses married couples in Connecticut, Vermont,  and New Hampshire, and comes on the heels of a Massachusetts Federal District Court ruling this summer finding DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional.

“DOMA must fall. In 1996, when Congress passed DOMA, the stated goal was to harm gay people and same-sex families with this law, and sadly, it has succeeded.  Married gay and lesbian couples fall through the federal safety nets that exist for other married people,” said Mary L. Bonauto, Civil Rights Project Director for GLAD.  “We have to keep the pressure on and get DOMA off the books before it does even more harm.”

In Pedersen et al. v. Office of Personnel Management, GLAD represents five married same-sex couples and a widower who have all been denied federal rights and protections simply because they are married to a person of the same sex.

Source: AP

Melanie Nathan
nathan@provatecourts.com

Melanie Nathan- Nov 29-2010 – A judge has rejected an attempt by the Minnesota Family Council to intervene in a lawsuit challenging state law that bans same-sex marriage. Three same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the state of Minnesota earlier this year arguing that the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law in 1997 violates the state Constitution. The Family Council argued that it should be part of the lawsuit, in part, because if DOMA is ruled unconstitutional, it will cost them millions to fight same-sex marriage. The court said the group has no standing to defend DOMA.

Peter J. Nickitas, the Attorney for the couples, said, “This decision is a great victory for the plaintiffs and their families, marriage equality, and the integrity of the court system.”

“The Council’s alleged injuries would occur solely due to its sincerely-held belief that principles rooted in its interpretations of religious texts are best for the well-being of children and families, and that marriage only between one man and one woman accords with these principles,” wrote Minnesota Fourth District Court Judge Mary S. DuFrense (PDF). “The Court certainly understands that the Council feels strongly about the social issue of same-sex marriage. Strong feelings, however, do not establish a legal interest in a lawsuit.”

The Minnesota Family Council attempted to enter the lawsuit with the help of James Dobson’s Alliance Defense Fund, an evangelical Christian legal group. The Right will attack from all ends – in their bid to maintain marriage inequality in the USA.

Douglas Benson, executive director of Marry Me Minnesota, an organization formed by the couples who are suing the state, said, “We appreciate the judge’s decision to deny the Minnesota Family Council’s motion and believe it ensures that our case will be decided on its merits, without the interference of anti-gay ideologues.”

Attorney for the couples, Peter J. Nickitas, said, “This decision is a great victory for the plaintiffs and their families, marriage equality, and the integrity of the court system.”

Read more from The Minnesota Independent

Related articles

• CHINA: Marriage Equality will Help Curb HIV (lezgetreal.com)

Melanie Nathan – November 21-2010

President Obama today spoke about DREAM act and his desire that it be enacted before the new Congress is seated – BUT what about parity and equality for Americans who cannot sponsor spouses for green cards. Maybe if the Media had spent more time on really important matters UAFA would be in his purview! Not to mention the fact that our self proclaimed-gimme-your-dollars  LGBT immigration equality leadership has failed to map us on this atlas at all!

Sarah Palin has been the greatest embarrassment this country has suffered since the day she opened her mouth in the national forum – given that opportunity by the very tenuous and senile John McCain.  What I have never been able to figure out though, is why the MEDIA has sold out to ratings by giving Palin 24/7 prime time?

Admittedly it may seem that I am doing the same here on LezGetReal, when I have avoided this reporting or writing  about Palin, despite the ability to garnish hots and ratings.   In fact I have been tempted to suggest Alaska be allowed to secede so that Queen Palin and the Royal family can have their throne.   You voted for her, have her, and keep her away from US at all cost.   But its hard for me to be unpatriotic.   SO I say  lets make her irrelevantly rich and pay her millions to stay in her own backyard via Reality show after reality show.

Palin can retreat and reload in ALASKA.   Yet Media – here is something very important for you to consider – ‘Real Americans’ not reality Americans  – Imagine if the media gave Americans who are forced into exile by discriminatory  laws the same attention that Palin has had. Okay I will go for 10%.  Ah now you get why I am reporting – ratings and numbers for EXILED Americans who cannot sponsor their spouses and partners  for green cards, just because they are same-sex partners.

