Appeals Court Judge's Ideology Is Called 'a Mortal Danger to Equal Rights'

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 26, 2005; Page A02

Leading gay rights groups yesterday dismissed as inconsequential Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s pro bono work on a gay rights case in the 1990s and came out in strong opposition to his nomination to the Supreme Court.

"For his entire adult life, John Roberts has been a disciple of and promoted a political and legal ideology that is antithetical to an America that embraces all, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people," Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said in a statement. "I have no doubt he's an accomplished lawyer and an affable dinner companion, but that doesn't make him any less a mortal danger to equal rights for gay people, reproductive freedom and affirmative action."

Some Democratic senators thought gay rights groups would hold their fire because Roberts provided assistance to lawyers in the 1996 Romer v. Evans case, a Supreme Court decision that solidified legal protections for gays. But the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays issued a statement saying his involvement was minor.

"We are mindful that Judge Roberts provided a few hours of pro bono help to the attorneys in Romer v. Evans -- a landmark case for our community," the organizations said. "Some have said that this work -- which consisted mostly of playing the role of a conservative justice -- demonstrates that Roberts is not personally anti-gay. This theory is not relevant to the important issue for our community: how Roberts would vote as a Supreme Court justice." Conservatives generally agree with the assessment that Roberts's work in the case was neither consequential nor indicative of his views on gay rights, though some were initially critical.

Echoing many of the concerns voiced by other liberal interest groups, the gay rights organizations said Roberts appears hostile to civil rights, personal privacy and individual freedoms. "Judge Roberts has such a narrow view of what the courts can and should do, it's a wonder he wants the job at all," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. "Ultimately, this is about an individual's right to privacy. From women's rights to religious freedom to civil rights, there is powerful evidence that Judge Roberts would rule against equality."

In highlighting their concern, the groups pointed to Lawrence v. Texas , in which the high court ruled in favor of legal and privacy protections for gays, overruling the state legislature. In recently released memos, Roberts has raised questions about courts intruding into areas where legislatures should rule.

The organizations are largely basing their opinions on Roberts's work for President Ronald Reagan more than 20 years ago, when the nominee was an employee at the Justice Department and then in the White House counsel's office. The National Archives has released 60,000 papers that include Roberts's views from that period. In most cases, the papers show a young lawyer opining on the key issues of the day, including affirmative action and equal protection for women and gays.

With the Senate Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearings nearing, liberal interest groups are pressuring Democratic senators to oppose Roberts and subject him to tough questioning about his views on issues such as gay rights and abortion. The first phase of their strategy is for different groups to announce their opposition on different days to create an impression of growing anti-Roberts momentum in the run-up to the hearings.

"There are a great many groups that determined they would oppose whomever President Bush nominated," White House spokesman Steve Schmidt said. "The only open question was which day they would do it."

As part of an effort to defend Roberts, a number of black leaders, including Niger Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality and Robert L. Woodson Sr. of the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, endorsed the nominee yesterday. "A large segment of the African American community . . . is standing firmly behind John Roberts . . . and his judicial philosophy," Innis said.
See the full article

Please, NOW more than ever show your support for The Dolphin Democratic Club, Equality Florida and everyone involved in the resignation of Broward County School Board Diversity Committee Member Steve Kane. The GLBT Community does support all children, of all races.

Where: K. C. Wright Admin. Bldg. Board Room/Pre-Function Room

600 SE 3rd Avenue, Fort Lauderdale

When: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 @ 4:00pm


Below is an letter to the Editor published in the Sun-Sentinel 8/22/2005

------------------------------------------------------------------

Diversity Committee, in fact, was working

By Steve Kane

Posted August 22 2005

In recent weeks, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel has published two attack columns by Michael Mayo, a commentary by gay activist Stratton Pollitzer and several Letters to the Editor, all negative, reflecting its one-sided coverage of the Broward schools Diversity Committee controversy. Each of these pieces has been hostile toward the committee in general and me in particular.

In the lead editorial of Aug. 19, the Sun-Sentinel states, "Rather than promoting unity, the Broward County Public Schools' 19-member Diversity Committee has been a source of dissension."

This is totally inaccurate. This is an excellent committee, which has worked long, hard and successfully at its job, which is trying to provide greater equity for the disadvantaged black (and white) students of Broward County.

The recent dissension that you refer to has not been caused by the committee, but by a group of gay activists who can't take "no" for an answer.

The "We Are Family" video was voted down by the Diversity Committee by a vote of 10 to 7. The video was then turned down by the screening committee. Their decision was then supported by Schools Superintendent Frank Till. And the decision was ultimately supported by the entire School Board.

In fact, I believe your own editorial supported the Diversity Committee's original decision to exclude the video. At that point, gay activists, frustrated by the failure of their attempt to introduce the concept of sexual orientation to our Broward County students in kindergarten through sixth grade, decided to retaliate by attempting to destroy the present Diversity Committee. Never mind that their vengeance comes at the expense of the education of disadvantaged children in our minority community. The activists could not care less.

