Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

NOM Is Asking A Gay Judge To Let It Defend Oregon’s Marriage Ban

Hon.-Michael-McShaneNever one to shy away from where it’s not wanted, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has taken it upon itself to try to defend a legal challenge to Oregon’s ban on marriage equality because the state attorney general refuses to do so. Just to make the case that much more interesting, the federal judge hearing NOM’s request, Michael McShane, is an openly gay man who is raising a child with his partner.

MCShane heard arguments Wednesday from lawyers for four couples seeking to overturn the marriage ban. However, he said he wouldn’t rule on the case until he decided whether NOM could step in to defend the law. The anti-marriage group filed a legal motion late Monday to insert itself into the case.

“It’s an eleventh hour filing but that’s because the attorney general, at the 10th hour, decided that she would walk over to the other side of the court room and start attacking the Oregon constitution that it is her duty to defend,” John Eastman, NOM’s Chairman of the Board, told KATU. 

Eastman has a strange sense of time (among other things). Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum announced in February that she wouldn’t defend the ban. Given its money woes, perhaps NOM didn’t have the funds to pursue the case. But apparently they’ve found good money to through after all the bad they’ve spent to date.

If McShane throws NOM out of court, the case is expected to proceed rapidly. McShane’s ruling is not expected before May 14.

Photo credit: OregonWomenLawyers.org


By:          John Gallagher
On:           Apr 23, 2014
    • moonman157

      “NOM is asking a gay judge to defend Oregon’s marriage ban” LOL GOOD LUCK WITH THAT, NOM. Certainly aren’t wasting money that could go to much worthier causes (like feeding the hungry or healing the sick. You know, the things Jesus actually told you to do.)

      Apr 24, 2014 at 1:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Icebloo

      Let them waste their money. Aren’t they already in debt this year ? Let them sink further. The right wing are ALL about money and nothing else so once their donors realize they are throwing their money away with no progress they will all stop donating.

      NOM’s days are numbered in this country.

      Apr 24, 2014 at 1:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mezaien

      The f.u.c.k.i.n.g Christian don`t get it!!.

      Apr 24, 2014 at 1:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mikehipp

      @moonman157: What are you saying moon? Are you saying that a gay judge can’t be impartial on a case that has to do with an issue that affects gay people?

      Do you, likewise, think that a heterosexual judge can’t be impartial on a case that has to do with an issue that affects heterosexual people or do you only think that gay people are incapable of impartiality?

      Apr 24, 2014 at 4:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • moonman157

      @mikehipp: No, I absolutely believe that gay judges can be just as impartial as heterosexual judges. But it’s obviously going to be quite a more difficult pitch to argue directly to a gay person about how destructive their lifestyle is to the family. Again, this is why it’s important to have diverse branches of government. No matter what else, we know that during this trial gay people will not be thought of in the abstract; Judge McShane brings with him a lifetime of experiences that he can use to scrutinize NOM’s claims. Essentially, NOM won’t be saying “gay people are immoral and destructive for society;” they will be saying, to a federal judge of all people, “YOU are destructive to society.” If would be similar to the Judge having a close family member or friend who is gay. It’s a reminder that we’re talking about human beings here. With a gay Judge, we know for certain that that point will not get lost during the trial.

      Apr 24, 2014 at 9:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

      Other than hatred of same-sex marriage, NOM has no standing what so ever to be in this case. I don’t think that can be though of as a standing.

      Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 1EqualityUSA

      It may be an attempt to say, “Activist judges!” again, in a shrill voice that stirs the NOMskulls into a frenzy. Anything to raise a buck for their failing, hate-fueled, impotent cause…annoying gnat.

      Apr 25, 2014 at 8:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dakotahgeo

      Absolute comedy!

      Apr 25, 2014 at 8:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.