Tweet
You’ll want to stick right here on the Blend for coverage of the federal Prop 8 trial because we have great resources for you that you won’t find anywhere else.
BLEND EXCLUSIVE: Trial analysis by NCLR’s Shannon Minter
But the big news is that we have just secured a nice exclusive for you — daily analysis of the trial from someone eminently qualified to do so — and is at the trial — Shannon Minter, Legal Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR). Daily wrap-ups will go up in the hours after court end of day.
Shannon was lead counsel for same-sex couples in the landmark California marriage equality case which held that same-sex couples have the fundamental right to marry and that laws that discriminate based on sexual orientation are inherently discriminatory and subject to the highest level of constitutional scrutiny.Shannon was also NCLR’s lead attorney on Sharon Smith’s groundbreaking wrongful death suit and has litigated many other impact cases in California and across the country.
In 2009, Shannon was named California Lawyer of the Year by California Lawyer.
BLEND EXCLUSIVE: Live Chat trial recap and discussion with NCLR
And we have another exclusive for you — at the end of the week Blenders will have the opportunity to ask questions about the trial’s first week in a CoverItLive chat with Shannon Minter or Kate Kendell, the Executive Director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights (depending on who’s available as we work out scheduling).
Growing up Mormon in Utah, Kate learned about the complexities of religion and politics from an early age. After receiving her J.D. from the University of Utah College of Law in 1988 and a few years practicing corporate law, she pursued her real love-civil rights advocacy-and became the first staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah. There she directly litigated many high-profile cases focusing on all aspects of civil liberties, including reproductive rights, prisoners’ rights, free speech, the rights of LGBT people, and the intersection of church and state. In 1994 she joined NCLR as legal director, and was named executive director two years later.
***
Live Trial Twitter Feeds
If you look on our sidebar, journalist Joe Mirabella will be Tweeting to give you information on what’s going on inside the courtroom via live feed; and we are also featuring the Tweets from the American Foundation for Equal Rights.
If Twitter’s widget blocks up (probably from traffic), you can open another window and follow both without the widget at:
5 Comments
Welcome, Shannon and Kate!I got CHILLS when I read the email exchanges in prep of this announcement and so look forward to your thoughts and analysis. Thank you so very much!
Awesome!!Question in advance of the chat:
In Hawaii we have an anti-marriage amendment that came about in an almost-identical fashion to Prop 8. The Trial Court ruled that the State could not discriminate against gay couples wishing to marry, the decision was appealed by the State, and in the interim before the appellate hearing, mormons funded a ballot initiative reserving marriage equality protection to the Legislature to grant. Ergo, the case was moot. If this Prop 8 case goes up to the 9th Circuit, and the 9th Circuit rules in our favor, as Hawaii is part of the 9th Circuit, does that mean that Hawaii’s anti-marriage amendment could be thrown out, as well?
Yeah, I think Oregonians are also wondering thatHere in the mighty 5th circuit (motto: Government as Yahweh meant it to be), we’re just curious.
I believe technically the 9th Circuit could only return a verdict on CA’s prop 8However, what would occur is that they could rule the entire concept of gay marriage discrimination unconstitutional rather than a more narrow view that California’s ban is unconstitutional, and without a stay while the whole thing moves on to the Supreme Court, every state under the 9th circuit could bring the same case and have their particular state’s discrimination policy reformed almost immediately. The limit of any court with the exception of the Supreme Court is that they can only rule on the case to hand. But once precedence is set, it’s all but a done deal for every other state in the 9th district. Though if the ruling is broad enough the cases might just go to the individual courts of each state who could also nullify the bans using the 9th circuit ruling as precedence. Your basic domino effect either way, unless the “Supremes” decide to weigh in.
exactlyMeasure 36 in oregon still have a lot of tapes and other media from that issue. WA DOMA was passed by the State Legislature and all of that was recorded.