As for the "bottom line" of the editorial -- "Staff [the Diversity Committee] with appropriate personnel and focus it on what already works in the school system." -- exactly who should be considered appropriate? Only people who share the views of the gay activists? Only those who share the liberal views of Mayo and the Sun-Sentinel? How about those who come from a biblical Christian perspective? Would they be appropriate? Or would that be too diverse for the Diversity Committee?

Finally, regarding your conclusion that the Diversity Committee should "focus on what already works in the school system," quite to the contrary, it is the mission, the responsibility, of the Diversity Committee to focus on what is not working.

Steve Kane is a radio host and former Diversity Committee member.
See the full article

Miami Herald -- August 20, 2005
by Mary Ellen Klas

Tallahassee -- A coalition of conservative religious groups said Friday that it will soon have enough signatures to trigger a court review of an amendment to ban gay and lesbian civil unions and same-sex marriage in Florida.

Florida4Marriage, working with the Christian Coalition and the Liberty Counsel, said it had nearly all of the 61,000 valid voter signatures needed to seek Florida Supreme Court approval of its proposed constitutional amendment.

High court approval of the ballot language is the first step to getting the measure on the November 2006 ballot.

The second step: The group must collect 611,000 valid voter signatures by Feb. 1.

The amendment would add to the state constitution a statement that marriage in Florida ``is the legal union of only one man and one woman, as husband and wife.''

It would also ban civil unions by declaring that ``no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.''

Christian Coalition President Bill Stephens predicted Friday that the group will collect the required signatures and, if the measure makes it to the ballot, it will get overwhelming approval.

''It'll pass, absolutely,'' he said, adding later: ``I hope people understand our message is not about hate and bigotry.''

Opponents of the measure, however, say the proposal is a divisive attempt to block access to future and existing legal benefits obtained by homosexual couples.

Equality Florida, a gay-rights advocacy group, said the amendment ``would not only block equal access to marriage, but it also would deny access to civil unions and threaten existing domestic partnership benefits.''

Equality Florida released a poll that said 54 percent of Floridians support a ban against gay marriage, while 55 percent said they support some type of legal union for gay and lesbian couples.

Gov. Jeb Bush has said he considers the amendment unnecessary, since Florida law already bans same-sex marriage and there has been no attempt to strike it down.


See the full article

Group collects signatures to push cause

By Jason Garcia
and Arin Gencer Orlando Sentinel
Posted August 20 2005

TALLAHASSEE · Supporters of a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage in Florida said Friday they are "on the brink" of collecting enough signatures to prompt a state Supreme Court review of their proposal.

The measure, which supporters want to put on the November 2006 ballot, would define marriage in Florida as "the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife." It would also ensure that "no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent" would be allowed.

Backers say the amendment is necessary because gay marriage would undermine heterosexual marriage. Opponents call it an attempt to sanction discrimination and to rally social conservatives to the polls next year.

"If there was ever a time for direct democracy, this is it," said John Stemberger, the chairman of Longwood-based Florida4Marriage.org, the group sponsoring the amendment.

Before any amendment can go before voters, it must be reviewed by the state Attorney General and the Supreme Court to ensure it's limited to a single subject and that the summary of the amendment that appears on a ballot is adequate. That review is triggered when an amendment's backers gather 10 percent of the 611,000 signatures they need to put it up for a vote.

Stemberger said his group will cross that threshold by early next week at the latest.

A 1997 state law already blocks gays and lesbians from marrying in Florida, a fact that has prompted some high-profile conservatives, including Gov. Jeb Bush, to call a constitutional ban unnecessary. But the amendment's backers said they are worried about a Monroe County challenge to that law currently working through the court system.

"This is really all about children," Stemberger said. "We can't throw a timeless institution to the wind without asking, `What's the impact on children?'"

Michael Albetta, the president of the Florida GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender) Democratic Caucus, said the amendment would debase the state constitution. "It's putting discrimination in the constitution," he said.

Noting the law that already prevents gay marriage, Albetta called the amendment a ploy to rally social conservatives to the polls in a nonpresidential election year.

"This amendment is being pushed by the Republican religious right to assure that the Republicans will vote Katherine Harris in," Albetta said, referring to the Sarasota congresswoman and former Florida Secretary of State who is challenging Democratic U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson.

Such a referendum would likely be a boon for the GOP, said Matthew Corrigan, a political science professor at the University of North Florida.

"It will probably help Republicans because it's going to energize Christian conservatives," Corrigan said. "It moves the subject away from, maybe Harris and Nelson, to gay marriage."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/state/orl-marriage2005aug20,0,1154555.story?coll=orl-news-headlines-state
See the full article

STATEMENT OF THE FLORIDA GLBT DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS ON THE SUSPENSION OF THE BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD’S DIVERSITY COMMITTEE

Fort Lauderdale – Today, the Broward County School Board voted to suspend its Diversity Committee, which has been mired in controversy for the past several weeks over issues surrounding the so-called promotion of issues of sexual orientation. Michael Albetta, president of the Florida GLBT Democratic Caucus, issued the following statement:

“Finally, the Broward County School Board did the right thing. After being sidetracked for weeks on a manufactured controversy over the ‘We Are Family’ video, the Diversity Committee has been suspended pending an emergency workshop. Rather than bringing us together and promoting tolerance and understanding, the Diversity Committee instead drove a wedge through the entire Broward County community. All of us – Democrats and Republicans, gay and straight – should thank the School Board for recognizing there are better ways to teach kids about diversity.”

