Notes on marriage initiative arguments at D.C. Court of Appeals

GLAA Forum: “Nimocks cited the CAA’s one explicit limitation on the right of initiative (appropriation of funds) as somehow showing that the right of initiative was otherwise co-extensive with the Council’s right to legislate. Basically, appellants’ position rests upon a static conception of the law, which is convenient for them since post-Dean facts and changes to the law have rendered it inapplicable. There was little if any direct reference to Dean. I did not hear any reference to the argument made previously by appellants that there is no discrimination because gays and lesbians can marry members of the opposite sex. But naturally there were frequent interruptions by the judges, so who knows what arguments Nimocks would have gotten to if he had the time. As it was, though, he did a lot of repeating of himself.”