Posts Tagged ‘U.S. Supreme Court’

U.S. Supreme Court Sets Prop 8 Date: March 26 – DOMA Challenge Too – Back-to-Back Showdown Over LGBT Civil Rights

Monday, January 7th, 2013

Well here’s the big news, direct from the Office of San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, below.

Via Steve Rhodes - click to expand

“U.S. Supreme Court sets Prop 8 oral argument date for March 26

DOMA challenge scheduled for the next day, setting the stage for back-to-back showdown over LGBT civil rights

SAN FRANCISCO (Jan. 7, 2013) — The U.S. Supreme Court moments ago published its formal argument calendar for March 2013, scheduling oral arguments in the federal constitutional challenge to California’s Proposition 8, called Hollingsworth v. Perry, for March 26, beginning at 10:00 a.m. EDT (7:00 a.m. PDT).

Another case that is also related to same-sex marriage rights — a challenge to the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA — will be heard the following day, on March 27, at the same time. That case is called United States v. Windsor.

In granting review to both marquee marriage equality cases exactly one month ago, the nation’s highest court set the stage for potentially landmark rulings on LGBT civil rights that promise to be the most eagerly-anticipated of the current court term. Rulings are expected by the end of June.

The legal issues at stake in the challenge to Prop 8, the controversial 2008 ballot measure that eliminated marriage rights for same-sex partners in California, are two-fold: first, whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman; and second, whether the proponents of Prop 8 have legal standing to litigate the case.

The American Foundation for Equal Rights filed the lawsuit in May 2009 on behalf two California couples who sought to marry: Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo. They are represented by lead counsel Theodore B. Olson and David Boies. City Attorney Dennis Herrera intervened as a co-plaintiff in the case in August 2009, renewing San Francisco’s groundbreaking pubic sector legal advocacy for the broader societal interest to end marriage discrimination against lesbian and gay couples. At trial, Herrera and his legal team provided extensive evidence that state and local governments derive significant societal and economic benefits when same-sex partners enjoy equal marriage rights — and, conversely, that denying such rights inflicts grave injustices on the LGBT community that, in turn, harm government and society at large.

When the high court granted review to the case on Dec. 7, 2012, Herrera said: “The federal challenge to Prop 8 represents one of the most significant civil rights cases to be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court in decades, and I’m confident that the high court will reach a decision that reaffirms our Constitution’s promise of equal protection under the law.”

The U.S. Supreme Court’s argument calendar for March is published online here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalMar2013.pdf

The comprehensive timeline of San Francisco’s legal battle for marriage equality since February 2004 is available on City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s website at:

http://www.sfcityattorney.org/index.aspx?page=23

The Prop 8 case is: Hollingsworth v. Perry, U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 12-144.  The DOMA case is: United States v. Windsor, U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 12-307.”

Tink happy tots…

DJH and company, 2008, Civic Center:

Click to expand

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer Graces U.C. Hastings – Another Interview From “Legally Speaking” Series

Thursday, November 17th, 2011

I’ll tell you, our UC Hastings Law School down in Civic Center has been en el fuego this past year or so, what with its new, new-school dean and whathaveyou.

For example, here’s yesterday’s joint, featuring United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer getting interviewd by UC Hastings Distinguished Professor David Faigman, an expert on constitutional theory:

Via James Block - click to expand

(And that comes on the heels of another Supreme Court Justice and the political debates they’ve had recently. It’s amazing, really.)

What were the topics? I have no idea. But Bob Egleko was there (with his pencil and notepad, since they don’t allow recordings), so check his report.

And I’ll be sure to upload video or link or whatever I can find in a week or two, pinky-swear.

“Legally Speaking: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer
11/16/2011 from 2:30 PM to 4:00 PM
198 McAllister, Louis B Mayer Lounge

Legally Speaking is a series of probing interviews with prominent lawyers, judges and academics, co-produced by UC Hastings and California Lawyer.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer will join UC Hastings for a Legally Speaking interview. Justice Breyer is the third U.S. Supreme Court Justice to spend time at UC Hastings in the last 13 months. He will be interviewed by UC Hastings Distinguished Professor David Faigman, an expert on constitutional theory. Justice Breyer’s most recent book Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge’s View will be the topic of discussion.”

ZOMG, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Graces UC Hastings Law School for “Legally Speaking” Series

Friday, September 16th, 2011

Get all the deets right here about U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s recent visit to U.C. Hastings, the first law school of the American West.

And writer Bob Egelko was there so be sure to take a look.

RBG also paid a visit to Professor David Faigman‘s Constitutional Law class earlier in the day:

James Block

  • Legally Speaking: Conversations with the Most Interesting Lawyers in the World
  • Professor Joan C. Williams, Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Hastings Foundation Chair, Founding Director of the Center for WorkLife Law
  • Professor David L. Faigman, John F. Digardi Distinguished Professor of Law, Director, UCSF/UC Hastings Consortium on Law, Science & Health Policy

Jerry Brown Throws Down: $24 Million Worth of Art Stolen by Nazis Should Go to Owner

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010

California Attorney General Jerry Brown can’t abide California museums that don’t give Nazi-stolen art back to the rightful owners. Even if that means that returning 500-year-old Adam and Eve will cost Pasadena’s Norton Simon Museum of Art a cool $24 mil.

Deets below.

El Protector De La Gente, Jerry Brown:

via Thomas Hawk

Brown Defends Right to Seek Return of Artworks Stolen by Nazis

LOS ANGELES – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. has filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a Connecticut woman who seeks the return of a pair of 500-year-old paintings looted by the Nazis during World War II, kept for a time in the estate of Nazi leader Hermann Göring and purchased 40 years ago by the Norton Simon Museum of Art.

Brown’s friend of the court brief backs Marei Von Saher, who is suing the Pasadena museum over “Adam and Eve.” The two panels painted by the 16th century German artist Lucas Cranach the Elder are evocative of original sin, according to the museum’s website.

The works were confiscated by Nazi soldiers from an Amsterdam gallery owned by a relative of Von Saher’s during the war. From there, the panels were moved to Göring’s country estate near Berlin until May 1945, when they were discovered by American troops. The following year, they were returned to Amsterdam. From there, the artwork’s trail grows murkier, leading through Russia and to a sale in 1971 to the Norton Simon Museum, where the panels are on display on the main floor. The paintings were appraised last year at $24 million. A depiction similar to the “Eve” panel appears each week at the beginning of the TV show “Desperate Housewives.”

Here they are:

All the deets, after the jump.

(more…)