>>New Mexico news --

>>Good news, too

>>

MON AUG 26, 2013 AT 03:45 PM PDT

Second New Mexico judge rules that counties must

Dave (imported) wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:20 pm issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples

by Meteor BladesFollow

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/2 ... ex-couples

Judge Alan Malott of New Mexico's Second Judicial District ruled Monday that state law does not prohibit marriage between same-sex couples and ordered the Bernalillo County clerk to issue marriage licenses. Last Thursday, District Judge Sarah Singleton also came down for marriage equality when she issued an order to Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar as a result of a lawsuit filed by two Santa Fe men. Earlier in the week, Doña Ana County Clerk Lynn Ellins began issuing licenses to same-sex couples after he said the state law didn't prohibit it:

The [Malott] ruling concerns a lawsuit filed on behalf of three lesbian couples who said the state constitution has no explicit ban on marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Bernalillo County will start issuing licenses to gay couples at 8 a.m. on Tuesday. The clerk's computers must be reconfigured.

After the Doña Ana clerk began issuing licenses, some Republican lawmakers said they would file a lawsuit because, they said, county clerks cannot make law. Republican Sen. William Sharer of Farmington said more than two dozen GOP lawmakers have agreed to join the lawsuit.

It likely will be filed with the state Supreme Court, but Sharer said lawyers were trying to decide the best legal strategy.

Neither Republican Gov. Susana Martinez nor Democratic Attorney General Gary King, who plans to run for her seat next year, indicated they planned to do anything to try to halt the practice as cases testing the legality of same-sex marriage work their way through the state Supreme Court.

A key element of any decision in that case if and when it is filed may well come down to a sentence in Section 18 of the New Mexico constitution: "Equality of rights under law shall not be denied on account of the sex of any person."

And New Mexico joins other states on the subject of Marriage Equality. Go NM.

River

Valencia, San Miguel, and Taos (in case you're going skiing this winter) counties have joined the list so far. Probably Sandoval county won't be on the list any time soon since key people may have been replaced since 2004 but I haven't had word on that.

>>These briefs are the first step in Pennsylvania where a County Clerk started to issue same-sex marriage licenses because he said that the PA law preventing that was unconstitutional under both State and Federal law.

>>THe PA Attorney General refused to take this to court (in essence they agreed with him) but in Pennsylvania the Governor is allowed to take up the case when the Att Gen refuses.

>>

>>

>>"MONTCO" refers to Montgomery County.

>>

State: Montco same-sex marriage licenses meaningless

Last updated: Thursday, August 29, 2013, 1:09 AM

Posted: Wednesday, August 28, 2013, 5:31 PM

Jessica Parks, Philadelphia Inquirer Staff Writer

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/polit ... _licenses_ meaningless.html

The Corbett administration said its lawsuit seeking to halt same-sex marriage licenses in Montgomery County "would have no direct effect" on the couples who have already received them.

In a brief Wednesday, state attorneys said those marriage licenses were never valid, and compared gay and lesbian couples to "12-year-olds" who are also barred from marrying under state law.

The state Department of Health and Montgomery County Register of Wills D. Bruce Hanes will appear in Commonwealth Court next Wednesday to argue the case.

A 1996 law defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Hanes and his supporters argue that the law is unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Since July 24, Hanes has issued 154 marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.

Thirty-two of the couples have petitioned to intervene in the case, arguing that a ruling against Hanes could also invalidate their marriages.

The state filed a brief Wednesday opposing the couples' participation, arguing that their marriage licenses hold no "actual value or legitimacy" and thus have no right to be defended in court.

"Had the clerk issued marriage licenses to 12-year-olds in violation of state law, would anyone seriously contend that each 12-year-old . . . is entitled to a hearing on the validity of his 'license'?" the state wrote.

If the couples wish to defend their "purported marriage licenses," the state wrote, they should file their own lawsuit or wait for the outcome of a federal challenge to Pennsylvania's marriage law.

"This case is about one thing: whether a local official may willfully disregard a statute based on his personal legal opinion that the statute is unconstitutional," they wrote.

>>I wan't expecting this news.

>>The article did not reproduce the post card. The DAILY BEAST is a bit flaky that way.

>>This is parallel to the takedown of DOMA and the PROP 8 decision upholding same-sex marriage in California.

