NOM BLOG

ProJo Front Page: "Gay Marriage Dead"

The headline says it all:

Source: Providence Journal

Judge Grants Expedited Hearing of Motion to Vacate Walker's Prop 8 Decision!

We've just received word that the expedited hearing date on the motion to vacate Judge Walker's biased decision in the Perry case has now been set for June 13, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.

Related: NOM Praises Motion to Vacate Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

Legal scholar: Congress can demand K&S reveal Coca-Cola communications

In light of Talking Point Memo's claim that Coca-Cola directly intervened to have King & Spalding drop its defense of DOMA, legal scholar Richard Painter suggests that Coca-Cola may be required to answer some pointed questions:

Absent a client confict, one client should not be permitted to dictate the representation -- or the discontinuance of representation -- of another client.

The House can now demand an answer -- did Coke call K&S about the DOMA litigation and what did they say?

K&S will have to answer.

First, if this communication was made it occurred during the prior representation and concerns the subject matter of the prior representation, so K&S has a duty to disclose it to the client. See ABA Model Rule 1.4.

Second, this is not a privileged communication by Coke because it was not made for the purpose of seeking legal advice -- or assessing any possible conflict with K&S's representation of Coke. If was made to interfere with the representation of another client.

If K&S does not answer questions from the House about this, the House might consider a subpoena.

Hat/tip: Volokh Conspiracy blog

Leading Legal Analyst: K&S Turning and Running "Astonishing"

Andrew Cohen, chief legal analyst and legal editor for CBS News --who is no friend of DOMA-- reacts to the news that King & Spalding has dropped its defense of the case:

Just last Friday, in this space, I defended the law firm's right to represent unpopular clients and causes in the face of fierce political attack by the folks at the Human Rights Campaign. They seemed downright giddy Monday in the wake of the law firm's withdrawal and Clement's subsequent resignation. But I'd like to know more from Hays at King & Spalding before I come to any final conclusions. And I have some questions as well, starting with: Why would a touchy firm take the case to begin with? The idea that a law firm as big and as powerful and as established as this would just turn tail and run because of external political pressure from a non-governmental organization is an astonishing one to contemplate, is it not?

Eat Mor Chikin! AFA Calls for a BUYcott of Chick-Fil-A This Week

Buy a chicken sandwich, and thank the manager for the company's support of traditional family values.

AFA is encouraging you to "BUYCOTT" a Chick-fil-A restaurant during the week of April 25-30.

When you pay for your meal, take a moment to thank them for standing on Christian principles by printing and handing them the Chick-fil-A "Thank You!" card (Print an entire sheet of cards for family and friends here).

More Props for Paul Clement from Across the WaPo Aisle

WaPo columnist Jonathan Capeheart is a big advocate for gay marriage--and no fan of NOM, as we learned from the Maryland fight. But kudos to him for recognizing a great man in Paul Clement:

From the standpoint of legal principle ... Paul Clement’s decision to bolt for Bancroft PLLC was the right one.

I don’t like one bit that time and taxpayer money are being spent to defend the indefensible. Yet, I respect Clement’s willingness to hold principle high above pressure to ensure the statute gets a fair — and hopefully losing — hearing in court. We might not like what lawyers do and what Clement did in particular. But ask yourself this question: Would you want to be represented in any legal preceding by someone who had shown a willingness to throw you under the bus? I sure wouldn’t.

Did Joe Solmonese Just Admit That Public Schools Will Teach About Gay Marriage?

From Talking Points Memo:

"King & Spaulding were not required to take up this defense and should be ashamed of associating themselves with an effort to deny rights to their fellow citizens," [Human Rights Campaign President Joe] Solmonese said in the statement. "With such a high-priced lawyer, it's no wonder the Speaker is grasping at straws in order to justify spending taxpayer money on defending discrimination. Next he'll probably call for slashing Education Department funding because kids might learn it's unconstitutional to discriminate against certain groups of people."

The New Yorker: Why Doma Deserves A Lawyer

Margaret Talbot joins a growing list of liberals disturbed at the bullying tactics HRC has used, saying it carries a "whiff of McCarthyite groupthink."

Andrew Sullivan on "Bullies in the Gay Rights Movement"

It is strange to see so many folks describe marriage as a "deeply unpopular" cause. As I told a Politico reporter yesterday, given our ability to win on this issue over and over in blue states, it is impossible to believe this is an "unpopular" cause among the American people, or that it hurts Republicans.

But kudos to Andrew (for whom it is obviously a deeply unpopular cause) for saying this:

"When civil rights groups bully, they lose the moral high-ground. When you have men like David Brock leading the charge - and there are no means he has ever eschewed to achieve his ends - the danger is that we prove the far right's point. We must be better than them."