Gays and lesbians who cannot sponsor spouses and permanent partners for green cards are the victims of the most unconscionable of human rights infractions and also have become the victims of the assault on our USA Constitution. Ironically people like Palin steal the limelight from Americans who truly deserve to heard.

We do not know the numbers but there are tens of thousand of Americans – maybe in 100 of thousands, living in Exile because they have chosen to be with their beloved partners – make no mistake it is not an easy choice;  parents, children, mortgages, jobs, careers and pensions are left behind.  All because a same- sex couples cannot sponsor a foreign partner for a green card.

As an advocate for such couples and as a lesbian American, having gone through the tough choices that bi-national same-sex couples must make – I am astounded that UAFA the law that would provide equality for Americans in the CURRENT immigration law, is last on the lips of most LGBT advocates,  so now because of that UAFA is not even a whisper in the lame duck session, where in fact it is beyond mere immigration reform and should be holding the hands of legislation such as the DREAM ACT and ENDA and even repeal of  DADT. (Don’t Ask Don’t Tell)

All I hear is DREAM ACT but no UAFA. I implore all to call and contact media and ask do they know of our plight. Call your local newspapers, write to MSNBC who did not have LGBT represented in the IMMIGRATION town Hall Sunday. Not a single mention of your plight dear exiles; nor mention of our Americans who will kiss beloved partners good bye at the deportation gate.

SHOW your outrage – maybe someone will hear -  Most shocking to me is the fact that so many of our own community have no idea of this discrimination against their own until they happen to fall in love with a foreigner;  engendered by the exclusion of same-sex couples from federal law, by the Defense of Marriage Act. (DOMA)  The repeal of the latter would of course eliminate the need for UAFA.

SO In an article about Sarah Palin I am talking binational same-sex immigration reform via equality to get you here to read this – a select few of the desperate comments I receive by the score on a daily basis:

DESPERATE PLEASE! Comments by Binationals and Friends

R, says – I am so sick of this as well. I used to rely on Immigration Equality .org  for hope that something was going to happen. Every day I look to these web sites for signs of hope only to get another slap in the face. I met my partner while working in the cruise industry. No American will work under the conditions that he had to work in. twelve hours a day seven days a week seven to eight months at a time. Making 1,400 a month. They allowed him to come here to kiss our American asses, to see how us royals live then after seven years of limited us entry (cd1 visa) refused even a visitors visa. Now he sits in his third world country, having to do laundry by hand, have water carried in that he has to heat up to take a shower, no heat.  And every day we search for a solution so that we can be together. With out the passage of UAFA the only option is that I have to go there and live. I have been there twice and find it very difficult. I am not a young man and I finally found the person I love more than anything and I am not going to let it pass me by while waiting on an act of congress to justify the love I have for another human being.

—————————————————————————————

D; Melanie, we have been reading your work for a while now and you are right on target.
We are just settling in back in Denmark….again. UGHH .  This 90 day rule gets old.  We were flagged last time we entered the U.S. So it looks like we will be out for the next year because that is what the agent at the airport decided for us. B.S. when we have followed all the rules at great expense financially…  Nevermind the details. I forgot for a moment that this is one place that everyone already knows the details and hardship.   As soon as we get our bags unpacked we are on board with you. I am furious that those of us who have chosen to follow the rules are punished  while those who are not Americans can choose to break the laws and in return be given more rights and privileges. .  Two words “Class Action”.  Why does Dream Act get a lame duck vote when American citizens are living in exile?  Why do we even tolerate the term Lame Duck?