>>

Walmart’s New Embrace of Gay Employees a Sign of Corporate Shift

by Daniel Gross Aug 29, 2013 4:45 AM EDT

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... shift.html

Walmart didn’t stand up and unfurl a giant rainbow flag. With open-enrollment season coming up, it sent out a postcard, reproduced below, announcing new items available for 2014: a vision plan, new information about quitting tobacco. Oh, and “full-time associates can cover any spouse or domestic partner.” Starting next year, Walmart employees who work more than 34 hours per week can have their domestic partners—gay or straight—covered under company-offered health insurance and that new vision plan. “The company is continually looking at its benefits programs and seeing what new features can be added,” said Randy Hargrove, a spokesman at Walmart. “Enrolling domestic partners is just one of the things that is being added.” According to a memo, the “full suite” of benefits also includes access to a discount card and spouse/partner life insurance.

Walmart’s move is a sign of how normal it has become for companies to acknowledge, welcome, and seek to embrace their gay employees. Public opinion is coming around, and the Supreme Court invalidated the Defense of Marriage Act, but gay marriage is not quite mainstream in the U.S. It is legal only in 13 states, and the fight for equality is a long way from over. Yet America’s corporate establishment is quietly, steadily, indicating its acceptance and support for committed same-sex relationships. “We’re at a moment where a majority of the Fortune 500 offer domestic-partner benefits,” said Deena Fidas, director of workplace-equality programs for the Human Rights Campaign in Washington.

The Human Rights Campaign says 62 percent of Fortune 500 companies have domestic-partner health-care benefits, up from 34 percent in 2002 and 53 percent in 2006. (Its corporate equality index can be seen here.) According to Mercer Consulting’s national survey of employer-sponsored health plans, the percentage of companies with more than 10 employees making coverage available to same-sex domestic partners rose from 25 percent in 2009 to 52 percent in 2011, and bumped up to 54 percent in 2012. J.D. Piro, senior vice president at Aon Hewitt, a large human-resources consulting firm, said that about 75 percent of employers it surveys offer same-sex domestic-partner benefits. At these companies, when enrollment periods open, people can submit marriage licenses, or partner affidavits, and qualify for benefits available to married couples.

My knee jerk reaction to this was: considering how few employees qualify as full time associates at Walmart this means nothing, but then I thought about the implications of the affordable healthcare act. Who knows, Walmart might actually do something nice for the people who work there. I doubt it, but who knows?

Doh! Never mind... This means nothing!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... are-costs/

...

Dave (imported) wrote: Fri Aug 30, 2013 6:06 am The Human Rights Campaign says 62 percent of Fortune 500 companies have domestic-partner health-care benefits, up from 34 percent in 2002 and 53 percent in 2006. ...

[/COLOR]

Jema,

The reason it's important is that it's the difference between tolerance and acceptance. That one of the things I remember about Harvey Milk is that he encouraged people to come out of the closet and stand as equals not hide as a inferiors. Things like this put gays and lesbians on the same footing as everyone else.

I think that the same thing will happen with transgendered youth.

It is heading in the right direction with republicans bringing up the rear.

as usual

River

>>US Treasury and your taxes.

>>Make your plans now if this applies to you.

>>Either that or get married.

>>

>>

All Legal Same-Sex Marriages Will Be Recognized for Federal Tax Purposes

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/pr ... l2153.aspx

8/29/2013

Ruling Provides Certainty, Benefits and Protections Under Federal Tax Law for Same-Sex Married Couples

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) today ruled that same-sex couples, legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages, will be treated as married for federal tax purposes. The ruling applies regardless of whether the couple lives in a jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage or a jurisdiction

Dave (imported) wrote: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:32 pm that does not recognize same-sex marriage.

The ruling implements federal tax aspects of the June 26th Supreme Court decision invalidating a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

“Today’s ruling provides certainty and clear, coherent tax filing guidance for

Dave (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:54 pm all legally married same-sex couples

nationwide. It provides access to benefits, responsibilities and protections under federal tax law that all Americans deserve,” said Secretary Jacob J. Lew. “This ruling also assures

Dave (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:54 pm legally married same-sex couples

that they can move freely throughout the country knowing that their federal filing status will not change.”

Under the ruling, same sex couples will be treated as married for all federal tax purposes, including income and gift and estate taxes. The ruling applies to all federal tax provisions where marriage is a factor, including filing status, claiming personal and dependency exemptions, taking the standard deduction, employee benefits, contributing to an IRA, and claiming the earned income tax credit or child tax credit.

Any same-sex marriage legally entered into in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory, or a foreign country will be covered by the ruling. However, the ruling does not apply to registered domestic partnerships, civil unions, or similar formal relationships recognized under state law.

Legally-married same-sex couples generally must file their 2013 federal income tax return using either the “married filing jointly” or “married filing separately” filing status.

...

more at URL:

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/pr ... l2153.aspx

Thread moved because I see this as more in tune with what this site is about.

Saved from the political section.

River