A hard-charging, uncompromisingly conservative faction

My Sunday movie was the documentary Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story. Reeve is best known for being the title character in the Superman movies of the 1970s and ‘80s. When he said he was going to that audition his acting friends thought he was selling out. The first one rocketed him to stardom. The fourth was forgettable. But he did a lot more than that. In one film (maybe two) he played a gay character. The one I know about was Deathtrap, which is a thriller (or dark comedy) and I remember seeing after it was released in 1982 and made its way to TV. He also played gay in a stage production (I didn’t get the name) which annoyed some people that Superman would stoop to that. The other thing he was well known for was a horse riding accident in 1995 that left him paralyzed from the neck down. He lived another nine years totally dependent on others. He still managed to do a lot. Growing up he had a messy home life that did not show a healthy marriage and ended in divorce. He had a father who was hard to please. From both of those he found relief in theater. When filming Superman he met Gae Exton, who became mother to his children Matthew and Alexandra. They never married and after a while the relationship fell apart. Months later he met Dana who became the mother of son Will (who now looks a lot like his father) and became his wife. Will Reeve is in the film industry as an actor and producer. Dana made sure to include Matthew and Alexandra as part of the family. Reeve saw how a marriage should work. He was roommates with Robin Williams in acting school (Julliard?) and they were lifelong friends. After the accident Williams was able to get Reeve to laugh and he knew life would be okay. Reeve used his stardom to gain access as an advocate. After the accident he became an advocate for those paralyzed, creating the Christopher Reeve Foundation to raise money for paralysis research. He wanted to find a cure. Dana wanted to improve the care of those paralyzed. Before the accident Reeve was quite active. After that he realized what was important wasn’t the activity but the relationship. That deepened with his kids. I very much enjoyed the film and recommend it. Christopher Reeve was a hero both on and off the screen. An article by Kavitha Surana for ProPublica and posted on Daily Kos discussed Emily Waldorf and her miscarriage and its complications, made worse because she lives in Arkansas. She was caught in limbo, her body started the miscarriage but over several days couldn’t complete it. In the meantime her uterus was open to infection. But doctors said they could do nothing until the fetal heartbeat ended, she went into labor, or she showed signs of dangerous infection. When doctors told her they could not treat her she started keeping notes of her experience. Texas modified its rules around abortion and miscarriage to say Waldorf’s situation is one where evacuating the uterus was medically necessary. Arkansas and many of the others that ban abortion haven’t done the same. Other women with this complication have died. Waldorf lived to tell the story, though resolving her case required a four hour ambulance trip to Kansas, were abortion is legal. There her uterus could be emptied. The whole thing left her with $147,000 in medical costs, which includes $5,000 for the ambulance ride. She worked at the hospital that refused to treat her. She did go back after he medical leave was over and quit a month later. No doctor has yet been sued under the abortion ban. But the hospital lawyers are way too wary of over eager prosecutors. To me they aren’t sufficiently concerned about malpractice. Eleanor Klibanoff, in an article for The Texas Tribune posted on Kos, explains how the nasty guy has transformed the Republican Party in Texas (and elsewhere). There was a lot of news recently about the nasty guy endorsing Ken Paxton for US Senate over incumbent John Cornyn, which Paxton won big. The story is enough Republican voters are loyal to the nasty guy to vote for whoever he says to vote for and get the results he wants. But Klibanoff wrote the dynamics began before the nasty guy appeared a decade ago. Before MAGA there was the Tea Party (remember them?), which formed the ground from which MAGA arose.

Once led by chamber of commerce conservatives who preached small government and big business, the Texas Republican Party has been conquered over the last 15 years by a hard-charging, uncompromisingly conservative faction, operating on the vanguard of the nation’s culture wars and driven by a sense of perpetual insurgency.

Since then there has been a power struggle in the party where “the hardliners, who paint themselves as the perennial underdogs, just keep winning.” The nasty guy cultivated candidates who were “aggressive, ideological, proudly politically incorrect and, above all, loyal.” And voters keep voting for them. Oliver Willis of Kos, as part of his series Explaining the Right delves into why Republicans continue to support the nasty guy.

For decades, the conservative media ecosystem primed these voters for a political figure like Trump. Right-wing talk radio, news sites, and especially Fox News have beamed propaganda into millions of American homes. Trump, an avid watcher of Fox News, learned what many other Republicans struggled with: that conservatives are extraordinarily responsive to messages that echo what they hear as part of their daily media diet. While other Republicans tend to focus on conservative policy issues, Trump has focused on the red meat of the right. This means snappy, punchy, insulting, bigoted statements and the like.

Voters want to continue with candidates ready with the insult rather than supporting the party establishment. So what the party does when the nasty guy can no longer be on the ballot is an open question. At the moment Republican candidates are sticking as tightly as they can to the nasty guy.

Right now, the most prudent path for Republicans probably seems to be the pro-Trump lane, but the writing is already on the wall. Voters have been rejecting Trumpism in droves. And the odds are it will hurt them in the long run.

That is American voters who are rejecting the nasty guy and all he’s been doing. Republican voters still vote for their man. Stephen Fowler of NPR went to a Republican rally in Iowa and reported on what he heard there. Most of the speakers Fowler featured did the usual thing that all good stuff comes from Republicans and all bad stuff comes from Democrats. What caught my attention is the anger coming off one speaker. The anger level was so high I wanted to cringe and cower. Alas, since the transcript doesn’t portray the anger I can’t tell which one it was (and I’m not listening to it again). In today’s pundit roundup Greg Dworkin of Kos quoted Lawrence Winnerman of Blue Amp discussing what is actually happening in the American economy. He says it is worse than a recession.

We are running an economy this week on the country we were in February. The shelves still look mostly normal. The shipping bays still seem mostly full. The cargo still appears mostly on time where it is supposed to appear. None of this is the world we are actually living in. We are spending down the last inventory of the country we used to have and we are spending it down on a clock. Inventory is mercy. Inventory is the cushion the world leaves you between the moment a thing breaks and the moment you feel it break. The blast wave is real, but the blast wave is also delayed by the length of a supply chain, by the contents of a warehouse, by the days it takes a tanker to cross an ocean. We have this week the strange privilege of standing inside the cushion. We will not have that privilege for long.