————————————————————————————-

N: Wish there was a way to show Pelosi and other politicians (and to truly make them realize and understand) what harm and suffering our current immigration laws are causing binational (same-sex) couples. I don’t think they really comprehend the pain and despair we feel and are going through on a daily basis, because no one who truly understands what this is like would not want to remedy this situation asap. UAFA would be such a tremendous relief to thousands of couples currently living in fear, uncertainty, hiding and separation; we are completely ignored by the law (unless it is to deny our applications, that a US spouse is recognized for).
We have a year left before we either have to leave the US or try another non-immigrant visa. Believe me every time it gets more difficult, because the suspicion about potential immigrant intent grows. We currently have no plan B, mainly because we were hoping that the Obama administration would pass pro LGBT legislation (incl. UAFA), and also because we are out of resource (money) after paying out of state tuition for many years (so we could be together) and one of us being unable to work. I realize that there is virtually no chance that UAFA will be addressed or voted on during lame duck or the next few years. So where do we go from here… We’ve been together for nine years and will celebrate our tenth anniversary next year, just where and under what circumstances (together, separated, in exile, in hiding… we don’t know).
What a situation to be in in the land of the free, where liberty, justice, equality and the pursuit of happiness supposedly reign supreme.

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

J: I too always get the amazed look when i explain that I cannot sponsor my partner … we need action. I miss my partner, we’ve personally been waiting for 6 years, living in 2 countries… I know some of us have it worse. it really hurts when I know that 20 (+/-) other countries already have figured this out. Why is the US so far behind? thank you to all working for this.

——————————————————————————————————————————————–

A: Mel, outside of writing to our senators, which I have done over and over. What else is there for those of us to do who are living in exile? I want to do more, but I no longer know what to do. Any suggestions? There has to be a mass way of getting our sotries heard or out there but it seems lost from outside the US.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

Melanie Nathan, Lt. Dan Choi Shirley Tan

http://lezgetreal.com/2010/11/immigration-equality-interview-fails-to-appease-same-sex-couples/

Another Comment:  FAEN-  Unfortunately the only way they listen is if we push….not politely either. I wish GetEqual would start putting pressure on the Dems AND the GOTP when it comes gay issues. I hate to say it but the Dems on their best day have no balls. There is no way the UAFA or ENDA will be on the to do list for the lame duck session. Unless something happens, like a miracle, I don’t see our agenda of equality going anywhere until at least 2013. Seriously, I still remember Obama and the Dems winning in such large numbers, I remember jumping up and down with joy, yelling at the top of my lungs, just KNOWING the binational community would FINALLY be equal. That seems like a lifetime ago and maybe the time to leave is now. Maybe I’m a coward but how long do we wait or start to really live?

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

http://lezgetreal.com/2010/11/nancy-pelosi-please-include-same-sex-greencards-uafa-with-enda/

http://lezgetreal.com/?s=melanie+nathan+binationals

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

http://out4immigration.blogspot.com/2010/11/hrc-where-do-same-sex-binational.html

Tim K  – I mean – did I miss something? An ELEVEN bullet point LGBT action plan, and I see no mention of immigration reform for same-sex binational couples. (OK, I’ll be fair and suppose that DOMA repeal could be construed as support of our same-sex binational couple immigration issue, but would it be so hard to actually spell it out?) Someone correct me if I am wrong but even with the election losses Tuesday, by my count UAFA STILL has more Congressional co-sponsors than any other immigration reform bill before Congress. Could HRC maybe concentrate some of its considerable lobbying strength in getting us some relief? And soon?

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Feb-  My name is ‘Des’*, I am a male U.S. citizen, born and raised here. In August 2002, after being largely unemployed for more than 2 years as a result of the dot-com bust, I went to Taiwan to support myself as a teacher of English as a Foreign Language.  In 2004 I got a job as a technical writer in the capital city, Taipei. In July of 2005, I met the love of my life, whom I shall call “John” (not his real name), in Taipei.Eventually John was able to get a job in the US and after a brief separation we both moved here to my home.

Coincidentally, right about the time I met John, a friend and coworker of mine, “George,” (also a U.S. citizen), who had joined the same company just about the time that I did, met a young woman while on vacation in another country and soon fell in love with and married her.

John is on a very limited visa, which enables him to work for one single company only, on contracts that can be renewed for up to 5 years.  His company has notified him that his current contract will not be renewed after the end of 2009.  At that time, he will have to leave the USA, and I will have to choose between staying with the person I love or remaining in my home and the country I love.

