Tag Archives: ADF: Austin R. Nimocks

World Magazine: “When Congress enacts laws on behalf of the American people, the American people have the right to expect them to be defended when they’re challenged,” said Senior Legal Counsel Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund. “How the attorney general’s constitutional duty to protect and defend the laws of the United States becomes optional is a great mystery.”

TPM: The Alliance Defense Fund, which asked a federal court for permission for Rep. Smith to serve as an intervenor-defendant in the DOMA cases in the past, issued a statement Wednesday that said it “will not waver in its ongoing defense of marriage nationwide.” “Either the House of Representatives or the Senate have the legal authority to intervene in pending lawsuits to defend the federal DOMA statute,” Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks said in a statement.

Charisma Online: “Marriage is a unifying issue in America. The federal Defense of Marriage Act reflects the reality that 90 percent of states protect marriage and that the citizens in those states believe in marriage as a union only between one man and one woman,” says Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks. “Tragically, the Department of Justice has chosen to appease a small—but vocal and wealthy—constituency and abandon its duty to the people.”[additional quotes by Austin]

Michael Foust writes at Baptist Press: aptist Press asked Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund — a Christian legal group — to explain the importance of the Justice Department’s decision. Following is a transcript:
. . . [Q&A follows]

SonoranNews.com: [full text of ADF press release]

Cal. Catholic Daily: In response to a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice informing the speaker of the House that the DOJ and President Obama will no longer defend a key component of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, the Alliance Defense Fund is issuing the following statement from ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks . . . [ADF Press release quoted]

One News Now: “The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) says the executive branch of the government has upped the ante by refusing to show up in the existing court cases, which is ultimately a disappointment to most Americans. (Listen to audio report) . . . “The Department of Justice has a constitutional duty to defend the laws duly enacted by Congress,” notes ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks. “And the refusal of the attorney general to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act just because they don’t like it politically is really inexcusable.”

Warren Richey of the Christian Science Monitor via MinnPost.com: “This only confirms what has appeared to be the case in several recent lawsuits. In those defense-of-marriage cases, the [Justice Department] has undermined rather than defended DOMA,” said Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund. “The American people have a right to expect their laws to be defended by the very people whose job it is to do so: their government officials,” he said. “But the administration is making clear that they are simply not going to defend marriage.”

“The American people have a right to expect their laws to be defended by the very people whose job it is to do so: their government officials. But the administration is making clear that they are simply not going to defend marriage.”

LezGetReal (A Gay Girl’s View on the World): “Of course, Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund echoed those concerns, but when confronted with the fact that the bill prevents churches from being forced to marry couples that they do not want to, Nimocks fell into the usual run of how he was upset over the fact that it would not protect individuals from discrimination. He used the example of marriage counselors who refuse to work with same-sex couples. He said “The religious exemption provided is wholly inadequate.” Of course, in Iowa they tried that and it got pointed out that the religious exemption could end up hurting just about every single group out there from different races and religions to LGBT Americans. When and if this is addressed, the odds on are that he will find some other excuse. Perhaps railing against robosexual marriage?”

TBD.com: Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund: “The legislation before you is inconsistent with the purposes of Maryland’s marriage laws,” the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based attorney testified. “Men and women still comprise the two great halves of humanity.”

Providence Journal Blog: “Speakers will include Maggie Gallagher, the chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage, Christopher Plante, the executive director of the local NOM chapter, Austin Nimocks, who is identified as the “Senior Counsel Alliance Defense Fund,”’ Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, president and founder of the Ruth Institute, which is described as a project of NOM, state Sen. Harold Metts and state Rep. Raymond Hull.”

Daily Record: “The legislation before you is inconsistent with the purposes of Maryland’s marriage laws,” Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel of the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Alliance Defense Fund, told the committee. “Men and women still comprise the two great halves of humanity.” The intense debate before them was reflected in the comments of senators on the committee.

Washington Post: Tuesday’s hearing grew combative at several points, particularly during testimony by Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization that seeks to defend “religious freedom.” Nimocks argued that government should keep marriage between a man and a woman as an incentive to foster “responsible procreation.” “Men and women still comprise the two great halves of humanity,” Nimocks said. “It matters that a child has a mom and a dad.” . . . In response to questioning by senators, Nimocks acknowledged that children of some same-sex couples could be better off than children of some heterosexual couples. But he said research has shown that in most cases, the best situation for a child is “a low-conflict marriage” between a man and a woman.