Lisa Needham of Kos wrote about the recent legal issues of the nasty guy and his minions. A pair of them caught my attention. The first of the pair is acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and his handling of the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case. The Campaign for Accountability decided there’s enough unethical stuff in Blanche’s actions they’ve filed a complaint with the bar of New York. The second of the pair is Blanche’s predecessor and former boss Pam Bondi. She’s facing a bar complaint in Florida. And she no longer has the protection of being a member of the president’s cabinet. This here blog has set another record in viewership with 313,818 views during May! That is 76% higher than the previous record of 177,760 set in April. Just a few days ago the daily viewership hit 29,010, also setting a record. As I mentioned last month the viewership is now quite broad. Blogger shows me the top 19 countries (“Other” is the 20th) and over the last seven days every one of those countries has had at least 1,860 views. That one is Tunisia. At the top of the list is Brazil at 12,878 views, Bangladesh at 6,000 views, Iraq at 5,704 views, and Vietnam at 5,234 views before we get to the US at 4,762 views. Other is at 39.8K views, so there are at least 21 more countries that have viewed this blog over the last week.

The fear is their efforts to indoctrinate their kids won’t succeed

I wrote yesterday about Russia fighting out in the open, where they’re easy pickings, when the could stay in their fortified trenches and let the Ukrainian’s come to them. Kos of Daily Kos gives a couple reasons why they might be doing that. 1. The message from Putin might be to not give up any land – including the few kilometers between the original front and the strong defenses. 2. Russian soldiers have no faith in the fortified trenches. Perhaps they feel like easy targets to Ukraine’s longer range artillery or they don’t know how to properly use those defensive positions. An Associated Press article posted on Kos reported that a federal judge has struck down the Arkansas ban on gender affirming care for children. Arkansas was the first to ban such care, so their ban was the first to come before the court. Here’s a key sentence from Judge Jay Moody’s ruling:

Rather than protecting children or safeguarding medical ethics, the evidence showed that the prohibited medical care improves the mental health and well-being of patients and that, by prohibiting it, the state undermined the interests it claims to be advancing.

Mark Sumner of Kos wrote about the legal troubles of Hunter Biden, son of the president. In a deal with the US Attorney’s Office Hunter will plead guilty to two charges of misdemeanor failure to pay taxes, and one felony charge of possessing a gun while using drugs. This is a very unusual deal. Hunter didn’t pay the taxes in 2017-2018, but did pay in 2021. Filing charges after the taxes were paid is quite rare. Also prosecution for possessing a weapon while using drugs is almost always restricted to cases where the defendant is also facing charges on gun violence or drug sales. So even though Republicans say Hunter got off easy, he’s facing stiffer charges than others in his situation – Like Roger Stone, who failed to pay $2 million in taxes and whose case was resolved without charges. I think that’s about 100 times what Hunter failed to pay. US Attorney David Weiss was appointed by the nasty guy, who bragged Weiss was among the most supportive of the MAGA cause. It was under the nasty guy that Weiss began to investigate Hunter. And when Dad became president and Merrick Garland became AG Weiss was given ultimate authority in this case. Wrote Sumner:

Biden, Garland, and everyone else at the DOJ gave Weiss free rein over every aspect of the case. If he didn’t charge Hunter Biden with more, it’s because he didn’t find more. This was the most Trump-aligned attorney doing his worst, punishing Hunter Biden in a way most people would not be punished for, with charges most would not face, and still the Republicans are screaming. Because they were never interested in the truth, or really in Hunter Biden. They just need someone to vilify. It doesn’t really matter who.

Sumner also wrote about Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. He wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal to get ahead of a ProPublica article about Alito’s corruption. Yeah, another justice accused of corruption. When the ProPublica article appeared later, Alito’s piece was shockingly accurate. Of course, the guilty usually know what they’re guilty of. Where have we heard this before? Alito was offered a fancy vacation (private jet, exclusive lodge) by a rich dude (Paul Singer) who later had cases before the Supremes. Alito didn’t report the value of the gifts (he didn’t think he needed to) and didn’t recuse himself from the cases. It’s another example of the justices being the only ones allowed to judge their behavior. ProPublica's article included the central conflict in the case, as a law professor put it:

If you were good friends, what were you doing ruling on his case? And if you weren’t good friends, what were you doing accepting this?

Most people don’t get these sorts of trips. Most people can’t afford them. Most people don’t have friends who can give them such a trip.

If Alito is looking for a little tip, it’s actually quite simple to tell if an act is corrupt. Just ask, “If I was not a judge, member of Congress, or other public official, would I be getting this gift?" If the answer is no, then accepting it is corrupt.

Rom DeathSantis has been saying “We believe in education, not indoctrination.” Laura Clawson of Kos wrote that if teachers really had the ability to indoctrinate they have a long wish list. Some of the things on the list: Treat themselves and others with kindness and respect. Follow directions, read the syllabus, ... don’t copy the PowerPoint outline and expect an A. Stop beginning papers with “Throughout history.” Use semicolons correctly. Put their name on their papers. Wrote Clawson:

The point is, teachers are trying to get students to do things and learn things all the time. It’s literally their job description! But they’re often unsuccessful at indoctrinating students into the most basic practices endorsed by every single teacher they have through their years of school. They don’t have the power of mind control. The nefarious practices Republicans are labeling “indoctrination” wouldn’t work if students weren’t open to them. The fear Republicans are expressing is that their own efforts to indoctrinate their kids won’t succeed—that their kids will be LGBTQ+ or will call out racism when they see or hear it. They want the schools to actively participate in keeping their kids in line by denying them knowledge. There is real indoctrination out there. But it’s not about Disney movies or which books school libraries make available. ... To be indoctrinated is to be taught to accept a set of beliefs uncritically, without considering other points of view or bodies of evidence. Where have you seen that in your life? In school? At home? In church? In a political group?

Walter Einenkel of Kos discussed a lecture by William Darity Professor, of Public Policy at Duke University. The lecture was titled “Does everyone lose from racism? Insights from stratification economics” and was given at University of Massachusetts Amherst. Einenkel wrote:

During the question and answer section of the lecture, a young man spewed what many would consider a right-wing, neo-libertarian talking point about Black “trends” of “higher crime rates” and “high illegitimacy rates” that would supersede any structural criticism of our country. Professor Darity deftly dismantled this fact-free “propagandistic method” and asked what exactly “crime” meant to this young man, noting that if it means a “history of violence,” then there is “unquestionably” only one group of Americans who, far and away, have participated in general and racially focused violence at levels unmatched by other groups of Americans.

Jon Cooper tweeted a cartoon showing the character Lisa Simpson (I had to look up the show to make sure I had the right name) in front of a screen that says:

Black lives matter is not an anti-white movement. Feminism is not an anti-men movement. Pride is not an anti-straight movement. This isn’t about you.

