Search for: "In RE MARRIAGE OF HARMS v. Harms"
Results 21 - 40
of 380
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Mar 2010, 8:23 pm
Same-sex marriage was never at issue in the case, although Gallagher implies that it was because it was decided at almost the same time as In re Marriage Cases. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 1:11 pm
I will not join the fray here on that question (although it seems hard for Prop 8 proponents to argue irreparable harm if the order is not stayed, since Californians have been living with the thousands of civil marriages by same-sex couples, entered into the several month interim between the California Supreme Court’s In re Marriage Cases ruling and voter approval of Prop. 8). [read post]
26 Dec 2023, 9:02 pm
In 1997, in Boerne v. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 2:32 pm
Read the entire 40 page opinion in Baskin v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 3:12 pm
Feeney, and Romer v. [read post]
26 Mar 2023, 1:47 pm
In In re Marriage of Fingert, a California court decided that “Courts cannot order individuals to move to and live in a community not of their choosing. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 1:26 pm
v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 7:23 am
Read the entire 40 page opinion in Baskin v. [read post]
8 May 2022, 7:13 am
” In re Marriage of Rayfield, 221 Ill. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 11:41 am
There is no empirical evidence that the legalization of same-sex marriage would undermine heterosexual marriage or would be harmful to children, contrary to the assertions of those who support state bans on gay marriage. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 2:00 pm
President Obama announced his support for gay marriage before winning re-election in November 2012, and still won. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 6:18 pm
Today the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriage in Kerrigan v. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 12:49 pm
[Loving v. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 3:57 pm
The dissenting justices also added that it appeared from the emails that Dokka "independently" chose to leave the marriage [i.e., we're not that excited about the merits of the case]. [read post]
3 May 2010, 8:10 am
And second, permitting gay and lesbian marriage doesn’t in any way harm opposite-sex marriages. [read post]
18 Sep 2009, 9:09 pm
Gill v. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 2:33 pm
CLEMENS, Appellant, v. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 2:01 pm
In today’s decision, Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, (B.C. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 11:11 am
[The speech compulsion it forbids is not limited to wedding-website designers who object to same-sex marriage, but its principles should apply only to a narrow range of commercial products] On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled in 303 Creative v. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 8:38 am
Fighting religious exemptions that harm LGBT people and others Our opponents don’t want America to accept LGBT people, but they know that they’re losing that fight. [read post]