We have been struggling for years now to find a way to stay in the same country, legally and permanently.

Right now, our best hope seems to be Canada, where we could legally marry – IF we can get in. Ironically, my former coworker, George, returned to the USA with his wife about 6 months ago. Because he is male and she is female, they were able to marry, and he was able to sponsor her for permanent residency in this country. Inexpensively and in a matter of mere months.

However, because John is male and I am male, even if we marry,   I cannot sponsor him for a “green card.” We have a committed, permanent, long-term relationship that is exactly like marriage in every way except in the eyes of current U.S. law.  I cannot sponsor John because of the discomfort that many people feel about the nature of our relationship in the abstract.

Meanwhile, in reality, John is a highly skilled worker, with a master’s degree in physics and rare expertise in integrated circuitry testing protocols, and our economy is being denied his contributions because as a U.S. citizen I am being denied our constitutional guarantee of “equal protection under the law.”

George and his wife are now living peacefully in another state. John and I, however, are living with the daily stress that comes with not knowing when or where or if we will be able to safely live together in one country without the likelihood that one of us will have to leave at an unpredictable time because of immigration law.  (Dated 3/09)”

—-Anyone wanting to learn more can find information and more  stories at www.out4immigration.org

—————————————————————————————————————————————

————————————————————————————————————————-

Melanie Nathan:
commissionermnathan@gmail.com

From, yesterday chained to the fence of the White House, to being dragged off, feet scraping ground, by two burly arresting  police officers , to  a meeting inside the White House with Brian Bond and a Member of the President’s Domestic Policy Council and a White House legal Counsel on LGBT issues.

Robin called me moments after the meeting, her voice breaking with emotion as she walked down the Pennsylvania Blvd, cell phone in hand, another moment of true grass roots activism.

She told me, “when the White House found out that the bloggers had been informed and broken the news of our meeting they were angry. But I told them that I was not willing to do any back room deals – but that I wanted to be transparent. That I wanted my LGBT community to see and hear everything that happens.  It is their equality at stake and they deserve that. She said she would rather leave than not be transparent.”

Mr. Bond told Robin McGehee, who points out that she was there as an activist, a mother, a lesbian and representing GetEQUAL, that he would then be unable to speak because he did not want what he said “used against them” but that he would listen. She told, he listened and he made notes.

McGehee told him that she would like to hear from the White House where LGBT equality legislation stood, specifically that she wanted to hear about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

She asked for an Executive Order by years end.  She asked why the White House was not going ahead with an executive order to stop discharges; she said the LGBT community was insisting on it at the very least; Why is DADT different from any other legislation? Why is the President not pushing and persuading Senator Snowe and Collins, the fence sitters? Why is the President not spending some political capital here for DADT?

She told Bond that not one single member of the Military should be discharged and that the President ought to be reflecting that by his actions.

Mr.  Bond told Robin that they  are working as hard as they can; saying “ we want to see that happen” – Robin pushed further and said there is a difference between wanting to make it happen and making it happen. It must happen.

McGehee said although she was there about DADT- she could not allow the opportunity to be exclusive to that as the only LGBT issue; and so she pulled out a picture of her two children and introduced them to the group.  She said that Although she realized DOMA may not be repealed at this time, she wanted the President to revert to his old pre- Presidential campaign position on marriage equality where he did support same sex marriage.  “Everyday  that our families live without dignity, the President should think of going back to his original stand  and he must support marriage equality- as person of faith he  should think of our dignity.  Remember he came out and said that his religious beliefs precluded him from endorsing same-sex marriage for gays- well,  as a person of faith the President ought to reflect on his denying our families and community the right to live with dignity.

Additionally she asked that the White House stop all future Federal Contracts that do not include protections for Transgender people; and she informed him it was her belief that if in fact this happened it would encourage more corporations who wanted to Contracts to do the same.

We also asked for the LGBT community to have a cabinet position.