I add that each of the three is an anti-hierarchy movement and many straight white men are deeply invested in the hierarchy. Michael Thomas, who writes a newsletter about climate change looked at why American vehicles are so much larger and so much more inefficient than in other countries. He starts with a comparison with the best selling vehicles in America and Europe. In Europe that is the Peugeot 208, about 2.3K pounds, $22.9K, and 50 mpg. In America that is the Ford F-150 pickup, about 4K pounds, $35.7K, and 25 mpg. Yes, there was a fuel efficiency law passed in 1975. It helped. For a while. Then (I think in 1985) lobbyists happened.

At the last minute, auto lobbyists convinced Congress to make a subtle change to the bill’s text. They got the fuel efficiency standards for trucks to be set separately from cars. The revised bill basically said, “Every *small car* has to hit 27.5 miles per gallon.” The truck standards would be set separately in a process that was much easier to corrupt. So what'd automakers do? They started making bigger cars in order to avoid regulations. This loophole significantly changed the economics of making cars and trucks in America. It became much more profitable for automakers to make big trucks and SUVs. Recently GM, Ford, and Chrysler stopped making small cars entirely. Instead the companies are focusing on selling their more profitable trucks and SUVs. All of this has had disastrous effects on both people and the planet. ... Auto lobbyists proved decades ago that it’s possible to design policies that encourage one type of vehicle over another. Now it’s time to pass policies that encourage people to buy smaller cars with a smaller impact.

I don’t want or need a truck or SUV. They’re to big and power hungry for my modest needs. Maybe I won’t be waiting for GM to make an electric car. Maybe, after 27 years in the American auto industry, I don’t ever buy American again.

Bipartisanship must be relegated to the dustbin—forever

Yesterday I wrote about the nasty guy signing an executive order and three memoranda. The mainstream media called it four executive orders. But Daily Kos made the distinction, so I followed their example. Jessica Sutherland of Kos reinforced that point in a post late yesterday. The distinction: Memoranda aren’t orders. Which means they’re suggestions. And don’t do much.

Sutherland points out other little details of this slew of documents.

Those $400 supplemental unemployment benefits to replace the $600 Congress authorized and let expire don’t plug into the federal unemployment system at all. They look like a new program that could take months to set up. The money would come from federal disaster relief – which is supposed to have its own hugely important priorities in a year that might see a record number of hurricanes. The amount of money would last five weeks.

The order on evictions is really only a request to HUD to “consider” whether evictions should stop.

Those payroll taxes are deferred – they still eventually have to be paid.

My summary: The nasty guy won the news cycle for Doing Something, while doing very little and giving the GOP in the Senate an excuse to claim another relief bill is no longer needed. This was a campaign event.



Jenna Ellis, a senior legal advisor to the nasty guy and his campaign, gleefully tweeted:

This is actually the biggest news of the day:

President Trump said if he is re-elected, he will look into terminating the payroll tax permanently!

Neera Tandon responded:

3 months before the election they are announcing their plan to end Social Security after the election. Just so we are all clear.

Hunter of Kos wrote that what the nasty guy did was fascist, illegal, and incompetent. He also explains the whole mess.



Leah McElrath tweeted:

Trump installs a top donor to head up Postal Service. That donor immediately fires management below him. Postal Service then nearly triples rate for states to mail ballots to voters.

Trump is trying to steal the election.

I mean...c’mon. The fact that Trump is trying to steal the election couldn’t be any clearer.

McElrath then includes a tweet from Anita Kumar, a White House correspondent for Politico:

Last week, aides and advisers began pondering possible executive actions Trump could take to curb mail-in voting — everything from directing the postal service to not deliver certain ballots to stopping local officials from counting them

This is a good time to quote a thread by Sigrid Ellis

The fact that it is illegal.
The fact that there is no legal authority for this action.
The fact that there are checks and balances to prevent it.
The fact that there is no precedent.

None of that matters to the authoritarian making a grab for power.

He is ALREADY forcing federal troops into cities against the will of governors and mayors.
He is ALREADY approving the shutdown of the USPS so it can be sold.
He is ALREADY laundering money through his office into his pocket.
He is ALREADY colluding with hostile foreign powers.

The unthinkable has already happened.

Do not rely on norms, precedent, usual operations, or any other soft mode of social control.

The only thing that will stop him is a Secret Service escort out of the building after he loses the election while the Joint Chiefs stand by.

This month’s Hightower Lowdown is about Big Meat and its abuses. We’re down to three big meat companies and all three put profits over people. Serious accidents happen routinely and just as routinely are covered up. That was made more clear when these companies got the nasty guy to declare them an essential business. They did it by saying if the didn’t get that declaration the nation would run short of meat. Jim Hightower said that was a lie.

The last section of the main article uses different words to talk about supremacy:

It’s obvious that plain old greed is part of today’s corporate ethic, but we need to confront an even more repugnant enabler of avarice: Disdain for workers. Bosses harbor a deep-seated attitude that its almost 200,000 frontline meatpackers ... are lesser humans, unworthy of having their wellbeing interfere with the high calling of industrial money making. Hence, the executive-suite’s abject failure to respond to what clearly was, and still is, a fast-spreading health crisis, is exacerbated by intense, behind-the-scenes lobbying demands that the federal government force employees back into petri-dish plants. How ironic, that to justify federal intervention corporate execs deemed slaughterhouse workers “essential,” even while valuing their lives so little that they would sacrifice them to profit.

The companies blamed the virus outbreaks on the workers. The GOP took up the cry suggesting the workers were untidy and that they just weren’t “regular folks.”

What we face here is not just standard corporate minginess, but an evil mentality that reduces workers to inferior, disposable beings: It not only dehumanizes the workplace, but workers themselves. It’s bad enough that some elites have always held such beliefs, but far worse that in the case of the meat industry, this lethal dehumanization is now accepted as the guiding ethic of both corporate and governmental policy. We must call out and reject this raw immorality, because dehumanization is the key to exploitation–it opens the gates to let racism, sexism, classism, and all other isms of inequality walk in.

Yes, dehumanization is the core of what is going on and the core to all the other isms. And that is a lot more than simple “disdain.” This is supremacy at its height. The corporate execs are saying compare my life to that of my workers to see how wonderful I am. Just don’t pay any attention that I make their lives miserable so that my life will look so much better.



Dartagnan of the Kos community discusses an essay by Joseph O’Neill written for the New York Review of Books. O’Neill is a professor at Bard College. The subject is a proposal for how Democrats should govern if they win it all in November.

Start with this: Noam Chomsky described the GOP as “the most dangerous organization in human history.” O’Neill added, “Republicans cannot be trusted with meaningful power precisely because they form one of the world-historical dangers that must be overcome.”

It isn’t just what the nasty guy is doing to wreck everything. It’s also that the GOP refuses to exert any control over him. And spent at least 30 years getting ready for him.