Baltimore Sun: Austin R. Nimocks, a lawyer for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, argued that marriage is intended to create a “stable union for the sake of responsibly producing and raising the next generation.” ”By adopting same-sex marriage you are telling those families that mothers and fathers don’t matter,” said Nimocks, who has testified around the country against gay marriage. He ruffled feathers on the committee when he suggested that there was a valid argument for single parents to rear children but not for ame-sex couples to be parents. He defined the ideal environment for raising children as “with a married mother and father in a low-conflict household.”

IndyStar.com: Attorney General Greg Zoeller submitted a letter supporting the resolution and committing to defend a constitutional ban against legal threats. Austin Nimocks, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, testified that the purpose of marriage is “to increase the likelihood that procreative relationships benefit society.” He pointed out that President Barack Obama does not endorse gay marriage.

NECN: “Wyoming wouldn’t recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states under a bill that cleared its first hearing in the House of Representatives Thursday . . . The Wyoming debate has attracted attention from the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based Christian civil rights group that has litigated against same-sex marriage in California. [Austin R. Nimocks], an ADF lawyer, has appeared at committee hearings on the issue.”

Catholic.net (Zenit): “William May, chairman of Catholics for the Common Good, called it ‘shocking’ that the court ‘did not accept the appeal of District of Columbia citizens who were deprived of their right to vote’ . . . [Austin Nimocks], Alliance Defense Fund senior legal counsel, stated, ‘In America, we respect the right to vote.’”

LifeSiteNews: “Jackson and the Stand4MarriageDC coalition were represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Christian public interest firm. ‘In America, we respect the right to vote. That right is explicitly protected by the D.C. Charter, but the government has succeeded for now in suppressing the voice of D.C. citizens,’ said ADF Senior Legal Counsel [Austin R. Nimocks].”

Michael Foust reports at Baptist Press: ‘In America, we respect the right to vote. That right is explicitly protected by the D.C. Charter, but the government has succeeded for now in suppressing the voice of D.C. citizens,” said [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. ‘We had hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would restore this guaranteed right in the district. … We will remain diligent in looking for other legal opportunities to protect and defend the right of all D.C. residents to have their voices heard as the D.C. Charter clearly intended.’”

Wyoming Tribune Eagle: “Legislation to clarify Wyoming’s definition of marriage split along party lines to pass out of a House committee 7-2 on Monday . . . [Austin Nimocks], senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, testified that marriage is often viewed as a contract with the state and two consenting adults. And while Wyoming must recognize marriages from other states, it must also provide divorces when legally-recognized couples decide to split, he added.”

Christian Web News: “‘No government should experiment with a practice that has been clearly demonstrated as harmful to women, children, and societies around the world,’ said ADF Senior Legal Counsel [Austin R. Nimocks] . . . Gerald Chipeur, one of more than 1,800 attorneys in the ADF alliance, examined Dr. Shoshana Grossbard before the court Tuesday.”

Alliance Defense Fund attorneys are available for media interviews via phone or satellite regarding the ongoing hearing at the Supreme Court of British Columbia on the question of whether polygamy can continue to be prohibited in that province and throughout Canada.

California Watch: Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Boies called the proceedings “a turning point” in history. “Looking forward 20, 30 years from now, people are going to wonder, ‘Why was this necessary?’” he said. “People will look back on this case the way we look back on Brown v. Board of Education and say, ‘Why did it take so long?’” Asked to respond to Boies’ prediction, Austin Nimocks, legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, which supports Prop. 8, said: “That’s the great thing about America. Everybody is free to disagree. The over seven million Californians who voted on this measure have a different opinion about that.”

ABC 7 online here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OK4rVdXWgbE

One News Now: ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks explains that the high court is being asked to intervene because “the citizens of D.C. have a clear right to vote on the question of marriage, and the D.C. courts have suppressed that right. Now we’re asking the Supreme Court to take up their case and their cause for democracy and the question of marriage in the District of Columbia.” He continues . . . ”

Charisma News: ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks said the D.C. Charter, which serves as a constitution for the district, guarantees citizens the right to initiate and vote on legislation, except for measures appropriating funds and other initiatives beyond the council’s scope. ”The decision from the D.C. Court of Appeals means that those living in our nation’s capitol are being denied the right to vote, and we hope the Supreme Court will restore this guaranteed right in the district,” Nimocks said. “The four dissenting judges were correct that the D.C. Council exceeded its authority when it imposed an unwarranted limitation on the citizens’ right to vote

Alliance Defense Fund and Stand4MarriageDC attorneys filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday asking the justices to weigh in on the right of District of Columbia residents to vote on the legal definition of marriage.

