Legal Challenge to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Dismissed

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a seven-year-old suit challenging the constitutionality of the anti-gay "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy on the grounds that, since the policy has officially been repealed, the legal controversy has now ended and rendered the case moot. Over a year ago a federal judge ruled in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was a violation of gay, lesbian and bisexual soldiers' First and Fifth Amendment rights. Now, if a future Congress decided to reinstate the policy, opponents would have to start a new lawsuit from scratch in order to challenge it. Jon Davidson of Lambda Legal, a prominent LGBT civil rights organization, issued a statement saying that the 9th Circuit's decision to dismiss the suit effectively ignores the 14,000 servicemen and women who lost their jobs and benefits since DADT was enacted in 1993.

Federal Court rules that trans inmates cannot be denied hormone therapy

WNEC Law alumnus Dru Levasseur is quoted in The Advocate's article by Michelle Garcia:

"A federal court ruled on Wednesday that transgender prisoners serving time must be allowed to continue hormone treatments in Wisconsin prisons.
The Wisconsin legislature passed a law, effective January 2006, which barred prison doctors from administering or prescribing hormone treatment or gender reassignment surgery for transgender people while in state custody.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin's ruling on Wednesday would not grant all inmates access to hormones or surgery, but now doctors can decide whether transgender inmates can receive care, as opposed to a blanket law.
The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal filed a challenge to the law on behalf of transgender prisoners, shortly after it went into effect. Dru Levasseur, Lambda Legal's Transgender Rights Attorney, hailed the decision.

"The court understood that medical treatment is critical for transgender people and that medical decisions should be made by doctors—not legislators," Levasseur said in a press release. "The state cannot decide to withhold treatment from people because they disapprove of their gender identity or medical needs—it’s unconstitutional." "

Lambda Legal brings same-sex marriage back to court in New Jersey

N.J. gay-marriage battle back in court

A sampling of posts from the last week:

Advocates for same-sex marriage are taking their case back to the New Jersey Supreme Court.

Lambda Legal filed a motion Thursday seeking a court ruling to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.

"We are here today to ask the New Jersey Supreme Court to make equality real," said Hayley Gorenberg, Lambda Legal's deputy legal director. The civil-rights group filed a motion on behalf of six same-sex couples who first brought a lawsuit in 2002 seeking the right to marry.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2006 that same-sex couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples. The decision, however, left it up to the Legislature to decide how to provide equal rights. Lawmakers chose civil unions, but gay and lesbian advocates argue that civil unions provide unequal benefits, are misunderstood, especially out of the state, and amount to a separate and unequal right.

-Jonathan Tamari

Robert Cover Public Interest Retreat

"Jennifer C. Pizer, Senior Counsel and Director of the Marriage Equality Project at Lambda Legal will be a featured speaker at the Robert Cover Public Interest Retreat, organized in part this year by WNEC Law students and open to all law students, Feb. 26-28th at the Sargent Center in Peterborough New Hampshire. This year, the theme is "Turning Point: Shaping Public Interest Law for 2015," and the retreat features a variety of public interest practitioners speaking on issues ranging from indigent criminal defense to representing children to international human rights. Register now."

Thanks to Professor Shay & Maren Law for this information