So the Democrats, once in power, should by highly partisan. Dartagnan explains:

To be clear, by “partisan,” O’Neill is not simply recommending being “anti” any individual Republican officeholders but rather wholly embracing a clear, straightforward Democratic agenda, with an enemy clearly and broadly defined as the Republican Party. The idea of “bipartisanship” must be relegated to the dustbin—forever. This is a Democratic world O’Neill foresees, one in which there is no longer any room for Republican ideology, policy, or philosophy of any sort.

To that end, as O’Neill states, “if Democrats want to win elections repeatedly, they must enact policies that are both effective and popular with Democrats.” This, he believes, is the only way the energy of the Democratic grassroots organizations that form the Party’s base of support will stay engaged, and continue to vigorously vote and re-vote the Democrats back into power.
…
Yet O’Neill also recognizes that for this to occur, so-called “moderate” Democrats must acknowledge that the energy of the Party is now centered among its most progressive members, and specifically that “moderates must accept that their conservative assumptions have been overtaken by events.”

I’m well aware that the GOP has been refusing bipartisanship since 1994 and Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America. That was to foster selfishness. Now refusing bipartisanship would promote the community.

To make O’Neill’s proposal happen Democrats need to foster both trust and dignity. O’Neill suggests tactics and measures. Here are some of them:

* Implement progressive policies without watering them down. Include taxes on the wealthy, Green New Deal, and improved health care. And don’t apologize.

* End the filibuster [which I learned was created so that Southern politicians to maintain Jim Crow].

* Continually brand the GOP as a disaster Americans can’t afford to ever let happen again. They can’t be trusted with power.

Being the party that isn’t the nasty guy might get Democrats elected in 2020. But that won’t do any good in 2022.



Anoa Changa of Kos Prism reports on a few initiatives to get youth to serve as poll workers for the November election. It’s a job critical to democracy. Up to this year a majority poll workers were 60 and older. That was because they had the time and the sense of civic responsibility. But this year with a virus raging many of the older workers resigned. So youth are being recruited for the jobs. Perhaps it will give them a sense of civic responsibility.



A campaign group in Arkansas has submitted signatures to get a proposal for an independent citizens redistricting commission on the ballot. Of course, the GOP in the state is doing all it can to declare the signatures invalid. From the description the proposal is similar to what Michigan citizens passed two years ago.

As for the effort in Michigan the selection process is in motion and the members of the commission should be selected by the end of the month.



Some schools have already reopened. It is going about as well as one would expect – not well. One superintendent of a Georgia school district was quoted in a New York Times tweet as saying:

Wearing a mask is a personal choice, and there is no practical way to enforce a mandate to wear them.

Which prompted lots of responses, such as this one from McElrath:

Mothers who’ve had their daughters sent home because their skirts were “too short” or their shoulder straps weren’t “wide enough” would like to have a word.

D. Carlisle responded to McElrath:

Yuuup! This is nuts. They can dictate every detail of a dress code including hairstyle and color, but they can't mandate a mask? They can mandate UNIFORMS but they can't mandate masks? Come. On.

And burkinator added:

Ah well you see the actual problem is they can't practically enforce a policy they don't care about.

North Paulding High School in Dallas, Georgia, not far from Atlanta is one that opened early with insufficient virus protections. Student Hanna Watters videoed the packed hallways with few students wearing masks. She was suspended for her efforts. She has no regrets and quoted John Lewis, saying it was “good and necessary trouble.” Suspension freed her up for three days of appearing on CNN and other media outlets.

Anything that helps all the people

The Haka is a ceremonial chant/dance done by the Maori, the indigenous people of New Zealand. There are versions for all kinds of occasions. The version performed these last few days is in memory of those who died at the Christchurch Mosque shootings. It may look rather threatening (versions of Haka are to inspire warriors), though it is also an act of solidarity and defiance.

In this Twitter thread Leah McElrath links to three performances of Haka, each less than two minutes. The first one is done by a single guy.

The second is most impressive, a large group doing the Haka in unison. In this one there is a shirtless guy in front. To our right and a bit behind is a man with a child in a green shirt. The first few times we see them the child is on the man’s shoulders. At the end the man is clutching the child. Quite a ride for the child.

The third is a mass Haka in a park near one of the mosques. It is impressive for the sheer number of people, though, alas, many of the white students don’t know what they’re doing. Even so, I’m glad they showed solidarity.

Yeah, I watched all three. Hint: Twitter videos start when the video is in your browser window, but the sound defaults to off.



Robert Reich, who used to be the Secretary of Labor in a Democratic administration and is now a progressive rouser, tweeted a quote from President Harry Truman from 1952. That brought a response with the full quote from user Harry S Truman giving ‘em hell:

Now that is the patented trademark of the special interest lobbies. Socialism is a scareword they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

Socialism is what they called public power.

Socialism is what they called social security.

Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

Scroll down the Twitter thread to see a cartoon of the meaning of socialism since 1790. The ignore the rest of it because it’s all pushback.



Last week Joe Balash, Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, speaking to a group of fossil fuel industry leaders, said:

One of the things that I have found absolutely thrilling in working for this administration is the president has a knack for keeping the attention of the media and the public focused somewhere else while we do all the work that needs to be done on behalf of the American people.

Melissa McEwan of Shakesville pounced:

Hey, Joe — if opening the ocean to oil and gas drilling is really something that "needs to be done on behalf of the American people," then why do you need the president to distract us from noticing that you're doing it?

Commenter carovee adds:

Oh dear. Someone in Trump's white house said the silent part out loud again. I wish this would get a lot more attention.

For two years now McEwan has been saying limiting illegal immigration is only the first phase. Next will be limits legal immigration. And now that’s a step closer. From the Washington Post:

The Trump administration is preparing to shutter all 21 international offices of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a move that could slow the processing of family visa applications, foreign adoptions, and citizenship petitions from members of the military.

McEwan responds:

Should the State Department approve this proposal and the plan moves ahead, it will feel very much to me like the Trump Regime is rolling down the shades on documented immigration and communicating to the world that America is closed.

And an authoritarian who mounts a successful bid to keep people out will next turn his attentions to keeping people in.

Shiver.

Ryan Knight describes himself as a Democratic activist who fights for LGBTQ equality, racial justice, women’s rights, and environmental justice. He posted a video of a wonderful epic rant by Arkansas State Senator Stephanie Flowers, a black woman. The Senate was debating a bill for a stand your ground law. There are such laws in several states and the one in Florida allowed George Zimmerman to be acquitted for the murder of Trayvon Martin. So when it is her turn to speak against the bill she rants, “This is about my son!” Eventually the senate timekeeper says she needs to stop. She replies, “I will not! What you gonna do – shoot me?”