Catholic News Agency: “Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins and several African American religious leaders held a press conference on Monday to urge the Senate to vote against a move that would repeal the current ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy banning openly homosexual persons from serving in the military . . . Leaders at yesterday’s conference included . . . [Austin Nimocks] who is Senior Counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund.”

ADF Attorney Austin Nimocks spoke at a Family Research Council press conference on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Standard Newswire: “Family Research Council President and Marine veteran Tony Perkins will join Bishop Harry Jackson, Alliance Defense Fund Senior Counsel [Austin Nimocks] and African American pastors from five states at a news conference Monday at 2 p.m. ET in Washington, D.C. The speakers will address religious liberty concerns on the eve of the U.S. Senate vote to overturn the law against the practice of open homosexual behavior in the military.”

ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks appeared on Point of View Radio to answer the question. | MP3 18:34 mins| Austin R. Nimocks’ article at Human Events: Federal Court Declares Most Americans A Bunch of Bigots.

Claudia Cowan writing at Fox News Insider: “[Walker] said an appeal may hinge on getting Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger or Attorney General Jerry Brown to join the defense team, which is highly unlikely . . . ‘If the Prop 8 proponents don’t have standing, that means that millions of California voters have no one to represent or defend them . . . so we feel very confident about this standing issue and believe, at the end of the day, the 9th Circuit is going to agree that we do have standing,’ says [Austin Nimocks], with the Alliance Defense Fund.”

Heritage Foundation | The Foundry: “What has been most surprising is the developing consensus from prominent legal experts and analysts, including many who support the redefinition of marriage, who find Judge Walker’s opinion unpersuasive.”

KCBS: “The federal judge who rejected California’s ban on same-sex marriage is now weighing legal briefs from both sides on whether to hold off on implementing his decision while the case is appealed . . . ‘When you make a decision that has that significant of an impact, and there’s the potential for it to be reversed, which there is; you obviously don’t want to undo something that maybe shouldn’t be undone,’ said [ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks].”

On 3TV Jim Campbell discusses the ruling’s potential impact on Arizona. | Austin R. Nimocks on CNN.

Austin R. Nimocks on the Vicki McKenna Show – MP3 16:39 mins | Austin with Kitty O’Neal on KFBK – MP3 5:21 mins | Austin on the Dave Ross Show – MP3 7:30 mins | Jim Campbell on the Janet Mefferd Show – MP3 18:15 mins | Doug Napier on AFR Focal Point with Bryan Fischer – MP3 21:55 mins | Jim Campbell with Chris Daniels on KMJ – MP3 14:54 | Austin with Pat Morrison on KPCC Southern Cal. Public Radio.  Austin responds to the question of why this is different than race.  MP3 4:35 mins.

“Judge Vaughn Walker ruled, among other things, that not one single person who voted for Proposition 8 had any rational reason for so doing. Yes, if you voted in favor of marriage in any of the states that have taken up this question, you’ve now been officially labeled as an irrational bigot, your voice being ‘nothing more than a fear or unarticulated dislike of same-sex couples,’ according to Judge Walker.”

Sacramento Bee: “Judge Vaughn R. Walker — who found the measure unconstitutional — may take additional time to decide whether to keep a temporary stay on his judgment in place . . . ‘We’ll even go up to the U.S. Supreme Court to get a stay,’ said [Austin Nimocks], attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona group that helped defend Proposition 8 before Walker. The request for a stay filed by Nimocks’ group and other attorneys argues that they think they have a strong chance of winning on appeal, and that if same-sex marriages are allowed to take place they ‘would be licensed under a cloud of uncertainty.’”

Jim Campbell on AFR Focal Point just before the ruling was handed down.  MP3  9:21 mins |  Jordan Lorence on the Janet Mefferd Show just before the ruling was handed down. Jordan indicated he was not on pins and needles before yesterday’s ruling, because the Judge had tipped his hand well in advance of yesterday’s ruling.  MP3 18:39 mins | Daniel Blomberg on KQED Northern California Public Radio after the ruling was handed down.  Daniel responds to several of the judge’s contentions in his ruling. MP3 6:27 mins |  Doug Napier with Tim Conway, Jr. on KFI 640 am. Its of the judge by the judge and for the judge. The ruling has no basis in law or history. MP3 6:18 mins | Austin R. Nimocks with Bret Burkhart & Chris Brecher-KGO 810AM SF.  Why is the ruling dangerous? According to the judge, we are all irrational bigots now.  MP3 3:47 min

Vancouver Sun (LA Times): “[Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund who fought to uphold Proposition 8 in Walker’s court, said the group would appeal. ‘We’re obviously disappointed that the judge did not uphold the will of over 7 million Californians who made a decision in a free and fair democratic process.’”