Two weeks ago I had a meeting with Robin McGehee and Kathy Drasky from OUT4Immigration at a fabulous San Francisco Sushi Restaurant – thank you BLOWFISH.

It was there, while talking about the Uniting American  Families Act and my hope it would be included with the DREAM Act in the lame duck session. I also showed Robin my Binational Visa and Pledge campaign. I spoke to Robin about the binational same sex community ‘s dissatisfaction and desperation.  That we were fed up with being the unnoticed of all gay issues, yet our UAFA- having the highest amount of co-sponsorship of all LGBT equality bills, in Congress.  We also discussed my views and writings about UAFA being stuck in Immigration reform.

SO Robin did not let us down and she spoke up “I told Mr. Bond that we wanted to see passage of the Uniting American families Act. That not one more person who has an American partner should be deported, separated or living in exile.  I told him, Mel about your binational Visa as a stop gap measure, and asked the President to get it done – and he wrote it down. I stressed he must stop the deportations of gay and lesbian spouses and partners. If we do not get UAFA this lame duck session  then the President must ensure no more deportations and getting our permanent partners Visas to come into the Country.

Robin McGehee did the Lgbt movement a great deed today.  The White House may well have heard the voices  of everyday gays and lesbians.  I believe we will see action and if we do not there will be more fences, more chains, and more noise.  Robin is inviting transparency as we move towards our basic civil rights, in the form of a real movement that is birthing as we speak. The movement that demands full equality.

In the meantime – call your Senators and ask what they are doing to broker the REPEAL of DADT in this Session and while you are at it, mention UAFA being included with DREAM ACT in this lame duck session.

Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Melanie Nathan – 11-15-10   The Irish justice minister Dermot Ahern has tabled amendments to give civil partners equal treatment under Ireland’s immigration laws.  The Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill is currently at Committee stage in the Dáil.

Yet to provide Marriage Equality, Ireland has signed  Civil Partnership into law, giving couples similar rights to marriage, effective January  2011; providing Immigration rights will  provide parity with straight couples who can marry.

Unlike the United States of America’s Federal Immigration law, which does not recognize same sex couples, even if legally married, for  the purpose of greencard sponsorship, Ireland  will now provide  for people in de facto relationships.

The US has yet to enact laws that will prevent gay and lesbian couples from having to exile to stay with foreign partners or from partners facing deportation.  The discrimination in the USA is based on the fact that same-sex partners are specifically excluded from Federal rights – such as the right to sponsor a spouse for a greencard, because of the Defense of Marriage Act. (DOMA)

However the once known as the Permanent Partners Immigration Act has been reintroduced into the US Congress as the Uniting American Families ACT, (UAFA) by Congressman Jerold Nadler, in 2009. This will give same sex couples the right to be included in the immigration Relative Petition laws, by simply adding the words “permanent partner” next to the word spouse in the Act.

On June 03,  2009, Shirley Tan, Gordon Stewart, Julian Bond (NAACP), and others testified before Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill, in support of the UAFA. The Legislation has not made it out of committee and is currently trapped in the larger and yet implausible Comprehensive Immigration reform.   Bad advocacy strategy in the USA has resulted in the UAFA being a fringe and little known piece of equality legislation, that ironically has had more co-sponsors than any other LGBT legislation.

In fact the plight of binational couples has barely made it into  the conscience of the Americans, especially bad is the fact that the majority of LGBT community has very little knowledge of this inequity until such time as they realize they cannot sponsor someone with whom they have fallen in love; and that their love will be subject to deportation if they do not leave the country in terms of the issued visa.

In Ireland now, Non EU same-sex partners of Irish or EU nationals are now entitled to apply for permission to remain in the country on the basis of their relationship.

In the USA some key Senators such as Dianne Feinstein have not yet signed on to co sponsor UAFA.  Although the Senator is supportive of the issue per se, some believe her only reason for non support is on the question Fraud. Ironically not having ANY law for same sex couples in this arena often encourages fraud as desperate gays and lesbians marry friends and even strangers  for the convenience of attaining legal status.

