WAPO reports that the authors of the recent Gay Marriage Referendum are taking their cause to court, asking judges to overturn the Board of Elections and Ethics’ Monday decision to block the proposal. The Board ruled that the Referendum, designed to annul the City Council’s decision to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, was in violation of the city’s Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Board stated that the proposal would extend or deny rights to legally married couples based strictly on their sexual orientation, thereby making it illegal. The Plaintiffs argue that Dean v. District, a 1995 court case which ruled the denying marriage to same-sex couples did not violate the HRA, validates their proposal. An expedited hearing has been requested.
George Gordon Meade by NCinDC
Last week, for the first time in my life, I was summoned for jury duty. Imagine the horrified look on my face when I received notice in the mail that sure enough, my time had come, the time to sit all day in a waiting room full of complete strangers and hope that I didn’t get picked as a juror. My friends had all told me how terrible it was and provided me with many excuses to get out of being picked. “Tell them that your uncle is a cop. Tell them that you could never judge another person for what they may or may not have done. Tell them that you’re a racist pig. Tell them you have an uncontrollable bladder.” But somehow, deep down inside, I had a morbid curiosity of seeing our legal system in action and actually did want to be picked. I wanted to be on a jury of peers, to listen to a case, hear the judge bang on his desk with a gavel, hear an attorney yell, “Objection!”, deliberate for hours, and finally deliver a verdict which would decide the fate of the defendant. I wanted Law & Order, only this wasn’t TV.