Speaker Fox Concedes Defeat on SSM in RI, Will Push Civil Union Bill

From the AP (more to follow):

Rhode Island's House speaker says legislation extending marriage rights to gay couples is dead for the year. House Speaker Gordon Fox, who is gay and is a leading supporter of the gay marriage bill, says that it's clear the bill won't overcome opposition in the Senate.

Fox, a Providence Democrat, says he'll instead sponsor civil union legislation giving same-sex couples the same state rights given to married couples.

The announcement deals a major setback to advocates of gay marriage in the Ocean State. They had called civil unions a poor substitute for full marriage.

Thank you to everyone who has worked so hard to defend marriage in Rhode Island, and congrats to Chris Plante at NOM-RI!

Stanford Undergrad Defends Marriage in University Paper

Ben VanBerkum is the co-founder of the Stanford Anscombe Society and published this in the opinion section of the Stanford Review:

Marriage. The word is loaded with political emotions in today’s cultural environment. Changes in societal perceptions have made marriage a hotly-contested issue, both politically and philosophically. The question of who can and cannot legally be recognized as married raises issues of discrimination, human rights, and the role of government in the lives of citizens.

Stanford students, being the activists we are, have naturally formed many groups to address these issues and to champion social changes. What the current campus atmosphere lacks is an organized student voice advocating for marriage as the union, until death, of one man and one woman—that is, the traditional definition of marriage. The Anscombe Society seeks to fill this void.

Our central thesis is that dialog about marriage must focus on what marriage really is. The Anscombe Society’s goal, then, is philosophical: we seek to promote campus discussion on the definition of marriage. We are confident that if we as a campus community approach the discussion honestly, we will come to understand the true nature of marriage.

AG Eric Holder Defends Paul Clement

Even the man responsible for ensuring that DOJ dropped its defense of DOMA says it deserves to be defended:

The former Bush administration lawyer under fire for defending the federal ban on gay marriage is getting support from an unexpected source - Attorney General Eric Holder.

Holder told reporters Tuesday that Clement is "doing that which lawyers do" to take on the responsibility of representing the lawmakers who wrote the ban.

"Paul Clement's a great lawyer," Holder said. "He has done a lot of really great things for this nation."

Judge Walker Replaces Prop 8 Video with Nuremberg Trial Tapes

Local KQED news reports:

Although Judge Vaughn Walker informed the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last week that he was planning to use the excerpt from the Prop. 8 trial again this week in a talk at Gonzaga University Law School, a spokeswoman now tells me the retired jurist has decided not to.

Instead, Walker will show tapes from the Nuremberg trials which she says "he feels make a tremendously strong statement about transparency in the courtroom." That lecture about the history of cameras in the courtroom is scheduled to take place Thursday at Gonzaga in Spokane. Not sure if there's an intended message in replacing Prop. 8 supporters with Nazis.

Walker's use of the 3-minute trial segment during a talk at the University of Arizona in Phoenix February 18th sparked calls by Prop. 8 supporters to have Judge Walker turn over all his trial recordings. His decision to forego use of that segment this week reduces pressure on the 9th Circuit to act by Thursday.

LA Times Speak Truth to Power: Evan Wolfson Wrong, Clement Right DOMA Deserves a Legal Defense

From the LA Times staff opinion page:

This is civics book stuff [that all clients deserve representation], but it's controversial with some gay activists. Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry referred to Clement as a "hired gun," an appellation that can describe any lawyer who doesn't work pro bono. (If Clement defended DOMA out of conviction, he would be abused even more.)

The law firm's critics raised a side issue: that the House Republicans' contract with King & Spalding prohibited lawyers at the firm from commenting on DOMA. If that's the case, the firm overreached. But it beggars belief that it dropped this hot potato because of that provision rather than because of the efforts of Human Rights Campaign, the gay-rights organization, to "shame" the firm.

UK Court: Catholic Agency Must Do Gay Adoptions

From the UK Guardian:

A Catholic adoption agency has lost a two-year battle to be excluded from laws that ban discrimination against homosexuals.

Leeds-based Catholic Care wanted exemption from the 2007 Sexual Orientation Regulations, which require it to consider gay and lesbian couples as prospective parents.

But a ruling on Tuesday by the Charity Tribunal upheld an earlier decision from the Charity Commission. The bishop of Leeds, the Right Rev Arthur Roche, said he was disappointed with the tribunal's ruling. He said: "It is unfortunate that those who will suffer as a consequence of this ruling will be the most vulnerable children, for whom Catholic Care has provided an excellent service for many years.It is an important point of principle that the charity should be able to prepare potential adoptive parents according to the tenets of the Catholic faith."