Having conferred with the Senators office, it is clear the issue is a little more involved;  the  lack of support by Senator Feinstein is based on a lack of a contractual nexus – the proof factor – that there is no fraud.  In Ireland the proof factor lies in the contract which is the Civil Union.

However this concern can be changed in the US by an amendment or rules that will require proof of a contractual nexus between the same-sex couples, such as a Marriage (or civil union) certificate from any Country or US state, a cohabitation contract.  The perceived problem with this is the wording of DOMA – which in essence says only marriages between a man or woman can be recognized; – however I believe that the contractual nexus documented to support a permanent partnership, even if a marriage certificate- is completely different to recognizing a marriage between same sex parties – what it does is serve as evidence of the permanent partnership.

Of course this all serves to show how complex it is when people do not have basic right and that in  the USA marriage equality is indeed the ultimate answer for parity under the law; precipitated not only by the already ruled unconstitutionality of DOMA in the Courts, but  even as a pure civil rights matter that ought to be ascribed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

Whereas the GLEN director of policy change, a gay group in Ireland, Eoin Collins said: “This is a very important advance and will help deliver greater security for same-sex couples worried about separation due to immigration difficulties,”  here in the USA it would seem that this administration has very little concern for its exiled citizens or those separated from loved ones who remain stranded outside the USA, for lack of parity under the Immigration and Naturalization Act of the USA.  Especially as now during the lame duck session there is a rare opportunity to rescue the Uniting American families Act from its half dug grave – in Comprehensive Immigration reform- and making it a priority to pass while the high congressional co-sponsorship is still seated.

Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
@oblogdeeoblogda

source : http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/11/11/irish-civil-partners-to-be-included-in-immigration-laws/

Melanie Nathan; 11-09-10; nathan@privatecourts.com

(San Francisco, November 9, 2010)—Lambda Legal yesterday filed a brief in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a lawsuit that could result in the next major court decision regarding the constitutionality of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” also known as DOMA.

Lambda Legal and the law firm of Morrison & Foerster filed the case earlier this year against the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and its Director, John Berry, on behalf of Karen Golinski. Golinski is an employee of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals who sought spousal health insurance benefits for her wife, Amy Cunninghis, that are provided to the spouses of heterosexual employees. After Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski ruled that denying those benefits would violate the court’s employment discrimination protections and directed Blue Cross/Blue Shield to enroll Cunninghis in the plan covering court employees and their family members, OPM told Blue Cross/Blue Shield not to do so. The suit seeks an injunction directing OPM to stop interfering with Chief Judge Kozinski’s orders.

The brief filed late yesterday answers a series of questions posed on October 15th by federal District Judge Jeffrey S. White addressing, among other topics, whether DOMA violates the U.S. Constitution. The brief notes that, in deciding Golinski’s case, Judge White may not need to rule on DOMA’s constitutionality, but that application of that law’s provisions to block equal employment benefits would indeed be unconstitutional. The brief explains that DOMA wrongfully discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and sex and unconstitutionally penalizes same-sex couples because of congressional disapproval of how they exercise their fundamental rights of intimacy and marriage.

“The Obama Administration’s aggressive efforts to prevent the court from enforcing its nondiscrimination protections may lead to DOMA’s undoing” said Jon Davidson, Lambda Legal’s Legal Director. “This began as an internal personnel matter, but the Administration has upped the ante. The Executive Branch shouldn’t be interfering with the Judiciary’s efforts to avoid employment discrimination. Even more so, the Administration shouldn’t be invoking DOMA, a law it agrees is discriminatory, as a reason to prevent the courts from compensating their lesbian and gay employees equally. One federal court has already held DOMA unconstitutional. This could be the second.”

A hearing is scheduled for December 17th. Lambda Legal represents Karen Golinski in this matter together with James McGuire and Rita Lin of Morrison & Foerster LLP.

The case is Golinski v. United States Office of Personnel Managemen

Melanie Nathan – November 09, 2010

On November 9, 2010 GLAD  filed their second major, multi-plaintiff lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the government’s denial of protections and responsibilities to married gay and lesbian couples. This new action specifically addresses married couples in Connecticut, Vermont,  and New Hampshire, and comes on the heels of a Massachusetts Federal District Court ruling this summer finding DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional.