The video ends with some statistics.

A study found that stand your ground states have more gun deaths and white people who kill Black people in those states are 250% more likely to go free. Arkansas’ stand your ground bill was defeated by a slim margin.

A couple of Knight’s recent tweets:

Roxanne Witing tweeted:

Thank you Ryan for the eye opening posts. Being Canadian we don’t see all of this in print.

He replies:

We don’t see it in print in America either. Corporate media’s chosen to “both sides” & normalize the Trump presidency. The only place to find the TRUTH these days is amongst the activists, the truth tellers & the resistance—and we won’t stop until this fascist presidency is over.

And in the second tweet:

Republicans are inaccurately labeling Democrats “socialists” while Democrats are not labeling Republicans fascists. That is the difference between the 2 parties. Republicans win the propaganda war by attacking with lies while Democrats play nice, which normalizes Trump & the GOP.

A repeal that isn’t

The North Carolina HB2 “Bathroom Bill” is back in the news because it has been repealed. There is no exclamation point for that sentence because the replacement is still discriminatory.

This bill was enacted a couple years ago. It had several anti-LGBT provisions, the most notorious being that trans people could not use the bathroom that matched their gender identity. The law was enacted swiftly after Charlotte passed a city ordinance protecting LGBT people. The response was also swift. Many entertainment and sports events moved from NC and several businesses decided to not expand in the state.

The new bill, signed today by Democrat Governor Roy Cooper, is actually quite short:

* The old bill is repealed.

* No state institution or city can pass a law about multiple occupancy bathrooms, showers, or changing facilities. This means we’re back to the bathroom regulations before HB2 was passed – there weren’t laws banning transgender people from using the bathroom of choice, but now there can’t be laws protecting that choice.

* No local government may enact LGBT protections in employment or public accommodation until Dec. 1, 2020.

So the state legislature said we don’t care about bathroom use anymore (under HB2 nobody was checking anyway and there were no penalties in the bill). But they also said there will be no new protections for LGBT people (like Charlotte tried to provide) for another 3½ years.

Conservative groups are annoyed because bathrooms are, in their view, no longer safe from trans people – men in dresses. Progressives are annoyed because of the ban on passing LGBT protections. It is still legal to discriminate against us and will remain so.



A bathroom bill died in Arkansas after opposition from the governor and from tourist groups. Governor Asa Hutchinson is not a friend to progressives. He opposed it because it might hurt business. In some states we’ll take our wins any way we can.



An anti-marriage equality bill in Tennessee will be delayed for a year. It would have required the state attorney general to defend city clerks who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Gosh, the voters were wrong?

A year ago the city council of Fayetteville, Arkansas approved a comprehensive LGBT right bill. The Duggar family (I'll let you Google Josh Duggar on your own) spearheaded a vicious campaign and voters overturned the ordinance. This year the city council tried again. This time voters ratified the ordinance 52.8% to 47.2%, even though our side was outspent 2 to 1. It will go into effect on Nov. 7, giving opponents enough time for a legal challenge. Strange that this bunch used to say the voters should decide. Now the challenge what voters decided. The ordinance prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, and in public accommodation because of sexual orientation and gender identity. Alas, there is still the detail of a state law that bans such city ordinances.

A commenter added this image:

Brian Mason, a deputy clerk under Kim Davis, has said he would continue to issue marriage licenses even if Davis tells him not to. Commenters wonder if Mason would be fired for insubordination, though he could respond with a wrongful termination suit. We haven't heard directly from Davis because she took the rest of the week off after being released from jail.



Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom has now passed her great grandmother Queen Victoria to become the longest serving British monarch at 63 years, 216 days. Since she is only 89 and her mother died at age 101 she may still have many years ahead of her. Britain is rejoicing, except perhaps for Prince Charles, who has been heir apparent for 63 years, 216 days.

Tammy Baldwin for president!

Back in February the Arkansas Legislature passed a bill banning local non-discrimination protections for sexual minorities. About the same time the city of Eureka Springs approved what the state law banned. An anti-gay group gathered enough signatures to put the city's ordinance up for a vote of the citizens. That vote was Tuesday and 71% of the voters want to keep protections for sexual minorities. So the city will enforce their ordinance – until July 20 when the state law goes into effect.



A new poll by the Pew Research Center shows that since 2007 the number of adults calling themselves Christian has dropped by about 5 million, or a drop of almost 8% of adults. All denominations are affected, though Evangelical Protestant dropped less than Catholic and Mainline Protestant. In contrast, the number of those unaffiliated with a church has risen. Among adults under 35 – the Millennials – the rise is indicating a religiously unaffiliated generation. Many are saying the reason is a political backlash against the GOP and their religious conservative backers.



In another new poll, this one by the Wall Street Journal and NBC:

found 61 percent of Americans would be enthusiastic about or comfortable with a gay or lesbian presidential candidate. In comparison, 52 percent said they'd be enthusiastic about or comfortable with an evangelical Christian running for president.

Yup, Tammy Baldwin over Mike Huckabee.



I've mentioned the extremely flawed and discredited study by Mark Regnerus that was declared unbelievable when it appeared in the Michigan same-sex marriage case a year ago. Two sociologists went through the study's data. They removed the suspect stuff (such as the person who claimed to be 7-foot-8 and 88 pounds), and corrected the methodological errors. They recomputed all the conclusions and – surprise! – all that data showed that "adult children who lived with same-sex parents show comparable outcome profiles to those from other family types, including intact biological families." Quite the opposite of the conclusion Regnerus computed. This corrected study will appear in Social Science Research, the same journal that published the original.

All that noise in Indiana

The news about various Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (aka Persecution Protection Acts) has been flowing thick and fast.

In Indiana
As I understand it the Indiana House passed an amendment to the state's RFRA so that it could not be used to discriminate against sexual minorities. A step in the right direction, but since the state does not include us in its civil rights law it is still legal to discriminate against us, unless one is in a city with a local non-discrimination ordinance. Gov. Mike Pence signed it. Of course, there is no attempt to add sexual minorities to the civil rights bill, so gay organizations are still putting on the pressure.

In Arkansas
Apparently, all the noise in Indiana caught the attention of Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Or maybe it was the Gov. finding his son Seth's name on a petition asking him to not sign his state's RFRA. Either way, Hutchinson didn't sign and sent it back for revision. The new version only addresses action by the gov't, not individuals or businesses, and closely follows the 1993 federal law. That new version has been passed and signed. As in Indiana, Arkansas doesn't include sexual minorities in their civil rights laws, so discrimination is still legal. Hutchinson is considering an executive order barring discrimination for state employment.

