Gay Marriage | Lambda Legal | News | West Virginia

West Virginia Attorney General Files Motion to Defend State's Gay Marriage Ban in Court

West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey has filed a motion to intervene and defend the state's ban on same-sex marriage in a lawsuit challenging it, the AP reports:

MorriseyNew York-based gay rights group Lambda Legal contends West Virginia’s Defense of Marriage Act violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It filed a complaint in U.S. District Court in Huntington in October on behalf of three same-sex couples and the child of one couple...

...Morrisey’s filing notes that state agencies enforce or otherwise execute the laws in question.

...Lambda Legal argues West Virginia’s ban unfairly discriminates against same-sex couples and their children. In addition to its own ban, the state doesn’t recognize same-sex marriages that occurred in other states. The organization says its clients are denied the legal sanction, societal respect, financial protections and other support that marriage gives to heterosexual couples.

The plaintiffs are partners Casie McGee and Sarah Adkins, and Justin Murdock and Will Glavaris, all of Huntington, and Nancy Michael and Jane Fenton, of St. Albans, and their son, Drew.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I think we'll lose this one 3-2. I feel sure that Justices Benjamin, Ketchum, and Davis will vote to uphold WV's DOMA.

    Posted by: Michael | Nov 23, 2013 4:23:49 PM


  2. Good. Some liberals don't appreciate the will of the people. The people of PA don't want the LGB community perverting the institution of marriage out of an uppity need for "political correctness."

    Posted by: Asam | Nov 23, 2013 5:04:12 PM


  3. oh right, by the will of the people, let’s burn ASAM at stake.

    Posted by: Andy Towlette | Nov 23, 2013 5:27:22 PM


  4. @Asam: Interesting, I've read a lot of comments from lame trolls but never before have I heard one of them say that the residents of Pennsylvania's will should dictate marriage laws in West Virginia lol A+ for originality I guess

    Posted by: JMC | Nov 23, 2013 5:28:32 PM


  5. @Michael,

    As this is filed in federal court and not state court, the WV Supreme Court will have no say.

    Posted by: Phoenix Justice | Nov 23, 2013 5:47:54 PM


  6. Excellent point, Phoenix. I failed to notice that. My apologies.

    Posted by: Michael | Nov 23, 2013 6:02:04 PM


  7. Asam - what does that have to do with the price of tomatoes in Illinois?

    Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Nov 23, 2013 7:22:34 PM


  8. "Will of the people" means nothing to the court. prop 8 overturn is a classic example.
    Just repeat it a few more times doesn't make it more or less true.

    Posted by: simon | Nov 23, 2013 7:26:25 PM


  9. Best Wishes to the plaintiffs. Your courage is noteworthy.

    Posted by: David | Nov 23, 2013 8:55:00 PM


  10. @Simon: the "will of the people" includes provisions in the U.S. Constitution such as the 14th amendment. Furthermore, Prop 8 was not so much the result of the "will of the people" but of enough of the people being fooled by a political campaign that consisted of a pack of lies. The abuse of the initiative process in California has been well documented, and goes well beyond Proposition 8, with most of the abuse due to special interests with deep pockets that are trying to make their pockets even deeper.

    If you want to pass an initiative, first there is an entrance fee of over a million dollars that represents the cost of gathering enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Then there is the campaign itself, which requires a massive advertising budget - those TV ads aren't cheap.

    Posted by: Bill | Nov 23, 2013 9:02:58 PM


  11. @ANDY TOWLETTE That's the spirit! I am tired of hearing about people "burned in effigy". As you succinctly said "Let't burn ASAM at the stake!"

    Posted by: Mike | Nov 23, 2013 9:54:27 PM


  12. @Asam: Kiss my gay @$$ and let's hope you and I never meet up. You're done.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Nov 24, 2013 12:41:23 AM


  13. Only an idiot would believe that a constitutional protection should be voted upon by the "people". Get a clue.

    Posted by: Hoelievmo Thug | Nov 24, 2013 7:37:17 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Attackers Beat Tennessee Store Owner Unconscious, Write 'Fag' on His Forehead: VIDEO« «