“DOMA must fall. In 1996, when Congress passed DOMA, the stated goal was to harm gay people and same-sex families with this law, and sadly, it has succeeded.  Married gay and lesbian couples fall through the federal safety nets that exist for other married people,” said Mary L. Bonauto, Civil Rights Project Director for GLAD.  “We have to keep the pressure on and get DOMA off the books before it does even more harm.”

In Pedersen et al. v. Office of Personnel Management, GLAD represents five married same-sex couples and a widower who have all been denied federal rights and protections simply because they are married to a person of the same sex.

”Getting married was extremely meaningful to Ann and me,” said Joanne Pedersen, who, with her spouse Ann Meitzen, is a plaintiff.  “We were shocked to discover that the federal government essentially looks on ours as a second-class marriage.”

Filed in Federal District Court in Connecticut, this suit addresses DOMA’s denial of marriages in connection with federal employees and retirees benefits programs, Social Security benefits, survivor benefits under federal pension laws, work leave to care for a spouse under the Family Medical Leave Act, and state retiree health insurance plans that are controlled by federal tax law.  Several plaintiffs who have paid additional federal income taxes because they cannot file a joint federal tax return as a married couple will join the suit once they are officially turned down for refunds from the IRS.

“Every day that DOMA stands, it arbitrarily divides married couples into two categories,”  said Gary D. Buseck, GLAD’s Legal Director. “And the extra burdens that DOMA has imposed on Massachusetts families since 2004 are now being endured by families in Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire.”

– Binationals are Concerned

Immigration has escaped the binational same-sex couple community, yet again; an “un-calculated” two years by the organizations that represent immigration equality for binational couples, with self professed leader Immigration  Equality at the helm.  How could this have happened?  Where do we stand now?  Well Immigration Equality will answer your questions on a Conference call if you submit your questions for their choice. (See below)

The lack of calculation and the unconscionable failure to ‘strategize’ according to the changing political climate over the past two years, has resulted in enormous upset for the gay community when it it comes to immigration parity under the law and we cannot blame Congress, nor the President; we can only blame misleading and head in the sand calculation -  as we were  taken down the wrong path; but a few complained or demanded transparency.

Yes this IS the blame game; and I feel justified because I am repeating what I said and said and said ……  Never before have I witnessed such reprehensible conduct in the name of an entire victimized community, at the hands of our own. Our bi-national families are exiled, await deportation, are struggling in the asylum process, hiding, want to come home! It is bad.

Your opportunity to agree or disagree is welcomed, but until the organization Immigration Equality satisfactorily answers some pertinent questions, my quest will continue!   Today the Group has advertised on their Face book page a conference call.   Now I have been on a few of those in the past and they tend to be a “rah-rah we are great and this is how much other minority groups love what we are doing soliloquy’s and its all about Comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) and how lovely our allies are in the immigration community.”

Well great and so what now?

The Uniting American Families Act was introduced into Congress during January of 2009, by Rep. Jerold Nadler, D, NY.  Since that time there have been more co-sponsors than any other LGBT equality legislation on record.  Yet instead of pursuing UAFA as a stand alone Bill – with the fervor and impetus provided by the June 03, 2009 hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rachel Tiven, of Immigration Equality, turned its limited resources to Immigration Reform spending the past 18 months chasing Comprehensive Immigration Reform- when it did not even exist.

Now we have been included in the Menendez Senate version – but so what?  Who in heavens name imagines Immigration Reform with Amnesty in it passing through the new Congress?  This scenario was easy to predict.  And it is way too complicated to get through during the lame duck.

There has never been a plan B that we as a community know of; and the self perceived leadership and influence of Immigration Equality, unchecked by other organizations, has turned out to be the Achilles heal of UAFA.