In Georgia
The lead sponsor says the RFRA in that state is dead – for this legislative session. This is the state where an amendment was attached to specifically say it cannot be used for discrimination and lawmakers lost interest.

In Michigan
All that Indiana noise also got the attention of Michigan's Gov. Rick Snyder. He announced today that if a Religious Freedom bill came to him without being accompanied by a revision to the state's civil rights act to include sexual minorities then he would veto the Religious Freedom bill. This is great news! Especially since Snyder has never issued a veto threat before the bill's first hearing and rarely issues veto threats.

Sen. Mike Shirkey, the RFRA sponsor, remains undeterred by the veto threat. House Speaker Kevin Cotter has no interest in taking up an expansion of the civil rights act.

So, it will remain legal discriminate against sexual minorities in Michigan. A person just can't use religion as the reason (not that a reason is necessary).

Elsewhere
North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory issued a veto threat. Montana Gov. Steve Bullock noted the Indiana backlash and said Montana didn't need a similar measure. The Montana RFRA was narrowly defeated.

Ari Ezra Waldman of Towleroad reviewed the first version of the Indiana RFRA, explaining how it is different from the 1993 federal law. Then he mentions something that is a bit disturbing – court interpretations, from the 2nd, 8th, 9th and DC Circuits, result in the federal law drifting toward the first Indiana law. What had been written to protect private citizens from the government has been expanded to protect corporations. The Hobby Lobby decision is the most well known.

Reconciling Ministries Network has issued a letter discussing the Indiana RFRA. It has a variation of the sign that has begun to appear on businesses in Indiana: "This Christ serves everyone and so do we." The letter describes the "indiscriminate servant love of Jesus Christ." It goes on to show how that appears in the Bible, in the songs we sing, and in the United Methodist Book of Discipline.

Slovenia!

Slovenia has approved same-sex marriage! The bill was hotly contested, but passed by a wide margin. An anti-gay group will push for a referendum on the law. That already happened back in 2012, when voters rejected an earlier marriage law. But getting to a referendum won't be easy because in 2013 the referendum law was changed so referendums on human rights issues are no longer allowed. (What a great idea! Wish we had done that here.)



I had written about Arkansas enacting a law that prevents cities from passing non-discrimination laws. Cities are now responding. (1) North Little Rock stated their commitment to fair and equal opportunities regardless of sexual orientation. (2) Businesses in Little Rock have started displaying stickers showing a rainbow hued state outline and the words "We serve and hire equally."



For a while there has been a Prayer Station inside the City Hall of Warren, Michigan. An atheist proposed putting up a Reason Station as well. The city refused. The cit said it wanted to avoid conflict and disruption in City Hall. Besides, the city didn't want an anti-religion presence, depriving religious groups of their constitutional freedoms. The ACLU sued, and won. So a Reason Station should appear in Warren's City Hall soon.



A recent poll found that more that 2/3 of Americans think the wealthy pay too little in federal tax and more that 60% say the middle class pays too much.



As the Latino population in some cities, such as Yakima, Washington, grows, local politicians have a way of keeping them out of government. Yakima is one-third Latino but there are no Latinos on the city council. The reason is all city council representatives are "at large." That means 50% of the voters can control 100% of the seats. That's even better than Gerrymandering and similar to what was (and is again) done to prevent blacks from serving in city gov't. Lawsuits can be effective in solving this problem. Alas, they're also expensive and take lots of time.

A Texas one-step

A state district judge ordered the Travis County Clerk to give Sarah Goodfriend and Suzanne Bryant a marriage license. The couple promptly got married. This came after a Travis County probate judge struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. A federal judge had struck down the ban a year ago, but that decision is before the 5th Circuit Court. The Travis County Clerk has said marriage licenses to same-sex couples must be court-ordered. So only one couple for now.

As expected the state Attorney General is in a tizzy and asked for a stay from the state Supremes. The Texas Supremes granted that stay, but did not invalidate the one marriage. That didn't satisfy the AG, who is considering other ways to invalidate Sarah and Suzanne's marriage. Grinch.



It is cold enough in America that residents in Atlanta are complaining of the cold and there is significant ice on Niagara Falls. Detroit is forecast for -9F tonight.



A Richland, Washington florist refused to do the flowers for a gay couple. A county court has now ruled against the owner, saying that while religious beliefs are protected by the First Amendment, actions based on those beliefs aren't. An appeal is likely.



Two bills made it out of Oklahoma's House Judiciary Committee. The first bill would (1) fire any gov't employee who gives out a same-sex marriage license, (2) bars public money to enforce any court order that requires giving licenses to same-sex couples, (3) fire any judge who tries to enforce same-sex marriage, (4) declares itself above "any contrary federal court ruling." They mean business. The second bill would get rid of marriage licenses, replacing them with marriage certificates, which only certain people could submit to the state.



I had reported the Arkansas legislature had passed a bill banning local non-discrimination protections for sexual minorities. Gov. Asa Hutchinson is torn – between burdensome business regulation and the loss of local control. That gays and lesbians lose protections escapes his concern. So Hutchinson is conflicted enough he won't sign the bill – but he won't veto it either, letting it become law.

A similar bill was approved in Arizona last year. Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed it at the urging of business leaders. But in Arkansas the business leaders are strangely quiet.



As for same-sex marriage in Alabama, a few of the current crop of GOP prez. candidates aren't exactly thundering in their condemnation. They seem to be reduced to claiming it is something that states should decide.

An Arkansas Supreme Court Justice (not Roy Moore) has given his opinions on same-sex marriage. Somehow allowing gays to marry completely voids the entire marriage law in the state and nobody should be able to get married. It seems gay marriages threaten the constitutionality of all marriages.

Bring it on!

The Arkansas legislature has passed a bill that prevents cities and counties from enacting their own anti-discrimination laws that protect sexual minorities. No governor veto is expected. Lawmakers say the bill created uniformity (so much more important than rights). Some things just need to be uniform across the state – along with murder and fraud. Yep, our desire for rights was just compared to murder and fraud. Democrat Representative Clarke Tucker challenges the claim that the bill would be good for business.

Hours after the state Senate passed the bill (and before the House did) the city of Eureka Springs, "the gay capital of the Ozarks," did exactly what the bill banned. Though the state may not sue, a right-wing group likely would. Council member Mickey Schneider said, "Bring it on!"



The little town of Thrumond, West Virginia passed passed an ordinance banning discrimination of sexual minorities. How little? There are only five residents in Thurmond. With a voting population that small it is easy to get a unanimous vote. But with a town that small and no news whether any of them are gay, why bother? The area is a big tourist draw for rafting and fishing and the ordinance will demand equal treatment by any business working through the town. In addition, it sets a great example.