The Florida GLBT Democratic Caucus is a chartered organization of the Florida Democratic Party. The Caucus has 13 Democratic clubs as chartered members, from Jacksonville to Tampa Bay to Key West
See the full article

Last modified Mon., August 15, 2005 - 12:34 AM
Originally created Monday, August 15, 2005


Calvary worships, considers reply


Episcopal church is one of six digesting rejection of a request for a new leader.


By JEFF BRUMLEY, The Times-Union


For two hours Sunday morning, the sanctuary at Calvary Church in Jacksonville was filled with praise music, Scripture reading, prayers for the sick and the occasional outbursts of restless children.


Altogether, a pretty typical worship service for this or any other church.

But Calvary's situation is anything but typical.

It is one of six North Florida Episcopal churches representing nearly 4,000 members that in June asked their bishop, the Right Rev. John Howard, to assign them a leader more in line with their views against same-sex marriage and gay ordination.

On Friday, Howard responded to the request in an 18-page letter posted on the Web site of the Jacksonville-based Episcopal Diocese of Florida, which he oversees.

"Essentially, he said 'no,'" the Rev. David Sandifer, vicar at Calvary Church, told about 120 worshipers before beginning his Sunday sermon. "It didn't come as a great surprise to us."

The other churches are All Souls and the Church of the Redeemer in Jacksonville; Grace Church in Orange Park; St. Michael's in Gainesville; and St. Luke's Community of Life in Tallahassee. A retired priest in Jacksonville also signed the June request.

They are upset that their denomination, the Episcopal Church USA, elected an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire in 2003. Their desire is to remain in communion with the more conservative Anglican Communion, an international fellowship to which the denomination belongs.

In his letter, Howard rejected the request because he said it amounted to "creating a new diocese-within-a-diocese," and he is open to discussing a less-comprehensive form of alternative oversight.

Howard's letter added that because Calvary and the Tallahassee congregation are mission churches instead of parishes -- a status giving the bishop more control over their affairs -- he would soon be calling in their priests "to discuss the future of their ministries."

"I'll let you read between the lines" about what that means, said Sandifer, whose church has 160 members.

What it means is Sandifer and the priest in Tallahassee could be removed from their churches, and the congregations' lay leadership boards could be dissolved, said Betty Collins, senior warden at Calvary.

"This is a time of real anxiety and sadness," she said.

But those emotions have not distracted the congregation from its mission of serving Christ, she said.

"We just keep on keeping on," she said.

Sandifer said he and the other priests will meet Tuesday to craft a public response to Howard's letter. He said it is likely the group will appeal the decision to the Anglican Communion.

In the meantime, Calvary Church will continue to plan and finance mission work, evangelize the community and worship in joy, Sandifer said.

"You would think in a time like this a congregation would be worried and distraught and pulled apart," he said, "but instead, there's a peace."


jeff.brumleyjacksonville.com, (904) 359-4310

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/081505/met_19503537.shtml
See the full article

This is a copy of an article that appeared on GayWired.com. You can see the original story by going to http://www.gaywired.com/article.cfm?Section=9&ID=6859 ===========================================================


Tampa City Commissioners to Consider Sexual Orientation Ordinance by Ross von Metzke (Tampa, FL) – Members of the Hillsborough County Human Relations Board voted Tuesday to ask county commissioners to reconsider adding sexual orientation to
the county's Human Rights Ordinance.

Al Giraud, a gay member of the board, raised the issue after commissioners adopted a policy back in June to “abstain from acknowledging, promoting and
participating” in gay pride events.

Giraud argued that reinstating sexual orientation protection gives commissioners “an opportunity to say we are not for discrimination,” adding
that he still disagrees with the gay pride policy.

The Human Relations Board made a similar request in 2000, five years after commissioners removed the sexual orientation provision from the human rights ordinance amid a divisive countywide debate. Commissioners Ronda Storms, Jim Norman, Tom Scott and Chris Hart voted in June 2000 against reintroducing
sexual orientation to the ordinance.

Hart is no longer on the board. Storms, who worked to repeal sexual orientation from the ordinance before she was elected, introduced this year's ban on gay
pride recognition. Norman and Scott joined her in the approval.

The county ordinance prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status or disability in connection with
employment and housing.

Currently, the majority of Fortune 500 companies, many of which are based in
Florida, prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Giraud filed a discrimination complaint with the city's Office of Human Rights, which does recognize sexual orientation, after two Gay Pride displays were
removed from a downtown library because of the county policy.
© 2005 GayWired.com, All Rights Reserved
See the full article