Rev
05/30/97 04:46 PM Trail lawyers
Rev 04/30/97 10:58
AM Same Sex marriage Rev 04/23/97 09:40
AM Added release 97-40 Rev 04/18/97 12:27
PM Added as new page Rev
05/30/97 04:46 PM Trail lawyers
Rev 04/30/97 10:58
AM Same Sex marriage
Rev 04/23/97 09:40
AM Added release 97-40
Rev 04/18/97 12:27
PM Added as new page
Trial
Lawyers Spew Hypocrisy Over Homeless Healthcare Proposal
Same-Sex
Marriage Update Hawaii voters will have the opportunity
to decide the fate of same-sex "marriage
Democrats Bludgeon Knight's Same-Sex
Marriage Ban with Hostile Amendments - Bill Dies.
Hawaii Lawmakers
May
Trump Supreme Court, Propose Constitutional Ban On Same-Sex
"Marriages
Same-Sex
"Marriage" Ban To Be Considered
Trial Lawyers Spew Hypocrisy Over Homeless Healthcare Proposal May 12, 1997
The California Senate will soon consider a proposal to give thousands of homeless people access to free basic medical care in homeless shelters throughout the state, at no cost to taxpayers.
The proposal, Senate Bill 446 by State Senator Pete Knight, would open the door to greater healthcare access in homeless shelters by making it harder to sue doctors for their volunteer medical services such as: immunizations, tuberculosis testing, and first aid treatment of minor illnesses or injuries.
SB 446 enjoys the strong support of dozens of homeless advocate organizations (including the United way and Salvation Army volunteerism groups, doctors' organizations, and city and county governments.
Only one organization opposes Knight's legislation: the California Trial Lawyers Association. recently renamed ''Consumer Attorneys of California." Their claim is that malting it harder to sue doctors for their volunteer services makes "second class citizens out of homeless people" and "exposes the state and its children to enormous health risks.""
If the Trial Lawyers are really so concerned about the welfare of homeless people, then why would they let thousands of homeless families go without ANY basic medical care rawer than give "Good Samaritan" legal protection to doctors who are willing to volunteer their services, but who can't due to the costly threat of frivolous lawsuits?
The answer should be obvious.
Same-Sex
Marriage Update: April 30, 1997 Late Tuesday, the Hawaii State Senate and House approved [placing before the voters] a constitutional amendment declaring "the legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples." The measure passed in the Senate 24-0 and in the House 45-6.
The amendment will now appear on the ballot November 3, 1998 and Hawaii voters will have the opportunity to decide the fate of same-sex "marriage" up or down, once and for all. All that's required is a simple majority. However, blank and spoiled ballots will count as "no" votes.
While opinion polls show that at least 70% of Hawaiians oppose same-sex marriage, only a bare majority (51%) would vote for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. [see Honolulu Star-Bulletin Poll, March 26, 1996]
Dan Foley, attorney for the gay couples seeking state marriage licenses, reports that he believes the Hawaii Supreme Court will hand down its ruling to legalize same-sex marriages BEFORE the November 1998 election.
Opponents of same-sex marriage will ask the Hawaii high court to delay its ruling until after the constitutional amendment vote, since passage of the amendment will effectively take the issue away from the court altogether
Press Release
#97-40 Date: April 22, 1997
Democrats Bludgeon Knight's Same-Sex Marriage Ban with Hostile Amendments - Bill Dies.
Today state Sen. Pete Knight's proposal to deny recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages was defeated when a hostile amendment, drafted by Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) and introduced by state Sen. Charles Calderon (D-Montebello), was attached to give marriage rights and benefits to homosexual couples who register with the state as 'domestic partners'.'
The amendment was narrowly adopted on a 5 to 4 vote, with all three Republicans and Senator Jack O'Connell (D-Santa Barbara) opposing. The committee will vote on the newly amended bill later tonight. The bill is expected to be opposed by all Republicans due to their objection to 'domestic partner' marriage benefits, and also opposed by most Democrats because the bill still invalidates same-sex marriages.
'The Democrats have clearly demonstrated that they favor same-sex marriage and that they are willing to change the core definition of the institution of marriage,' said Knight. Knight expressed frustration that the Legislature has been unresponsive to Californians' overwhelming opposition to state recognition of same-sex marriages.
'They had their game plan all along - they defeated the bill
indirectly with a hostile amendment to protect themselves from
going on record as favoring same-sex marriage,' said Knight. 'The
public would be outraged it they had voted down a clean bill.'
Return
to index at top of page
News Release #97-37 DATE: April 17, 1997
After weeks of intense public pressure, leaders of the Hawaii Legislature have agreed to submit to the voters a proposed state constitutional amendment that would overrule the Hawaii Supreme Court's pending decision to legalize same-sex marriages. The amendment would explicitly empower the Legislature to reserve the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples.
The constitutional amendment still must be approved by a two-thirds majority of both the Hawaii House and Senate before midnight on Friday, April 18, and then be approved by a majority of Hawaii voters in the 1998 November election.
But Dan Foley, the lawyer representing the gay and lesbian couples who sued the state for marriage licenses, told the Honolulu Advertiser yesterday that even if lawmakers approve the proposal, it wouldn't end his case. Foley said that if the amendment is ratified by the voters in the November 1998 election, the 1999 Legislature still would need to pass a law banning same-sex marriage.
Foley believes that the Hawaii Supreme Court will rule before then, creating a window in time during which same-sex couples could legally marry in Hawaii.
Senator Pete Knight announced that he will continue to push for his Senate Bill 911, which would deny legal recognition to any same-sex marriage performed in another state, because California already defines marriage as between a man and woman. Twenty-one (21) states and the US Congress have so far passed similar bills.
Even after learning of these events in Hawaii, Knight still believes SB 911 is necessary because: (1) the Hawaii Supreme Court could legalize same-sex marriages before the constitutional amendment passes, (2) the constitutional amendment could fail to pass, and (3) at least six other states are currently considering legislative proposals or pending court cases that would legalize same-sex marriages.
SB 911 will be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, April 22, at 2:00 PM in the State Capitol, Room 4203
Return to index at top of page
News Release #97-34 DATE: April 11, 1997
State Senator Pete Knight will be available next week from Monday morning through midday on Thursday (April 14 - 17) in his capitol office to answer reporters' questions regarding his legislation to ban recognition of same-sex marriages from other states.
SB 911 is in reaction to a 1993 Hawaii Supreme Court ruling that the state's denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples amounted to unconstitutional gender discrimination unless the state could show a compelling public interest in doing so.
Following a 10-day trial in September, 1996, Circuit Judge Kevin Chang ruled that the state had failed to demonstrate a compelling reason to bar same-sex couples from obtaining marriage licenses. The Hawaii Supreme Court is expected to affirm Chang's opinion and order that marriage licenses be made available to same-sex couples later this summer.
Senate Bill 911, which is similar to AB 1982 sponsored by Knight when he served in the State Assembly, will be voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, April 22.
When same-sex marriages are validated in Hawaii, at least twenty-one (21) other states (which have so far enacted bills like SB 911) will not recognize those marriages as valid within their borders. Same-sex marriages will also not be recognized for any purpose under federal law since President Clinton signed the ""Defense of Marriage Act," passed by Congress last September, 1996.
Return to index at top of page
Back to local government page
To the Vanguard News Home page