JONAH stands for Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing, the Jewish counterpart to Exodus providing services "for those struggling with unwanted same-sex sexual attractions." Meaning they attempt to make a gay person become straight. Through a lawsuit a judge in New Jersey has declared that JONAH has violated the state's Consumer Fraud Act for advertising they provided a service they could not deliver. Hopefully, this will set a precedent against conversion therapy clinics across the country.

Arkansas, Mississippi!

A federal judge struck down the ban to same-sex marriage in Arkansas. The ruling came with a stay, pending an expected appeal to the 8th Circuit. There is a separate case before the state's Supremes. That one is an appeal of a county circuit judge's ruling that allowed 541 same-sex couples to wed earlier this year before the state Supremes put a stop to them.

A few hours later another federal judge did the same to the ban in Mississippi. It also came with a stay, pending appeal to the 5th Circuit, where there is already a case from Texas.

Isn't it nice that these rulings are becoming so routine I don't exclaim over the various ideas in the rulings? I didn't even read them.

Pro-life and for same-sex marriage

The news reports for this one seem a bit convoluted. I think it comes down to this: Earlier this summer a state court in Arkansas struck down the same-sex marriage ban. The case now goes to the state Supremes. The attorneys for the gay couples are concerned. Maybe up to five of the seven members of the Arkansas Supremes are up for election. Conservative state lawmakers have declared if the Supremes side with marriage equality the justices will be targeted. Therefore the attorneys say those justices cannot be unbiased, and therefore they should step aside when this case is heard.

The Supremes have ruled on that request for their own to step aside: denied.



The marriage equality case in Wisconsin will be appealed to the Supremes.



Fifteen states that already have same-sex marriage and another seventeen who don't (most of those cases haven't been decided yet, though Oklahoma's case has already been through the Circuit Court) have asked the Supremes to take the Oklahoma case and settle the same-sex marriage issue. Let's be done with it. Yes, that's almost two-thirds of the states.

Commenter Ben~Andy explains the move this way: At one point we [voters or legislature] really liked these same-sex marriage bans. But they're indefensible now and we don't want to spend the money to defend them. Though we can see the writing on the wall, we're weak and spineless. So we want you, the Supremes, to get rid of those laws for us. That has the added benefit that we can rail against you, turn out our base, and win in November, take back the Senate and pack the judiciary to our liking.

While I agree that is likely how many conservatives are thinking it is almost impossible for the Supremes to rule before November.



A bit more about the ruling from the 7th Circuit Court. A good deal of the questioning during oral arguments had to do with refuting the claim that gay parents are harmful to children. A good chunk of the ruling takes the opposite view. Same-sex parents are just fine and we need to support that because they are more willing to adopt kids who have been in the foster care system. Taking it one more step:

Also, the more willing adopters there are, not only the fewer children there will be in foster care or being raised by single mothers but also the fewer abortions there will be. Carrying a baby to term and putting the baby up for adoption is an alternative to abortion for a pregnant woman who thinks that as a single mother she could not cope with the baby. The pro-life community recognizes this.

What a delicious piece of reasoning! If you are pro-life you should be for same-sex marriage. It will be the gay couples who care for the babies who aren't aborted.



Craig James of the Family Research Council (declared a hate group for their diatribes and work against us) is a little jealous of our recent success. Perhaps his gang could learn a few political organizational skills from us, cuz, obviously, we're so good at it. Commenters respond the FRC couldn't reproduce our success because it is built on such things as reason, science, rationality, humanity, compassion, understanding, truth, and love.



Randy Thomas used to be Executive Vice President of Exodus International, that group that used to champion gay conversion therapy. Exodus has closed its doors and Thomas is now apologizing for his role in promoting therapy that didn't work and ruined lives. Back in 2008 he was "jubilant" that California's Prop 8 passed. The next day he saw the faces of the gay community. Maybe the win was a terrible wrong. Here's a piece of his apology:

The part that breaks my heart, is that the night that Prop 8 (and other marriage bans) passed, we made it very clear to the gay community that policy was more important than they are. We made it clear that we thought that investing in rules was more important than sacrificially serving in honest relationship. We communicated that we valued the letter of the law more than the authentic expression of grace in the context of humbly living our lives and loving our neighbor. The message we sent was deeply damaging to our relationships with our gay neighbors and family members.

For my part in this, I deeply apologize.

He is now glad that marriage bans are being struck down.

Take our nation back

A group of black pastors from Detroit have filed a brief in the Michigan's same-sex marriage case now before the 6th Circuit. Put simply, they don't like us. They essentially said in their press conference: If you don't work against homosexuality like they do then you don't believe in God. It is "ignorant and myopic" to compare gay civil rights to black civil rights. Gays will "destroy the backbone of our society." And… "It's time to take our nation back."

Did you catch that last one? Do you remember who has been saying it the most lately? Yup, the Tea Party folks, who want to take the country back from the clutches of the black and brown folk. And now black people want to take the country back from gay people. Pardon my while I go find the off-switch for the Irony Alarm.



The latest in Idaho is that the 9th Circuit issued a stay on same-sex marriage. That happened in time to prevent any couples from actually getting married. This stay is in effect until the 9th Circuit decides what to do with the case. If they take it the stay would likely be extended.



The lower court judge in Arkansas fixed the problems with his ruling by mentioning the second law. Same-sex marriages resumed for a moment. Then state Supremes quickly issued a stay. Marriages stopped. It might be a year before they get to the case.



Ten years ago tomorrow same-sex couples in Massachusetts started getting marriage licenses and be able to legally wed. The timeline looks something like this:

2004 Massachusetts
2005
2006
2007
2008 Connecticut, California (come and gone)
2009 Iowa, Vermont, and Washington DC
2010 New Hampshire
2011 New York
2012 Maryland, Maine, Washington state
2013 Rhode Island, Dela, Minn, New Jersey, Hawaii, New Mexico, Illinois, Calif.
---- and Utah struck down, then stayed.
2014 Okla, Virginia, Texas, Mich, Idaho, Ark. -- full rights, but stayed.
---- Ohio, Kentucky -- partial rights, also stayed.

The slow march towards equality is never in vain

It appears in Arkansas there were two separate laws concerning same-sex marriage. One of them, written into the constitution, said gay couples could not get married. The other said county clerks couldn't issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The recent ruling by a state judge struck down only the amendment. When the state, as defendants, went to the state Supremes the court said we can't issue a stay (yet) because the case is premature. So it is back to the original judge. In the meantime a stay is effectively in place because of that second law.



