<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Laura Bergus &#187; gay marriage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://laurabergus.com/tag/gay-marriage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://laurabergus.com</link>
	<description>Law grad + web &#38; media background = belief that legal services should be affordable, accessible, and online.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 May 2011 14:57:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>You didn&#8217;t believe me that Iowa was progressive?</title>
		<link>http://laurabergus.com/2009/04/you-didnt-believe-me-that-iowa-was-progressive/</link>
		<comments>http://laurabergus.com/2009/04/you-didnt-believe-me-that-iowa-was-progressive/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:38:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Laura Bergus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[law school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[activist judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[same-sex marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Varnum v. Brien]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://laurabergus.com/?p=154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By now everyone knows about the Iowa Supreme Court&#8217;s unanimous opinion invalidating our legislature&#8217;s gay marriage ban.  This decision makes me proud to be an Iowan and reaffirms my inherent faith in humanity (and I say neither of these things lightly).  While plenty in our state are already calling for a constitutional amendment [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By now everyone knows about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varnum_v._Brien">Iowa Supreme Court&#8217;s unanimous opinion invalidating our legislature&#8217;s gay marriage ban</a>.  This decision makes me proud to be an Iowan and reaffirms my inherent faith in humanity (and I say neither of these things lightly).  While plenty in our state are already <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=7277498">calling for a constitutional amendment</a> (which Democratic <a href="http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090407/NEWS/90407035/-1/SPORTS12">governor Chet Culver said he is &#8220;reluctant&#8221; to entertain</a>, and which is a <a href="http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Constitution.html#a10s1">rather drawn-out process</a>, especially compared to California) and lamenting <a href="http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&amp;ContentRecord_id=6c9c6ef1-19b9-b4b1-12c8-fa02454cc0f4">&#8220;activist judges,&#8221;</a> I&#8217;ve been running across a fair amount of support for the validity of <em><a href="http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/wfData/files/Varnum/07-1499.pdf">Varnum v. Brien </a></em><a href="http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/wfData/files/Varnum/07-1499.pdf">[pdf]</a> as the appropriate exercise of judicial discretion and a model opinion in its clarity of purpose.  Some examples:<br />
<a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2009/04/analysis-of-iowa-supreme-court-ruling-on-samesex-marriage.html"><br />
Constitutional Law Prof Blog</a><br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/opinion/05sun3.html?_r=1&amp;hpw">New York Times editorial</a><br />
<a href="http://www.religiondispatches.org/blog/sexandgender/1309/in_iowa_gay_marriage_ruling,_truth_is_the_winner/">Religious Dispatches</a><br />
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123906051568695003.html">Wall Street Journal &#8220;Why Gay Marriage Matters&#8221;<br />
</a>Since the Iowa ruling, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/07/AR2009040701663.html">Vermont and D.C. also took steps to recognize same-sex marriage</a>.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&amp;address=389x5385122">statement by Iowa&#8217;s Senate Majority Leader</a> perhaps best sums up why I still stick up for Iowa:</p>
<blockquote><p>“Iowa has always been a leader in the area of civil rights.</p>
<p>“In 1839, the Iowa Supreme Court rejected slavery in a decision that found that a slave named Ralph became free when he stepped on Iowa soil, 26 years before the end of the Civil War decided the issue.</p>
<p>“In 1868, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that racially segregated “separate but equal” schools had no place in Iowa, 85 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.</p>
<p>“In 1873, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled against racial discrimination in public accommodations, 91 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.</p>
<p>“In 1869, Iowa became the first state in the union to admit women to the practice of law.</p>
<p>“In the case of recognizing loving relationships between two adults, the Iowa Supreme Court is once again taking a leadership position on civil rights.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Finally, as a law student, it was pretty awesome, albeit a little nerdy, to read an opinion of such historic relevance and 1) understand what&#8217;s going on from a procedural standpoint and 2) recall that I had a chance to meet the opinion&#8217;s author, <a href="http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Justices/Mark_S_Cady/">Justice Mark Cady</a> last fall at a dinner party at a professor&#8217;s house. Sweet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://laurabergus.com/2009/04/you-didnt-believe-me-that-iowa-was-progressive/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

