LGBT rights

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected several appeals on Monday in cases in which judges have overturned various states' bans on same-sex marriage. That caused a spur of nuptials among happy same-sex couples until "Justice Anthony Kennedy mistakenly blocked the start of same-sex marriage in Nevada in an order that spawned confusion among state officials and disappointment in couples hoping to be wed." Now a court spokesperson says that order was a mistake, according to the Associatied Press: "Kennedy's order issued a day earlier was an error that the justice corrected with a second order several hours later."

SCOTUSBlog's Lyle Denniston reports on the details of the Ninth Circuit's ruling that ended bans on same-sex marriage in Idaho and Nevada and will likely control the fate of the bans in Alaska, Arizona, and Montana: "First, all three judges on the panel joined in an opinion by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt finding that the Idaho and Nevada bans violate the constitutional guarantee of same-sex couples to be treated the same legally as opposite-sex couples.  Second, Judge Reinhardt issued a separate opinion, for himself only, saying he would also strike down those bans under the Constitution’s Due Process Clause, arguing that the right to marry is a fundamental guarantee and that gays and lesbians have a right to share in that right. Third, Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon, in a separate opinion only for herself, said she would have also struck down the bans on the premise that they discriminate on the basis of gender."

Missouri's attorney general announced Monday that his state will not appeal a state-court ruling requiring the state to recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state, Reuters' Kevin Murphy reports: "The decision not to appeal the ruling came hours after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to decide once and for all whether states can ban gay marriage, allowing same-sex couples to marry in five additional states immediately."

Breaking news from the Associated Press: the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected appeals from five states which had their bans on same-sex marriage overturned. The appeals are from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. The result? Same-sex marriage will be legal in 30 states and in the District of Columbia.

Robert Barnes, writing in the Washington Post, says the possibility of a landmark ruling for same-sex marriage and LGBT rights is looming large over the Supreme Court's upcoming term. A ruling in favor of same-sex marriage "could serve as a surprising legacy of an otherwise increasingly conservative court," Barnes notes. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who has authored the most important decisions in protecting the rights of LGBT Americans, likely would be the swing vote in that decision.

Barnes also notes that the court could take up challenges to state laws restricting access to abortion and challenges to the federal subsidies for consumers who bought health insurance on federally run Affordable Care Act exchanges.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a two lawsuits against companies in Michigan and Florida for allegedy discriminating against transgender employees, the Los Angeles Times reports: "Both lawsuits cite violations under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which offers protections against sexual discrimination, in a move that marks the first time the federal government has used the law to protect transgender workers against private companies, according to the EEOC."

Two years ago, the EEOC ruled for the first time that discrimination against transgender employees is covered by the Civil Rights Act, the LA Times further reports.

The U.S. Supreme Court will be meeting in conference Monday to consider whether to take up the issue of same-sex marriage, writes U.S. News and World Report's Tierney Sneed: "The petitions come from four separate decisions out of three different U.S. Courts of Appeal on cases emanating from five different states."

Garrett Epps, a constitutional law professor, said the Supreme Court isn't likely to take up the issue until a circuit court of appeals upholds a ban on same-sex marriage, leading to a split among intermediate federal appellate courts.

Also at issue is whether bans should be rejected on equal protection or due process grounds: "Bans in Utah and Oklahoma, both overturned in separate decisions by the 10th Circuit, were decided on the basis of due process, meaning that denying gay couples the ability to wed deprives them of their fundamental right to marry. The 7th Circuit decision finding Indiana’s and Wisconsin’s same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional did so on the grounds of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, with the unanimous panel arguing that same-sex marriage bans discriminate against one’s sexual orientation. If the Supreme Court decides on a case that invokes the equal protection clause, how it interprets the 14th Amendment could affect judicial rulings on other questions of LGBT rights and discrimination."

A Louisiana judge has ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional in the case of a couple seeking recognition of their California nuptials, KSLA News reports. A federal judge ruled earlier this year that the state-level ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional, reasoning that "gay marriage supporters failed to prove that the ban violates equal protection or due process provisions of the Constitution."

Brynn Tannehill, director of advocacy for SPART*A, writes in the Huffington Post on how to be a good ally for transgender rights. Tannehill says that many people take positions "on a lack of understanding of the lived experiences of so many transgender people: of how hard it is to find work, or medically necessary health care, or accepting partners, or athletic activities where we're welcomed, or safe spaces; how hard it is to simply not be othered." As in all activism and in social change, the starting point is listening to what transgender people say about their lives, Tannehill writes.

SCOTUSBlog's Lyle Denniston reports that the Supreme Court will look at the same-sex marriage cases in which governmental officials are seeking to have their bans on same-sex nuptials restored. The court will have a conference on the cases September 29, Denniston reports: "Together, the petitions raise two constitutional questions:  do states have power to refuse to allow same-sex couples to marry, and do states have power to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states?  In all of the federal appeals courts’ decisions being challenged in these cases, state marriage bans of one or both of those kinds were struck down under the federal Constitution, either under equal protection or due process guarantees, or both." Some of the cases also asks the justices to specify a standard for scrutinizing the constitutionality of laws that implicate LGBT rights, Denniston adds.