UPI: “[Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund — which argued on behalf of Proposition 8 in the court case — said plaintiffs will appeal the ruling. ‘We’re obviously disappointed that the judge did not uphold the will of over 7 million Californians who made a decision in a free and fair democratic process,’ Nimocks said.”

Los Angeles Times: “Updated at 2:28 p.m.: . . . [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund who fought to uphold Prop 8 in Walker’s court, vowed to appeal, saying ‘We’re obviously disappointed that the judge did not uphold the will of over 7 million Californians who made a decision in a free and fair democratic process.’”

The Sacramento Bee: ‘He has indicted through his opinion,’ [ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks] said, ‘the rationale of every vote’ cast to bar gay marriage in California and in other states. ‘This ruling dismisses the right of the people to vote’ . . . ‘What would be radical,’ [ADF Attorney Brian Raum] said in a prepared statement, ‘would be to allow a handful of activists to gut the core of the American democratic system and, in addition, force the entire country to accept a system that intentionally denies children the mom and the dad they deserve.’”

“The New Jersey Supreme Court issued an order Monday rejecting a recently filed motion in a long-ago-resolved lawsuit that attempted to force New Jersey legislature to redefine marriage.”

Keen News Service: “But the ruling may not be the end of the battle for Washington, D.C. The U.S. Supreme Court and Congress may have the final word. … The [Alliance Defense Fund] issued a statement after the ruling, indicating it is considering whether to petition the Court of Appeals decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. ‘The decision from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals means that those living in our nation’s capitol are being denied their most fundamental freedom –the right to vote,’ said Alliance Senior Legal Counsel [Austin Nimocks]. ‘We are considering our options to right this wrong, which include asking the Supreme Court of the United States to consider this case.’”

On July 20, 2010, FRCAction is sponsoring a webcast about the Defense Authorization Act. ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks will be joining this panel.

RH Reality Check: “In response to the DC Court of Appeals ruling, Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, one of the key opponents to same sex marriage, argued: ‘In America, we respect the right to vote. The citizens of the District of Columbia should not have their voices suppressed by the government, but that is exactly what is happening here.’”

Christian Web News: “After their appeal to vote on gay marriage was rejected, Christians and conservative groups in Washington are now determined to take the issue to the U.S. Supreme court. ‘In America, we respect the right to vote. The citizens of the District of Columbia should not have their voices suppressed by the government, but that is exactly what is happening here,’ said [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund.”

Christian Post: “Christians and conservative groups in Washington are determined to take the gay marriage issue to the U.S. Supreme Court after their appeal to let the people vote on the matter was rejected. ‘In America, we respect the right to vote. The citizens of the District of Columbia should not have their voices suppressed by the government, but that is exactly what is happening here,’ said [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund.”

Washington Post: “Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, which has been battling gay unions, said: ‘The decision from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals today means that those living in our nation’s capital are being denied their most fundamental freedom — the right to vote. We are considering our options to right this wrong, which include asking the Supreme Court of the United States to consider this case.’”

Michael Foust of Townhall (Baptist Press): “The suit was brought by D.C.-area pastor Harry Jackson, former D.C. delegate Walter Fauntroy and others who were represented by attorneys for the Alliance Defense Fund and StandforMarriageDC.com . . . Austin R. Nimocks, an Alliance Defense Fund attorney who argued the case before the court in May, called the decision a blow to the ‘right to vote.’ ‘The citizens of the District of Columbia should not have their voices suppressed by the government, but that is exactly what is happening here,’ Nimocks said. ‘The decision from the D.C. Court of Appeals means that those living in our nation’s capitol are being denied their most fundamental freedom: the right to vote. We are considering our options to right this wrong, which include asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider this case . . . ”

Christian Science Monitor: “The DC Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that Washington was within its rights to block a popular vote on same-sex marriage because the results could violate its human rights law. The city legalized gay marriage in March . . . ‘Individual states shouldn’t have the right to impose a radical redefinition of marriage on the rest of the country,’ Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund, said in response to Judge Tauro’s decision in Massachusetts.”

