California, as the nation’s most populous state and home to more than 98,000 same-sex couples, would be the gay rights movement’s biggest prize of them all.

“Today’s petition shows how far the anti-marriage proponents of Proposition 8 will go to ensure that gay and lesbian Americans remain second-class citizens,” said Chad Griffin, president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which sued to overturn the California ban. “Separate is never equal – and I am confident that one day, very soon, every American will be able to enjoy the fundamental freedom to marry.”

Read full article >

Ted Boutrous, an attorney for the two couples who challenged the constitutionality of Prop 8, says he’s not worried about a full 9th Circuit review.

“We believe that all paths for us lead to one thing and that is Proposition 8 is going to be struck down,” said Boutrous. “Some of them would take more time, some would take less. We want the speediest path but we’re ready for whatever happens.”

A majority of the 9th Circuit’s dozens of active judges would have to agree to re-hear the appeal. If they do, the court randomly appoints 10 judges and the Chief Judge to convene a panel. If the court agrees to re-hear the Prop 8 decision, it may take another year to conduct a full hearing.

Read and listed to the full story >

“Supporters of same-sex marriage were ready to continue the fight.

‘We are ready to defend our victory whatever path this case takes,’ said Theodore Boutrous, an attorney for Prop. 8′s challengers.

‘Because our plaintiffs have the right to get married, which both the District Court and the Ninth Circuit vindicated, we oppose en banc review and will seek to bring that fundamental right to reality at the earliest possible time.’

‘In its ruling earlier this month, the 9th Circuit panel said Proposition 8 stripped away a previously established right for same-sex couples to marry in California without any social or legal justification other than bias against gays and lesbians.”

Read the full article >

The anti-marriage proponents of Prop. 8 are now asking for a wider panel of the Ninth Circuit to review their baseless, discriminatory claims for justifying state-sponsored discrimination. Moreover, they are also continuing their offensive, homophobic attack on the District Court judge who first heard our case and struck down Prop. 8. With this new filing, they are trying, once again, to get the case thrown out because the trial judge was gay and in a relationship.

If they want another round, we are ready.

We won in Federal District Court; Prop. 8 was found unconstitutional. We won again in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; Prop. 8 was deemed to “serve no purpose…other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California.”

No matter what path this case takes, we will defend our victory.

A rehearing of our case is completely unnecessary. Because gay and lesbian couples like our plaintiffs have the right to get married, which both the Federal District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vindicated, AFER opposes a rehearing by the Ninth Circuit and will seek to bring that fundamental right to reality at the earliest possible time for the tens of thousands of Californians who are being denied basic justice, due process and equality.

Every piece of evidence and every witness (including the Prop. 8 Proponents’ own witnesses) pointed to one conclusion: the fundamental freedom to marry should not be denied to any American. They failed to present a shred of evidence to justify discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans, and they will fail yet again.

The Ninth Circuit will now have to decide if it will rehear our case. A majority of the Ninth Circuit’s 25 active judges will need to vote on what is known as en banc review. If the request is granted, the case will be heard by a panel of 11 judges. If it is rejected, we can expect the anti-marriage forces to try and take our case to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Because the Court has acted swiftly in the past by placing our case on an expedited schedule, there is every reason to believe that it will quickly resolve this issue.

• Watch this quick 2-minute video to learn what’s next >

When we filed this case, we knew it would be hard-fought. We knew the anti-marriage forces would try every legal maneuver and stall tactic to prevent gay and lesbian couples from being able to get married.

They have lost at every turn, and they will lose again.

P.S. Watch this quick video to learn more about next steps in the Prop. 8 case.

San Francisco, CA – Today, anti-marriage forces asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its landmark ruling in Perry v. Brown upholding the historic August 2010 decision of the Federal District Court that found California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional.  Proposition 8 stripped gay and lesbian Californians of the fundamental freedom to marry.

Two weeks ago, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit concluded that Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  The Ninth Circuit held:

“Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.  The Constitution simply does not allow for laws of this sort.”

The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) is the sole sponsor of the Perry case.

The request for a larger eleven-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit to reconsider the case, known as rehearing en banc, is only granted upon a majority vote of the Ninth Circuit’s 25 judges in regular active service.  A petition for rehearing en banc temporarily stays the three-judge panel’s decision striking down Proposition 8.

Proponents’ also renewed their baseless attempt to impugn the reputation of the United States District Chief Judge who struck down Proposition 8.  Unable to defend Proposition 8 on its merits, Proponents claim that the now-retired Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker was disqualified from ruling on Proposition 8 and that his historic decision should be vacated because he is gay and in a committed relationship.  The Ninth Circuit unanimously rejected Proponents’ offensive argument, stating: “To do otherwise would demonstrate a lack of respect for the integrity of our federal courts.”

“We are ready to defend our victory whatever path this case takes,” said Plaintiffs’ attorney Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.  “Because our plaintiffs have the right to get married, which both the Federal District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vindicated, we oppose en banc review and will seek to bring that fundamental right to reality at the earliest possible time for the tens of thousands of Californians who are being denied basic justice, due process and equality.”

“Today’s petition shows how far the anti-marriage proponents of Proposition 8 will go to ensure that gay and lesbian Americans remain second-class citizens,” said AFER Board President Chad Griffin.  “It is time for this discrimination to come to an end once and for all.   Separate is never equal—and I am confident that one day, very soon, every American will be able to enjoy the fundamental freedom to marry.”

• Read the Ninth Circuit’s Decision >

 ###

Press Contacts:

• Elizabeth Riel 310.560.4886 or elizabeth@afer.org
• Brandon Hersh 202.412.9766 or brandon@afer.org

About the American Foundation for Equal Rights

The American Foundation for Equal Rights is the sole sponsor of the Perry case. After bringing together Theodore B. Olson and David Boies to lead its legal team, AFER successfully advanced the Perry case through Federal District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Foundation is committed to achieving full federal marriage equality. 

Dustin Lance Black & Rob Reiner, AFER Boardmembers

AFER Co-Founder and Board President Chad Griffin

Ted Olson

Plaintiffs Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo

Plaintiffs Kris Perry and Sandy Steir

LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

Los Angeles, CA – The New Jersey Legislature passed marriage equality legislation today, joining the State of Washington as the second state in recent days to defend the fundamental freedom to marry for all of its citizens.

One week ago, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a landmark ruling upholding the historic August 2010 decision of the Federal District Court that found California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional.

American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) Board President Chad Griffin issued the following statement:

“New Jersey has taken a momentous step in defending the fundamental constitutional freedom to marry for all Americans.  Separate is never equal—and the New Jersey Legislature recognized that today, setting an important example for the rest of the nation.”

 ###

Press Contacts

• Elizabeth Riel 310.560.4886 or elizabeth@afer.org
• Brandon Hersh 202.412.9766 or brandon@afer.org

About the American Foundation for Equal Rights

The American Foundation for Equal Rights is the sole sponsor of the Perry case. After bringing together Theodore B. Olson and David Boies to lead its legal team, AFER successfully advanced the Perry case through Federal District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Foundation is committed to achieving full federal marriage equality. www.afer.org 

The event was covered in the February 15 issue of Variety:

‘”We filed this (suit) not only to win inside the courtroom but to win in the court of public opinion,’ Griffin told the stars, same-sex parents and creative types who filled a Universal Studios theater Saturday. Among those in the crowd were Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Eric Stonestreet, Dustin Lance Black, Max Mutchnick, Erik Hyman and Ryan Murphy, along with the plaintiffs in the case, Kris Perry and Sandy Stier and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo.”

Read the full article >