Way back last year I asked Congresswoman Jackie Speier if she thought that joining UAFA to Immigration Reform would make it more difficult as a stand-alone Bill, she agreed that although at that time there was not enough traction in Congress to pursue a vote at the time (JULY 2009); she was hopeful that if we fought for it to gain more traction, especially after Shirley Tan’s testimony, we could succeed.  She agreed that holding out for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill could in essence have the effect of precluding the opportunity for UAFA to gain traction and pass as a stand-alone in a Dem Controlled Congress. We now find ourselves in that predictable situation.

The ups and downs of the journey to immigration reform are clearly noted in my myriad of articles along the way, noted on Lezgetreal in my Binational Column.  I have not been against immigration reform per se, but I have opposed chasing it for UAFA.  To my way of thinking UAFA is about the American having equality to sponsor a spouse.

I have believed we would have been better served had we pushed to the nth degree for UAFA and if not attained as its own Bill by the time of CIR – which is very simple in effect – then we would have been organically attractive to CIR with our already accumulated co-sponsorship.   This is not hind sight on my part as I wrote this very same thought in June 2009.

However we were steered by Immigration Equality away from this opportunity.  All the UAFA gained sponsorship has been a direct result of the work of the unfunded volunteer grass-root group, Out4Immigration, worked by hundreds of letter- writers and led by a core few; Kathy, Gina, and Amos.

Tom Tierney who led the letter writing campaign recently left Out4Immigration for a paid job with Immigration Equality, a testament to and probably the only adequate acknowledgment by IE of the work of the San Francisco based Out4Immigration.

So here are the BIG questions now and hopefully someone will ask them or IE will think them important enough to address:

1. Will IE change its course and pursue UAFA as a stand alone during the Lame duck?
2. If not, does IE think that Comprehensive Immigration Reform will pass during lame duck – because it sure won’t get passed the house when the Republican controlled session starts?
3. Has Luis Guiterrez actually provided the language into the CIR house Immigration Reform Bill yet – or is it still all talk?
4. What other legislation could make UAFA a lame duck attraction – such as DREAM ACT.

Immigration Equality failed to take stock of the political climate as time went by; the impact of Healthcare reform on their strategy – the impact of the DADT debacle on their strategy and many more signs that were politics 101 that should have involved a lot more transparency and inclusion.

So this is the FB announcement – I encourage you to ask your questions and be on the call. Immigration Equality will NOT answer my questions, my calls and nor will they accept my comments on their site.

Related articles

• Explosive: Does Immigration Equality Hold Future of UAFA as Bi-Nationals Beg for Immediate Relief (lezgetreal.com)
• Rumors UAFA to be Introduced with Senate Inmigration Reform Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• Breaking: Grassroot Binational UAFA Summit – Taking Back our Binational Strategy (lezgetreal.com)
• Breaking: Senator Menedez Includes UAFA in Senate Version of Immigration Reform (lezgetreal.com)
• Churches Cry Foul in Wake of Same-Sex Partner Inclusion in Immigration Reform (lezgetreal.com)
• Four New House Co-Sponsors for UAFA – Time to Act Fast (lezgetreal.com)
• SCREAM: President Obama Act Now for Binational Same Sex Couples (lezgetreal.com)
• DADT in DANGER and UAFA Possible? (topix.net)

Melanie Nathan – 10-20-10-

Speaks to oust NY State  Senators who refuse to vote for Gay marriage in NY Senate.

New York – Actor Alec Baldwin may not be gay, but he wants to at least have the option to marry Jesse Tyler Ferguson, who stars on the ABC sitcom “Modern Family.”

Baldwin cut an ad for Fight Back NY, an advocacy group and political action committee that campaigns for Senate candidates who approve of same-sex marriage. Baldwin, who has lent his voice to a variety of liberal causes over the years, jokes in the video that his only hindrance to getting married to Ferguson are a group of state lawmakers opposed to same-sex marriage.

In this case, the group is targeting Sen. Frank Padavan, R-Queens.

Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts

Related articles

• Alec Baldwin for Fight Back New York (advocate.com)
• Alec Baldwin Defends Gay Marriage For Fight Back NY (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)