Ari Ezra Waldman of Towleroad has a review of the Virginia marriage equality case before the 4th Circuit. He listened to the entire oral argument. He noted how vehement judge Paul Niemeyer was against our side. This judge kept insisting gay marriage was a "new right," to "get gay married." And that isn't in the Constitution. We have "B relationships."

Waldman says Niemeyer's goal was to make gay people the "other." It is one of the oldest conservative tricks and when that happens it is much easier to discriminate against someone. Waldman says Niemeyer comments expressed two ideas. The first is the legal argument and included the claim that since this is a new right there are no previous precedents (so much for what the Supremes said last summer). The second is a plain homophobic rant, a swipe at our dignity, showing the deepest unease about gay people. It is a preview of what Antonin Scalia might say. Another part of Niemeyer's comments was resignation. Whatever the outcome he and his colleagues would only be a speed bump on the way to the Supremes.

The other two members of the 4th Circuit panel, Roger Gregory and Henry Floyd, did their best to ignore Niemeyer. Gregory is clearly on our side. After arguing with the state about their concern for children as a reason to stop same-sex marriage he said, "It’s really disingenuous, your interest in children." Floyd's vote may be a bit harder to predict, though he did say the real issue is equal dignity, not a mom and a dad.



Ari Ezra Waldman, in another article for Towleroad, reviews the marriage equality ruling out of Idaho. Yes, the usual stuff. The major issues are due process, equal protection, and whether the federal gov't can intervene. The state came back and asked for a stay. The judge essentially said no -- you're going to lose anyway. There is no need to postpone the trauma inflicted on gay couples. Are we getting to a point where stays will routinely not be included in these rulings?

Jim, Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin lists a few more issues in the ruling.

Tyranny of the majority:

This case asks a basic and enduring question about the essence of American government: Whether the will of the majority, based as it often is on sincere beliefs and democratic consensus, may trump the rights of a minority.
…
After careful consideration, the Court finds Idaho’s Marriage Laws unconstitutional. This conclusion reaffirms a longstanding maxim underlying our system of government—a state’s broad authority to regulate matters of state concern does not include the power to violate an individual’s protected constitutional rights.
…
More recently, the Supreme Court confirmed that gay and lesbian individuals do not forfeit their constitutional liberties simply because of their sexual orientation.
…
Finally, and most critically, the Supreme Court’s marriage cases demonstrate that the right to marry is an individual right, belonging to all.

What about the kids?

The best that can be said for Defendants’ position is that some social scientists quibble with the prevailing consensus that the children of same-sex parents, on average, fare no better or worse than the children of opposite-sex parents.

And besides… Straight couples do not have to follow the norm of raising children. Idaho doesn't hand out licenses based on the couple's ability or desire to have children. Licenses are not withheld if the couple "might be, or are, non-optimal parents." Withholding legal, financial, and social benefits of marriage harms the children the state says they want to protect.

And religious liberty: The state doesn't have the right to prevent churches from officiating at same-sex ceremonies that is a part of their religion.

"Slow as the march toward equality may seem, it is never in vain."

Idaho!

This is like watching dominos fall. Late this afternoon a federal judge declared Idaho's same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutional. The reasons are the usual. The ruling takes effect -- and couples may start to marry -- Friday morning. The governor vows to appeal and has asked for a stay.



The Virginia case was before the 4th Circuit today. Of the three judge panel one was antagonistic, insisting a child needed a mother and father, another appeared to be on our side, and the third was rather quiet. There is no date set for the ruling.



In Arkansas the state's Supremes put a deadline of tomorrow to file briefs on the question of a stay of the same-sex marriage ruling.



A challenge to the same-sex marriage ban in Alaska was filed on Monday. A challenge to the ban in South Dakota will be filed within a few days. The current tally:

17 states permit same-sex marriage.
33 states ban same-sex marriage. Out of those…
31 states have or will soon have a challenge to that ban. Leaving…
2 states -- North Dakota and Montana -- without a challenge.

One by one.

There's always a typewriter

A stay hasn't been issued in Arkansas yet so a few more counties performed same-sex marriages today. The original suit listed six counties, so the rest said we don't have to abide by the ruling. And at least one of the six didn't allow same-sex couples to marry because, gosh, the computer form lists "man" and "woman." To which another county clerk (one that didn't allow gays to marry) responded there's always a typewriter.

So hundreds of same-sex couples in Arkansas (and Texas and Oklahoma) hurried to the handful of county offices to get married today. The busiest was for Pulaski County, which includes Little Rock.

Ari Ezra Waldman of Towleroad reviews the Arkansas decision. This went before a state court because the suit included the claim that the marriage ban violated the Arkansas Constitution. A reader wondered why the ban could be in conflict with the Constitution since it is a part of the Constitution. It's because with the ban the document is in conflict with itself and some parts -- the stuff about equal rights -- takes precedence.

Arkansas!

I didn't see this one coming. A state judge in Arkansas struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban. Not only does the ban violate the federal Constitution (in ways we've seen before) it is inconsistent with the rest of the Arkansas Constitution. The judge wrote:

These rights vest in every person over whom the Constitution has authority and, because they are so important, an individual’s fundamental rights “may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”

The judge is aware of activist judges and said that when it comes to fundamental rights the judiciary has failed unpopular minorities in the past.

The ruling came out late on a Friday. It did not include a stay. And most county clerk offices are closed on Saturday. The one exception in Eureka Springs, which happens to be the gay hotspot of the Ozarks (there is such a thing?). The county clerk was unsure of what to do and closed the office. The deputy clerk had no problems and reopened it. So there were about 15 same-sex weddings in Arkansas yesterday, the first time in the Old South. More photos here and here. Alas, yes, an appeal is coming.

Big consequences that I can't prove

The Oklahoma marriage equality case was before the 10th Circuit Court yesterday. The state had declared that allowing same-sex couples to marry "harms the government’s interest in creating stable families and cared for children." One of the judges on the case demanded the state prove it. The attorney for the state said it isn't the government's responsibility to show the harm. Quite the dodge. The judge persisted. The attorney replied there are "real world consequences" but "no one knows the long-term effects." Translation: The most horrible things are going to happen and we can't prove any of it, nor do we have to. Which means they're in the same situation as this guy.



The Arkansas same-sex marriage ban has been before the judge. He says he will rule within two weeks. The plaintiff attorney is feeling pretty good. Since the Windsor case last summer, the one that struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act, there have been 18 cases at the state and federal level that ruled in favor of equality. The attorney for the state said that ruling only applies to federal laws and did not block states from defining marriage as they wish. He is correct, but he misses the point.