Wall Street Journal: “An attorney for the group asking for the initiative, Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund, said in a statement that the decision means district residents ‘are being denied their most fundamental freedom—the right to vote.’ Mr. Nimocks said the group is considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

ADF, Stand4 Marriage DC seriously considering appeal to U.S. Supreme Court

A federal judge granted summary judgment Thursday to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in a decision against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which declares the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.

ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks writing at The Christian Post’s Advancing Religious Liberty blog: “‘I felt like, being a part of this project, that the message was really greater than my relationship is.’ These are the words of Nikki, one of the star characters of Showtime’s new series, The Real L Word, and she is 100 percent correct in her sentiments. While seeking to glorify homosexual behavior and same-sex relationships, The Real L Word provides a behind-the-scenes glimpse into today’s equivalent of Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory. The monster being created? Making our children virtual lab rats through the intentional creation of more and more fatherless families. That’s a message that is quite disturbing. … [T]hese very young kids, when they need a father figure the most, will be subjected to their mother’s new same-sex partner who, as part of her rationale for participating in the show, wants to ‘break stereotypes . . . The bottom line is this–heterosexual sex makes babies, society needs babies, and babies need their mothers and fathers.’”

ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks appeared on Live from Criswell with guest host Penna Dexter to discuss the Proposition 8 trial. | MP3 12:35 | ADFmedia.org Perry v. Schwarzenegger resource page

CitizenLink: “‘Nurturing families come in many forms,’ Obama said, ‘and children may be raised by a father and mother, a single father, two fathers, a stepfather, a grandfather, or caring guardian.’ … ‘No matter how much they may love a child, two fathers do not create a mother,’ [Austin R. Nimocks] explained ‘And, the same can be said when there are two moms. No matter how good of a parent they are or how much they may love the child, they do not create a dad, and children need both a mother and a father. That is what marriage laws are all about.’”

ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks appeared on the Zeb Bell Show to discuss the Proposition 8 trial.  | MP3 14:43 mins

ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks appeared [MP4 1:56] on KRON-4 prior to closing arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger. The station also excerpted, in a later broadcast [MP4 2:15], Austin’s comments at the news conference following closing arguments.

OneNewsNow: “Alliance Defense Fund attorney [Austin R. Nimocks] was on hand for the arguments in the latest attempt to invalidate the vote on Prop. 8. ‘This is a question over whether our most basic and important fundamental right — the right to vote — is going to be trumped by the courts,’ states the attorney. ‘No right is more important in this country than the right of a free society to express their will at the ballot box.’”

NPR: “[Austin Nimocks] of the Alliance Defense Fund, a group opposing gay marriage, said his side remains confident that they made their case. ‘Defending Prop 8 is playing defense,’ Nimocks said. ‘It’s the burden of proof which Judge Walker made abundantly clear that belongs to the plaintiffs to have to prove that Prop 8 is unconstitutional.’”

CitizenLink: “[Austin Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, said it boils down to whether we still live in a democracy. ‘(If) a single judge is going to trump the voices of over 7 million Californians who heard both sides of the debate and cast their votes accordingly,’ he said.”

WorldNetDaily: “ADF senior legal counsel [Austin Nimocks] spoke to WND as he left the courtroom today. ‘I think the closing arguments went very well, especially the arguments of Charles Cooper,’ Nimocks said. ‘All the legal bases were covered, and I think he did an excellent job articulating why the voices of more than 7 million Californians, in enacting Prop 8, were constitutional voices with the full entitlement to do exactly what they did.’ . . . U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker is presiding over the case. As WND reported, media outlets have reported Walker is homosexual. . . . Nimocks told WND today, ‘That certainly was not an issue that was raised in the court room.’”

LA Times | L.A. Now: “Jeff Zarrillo, who came to court with his partner, Paul Katami, said: ‘All we’re asking the court to do is make sure we’re protected under our Constitution like everyone is supposed to be.’ But attorneys for the Alliance Defense Fund, which supports Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage, argued in front of the courthouse that allowing same-sex marriage would be an ‘extreme interpretation of the Constitution.’ ‘The focus for it is whether we still live in a democracy,’ said [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the group, ‘whether a single judge is going to trump the voices of over 7 million Californians who heard both sides of the debate and cast their votes accordingly.’”

Washington Examiner: “Maryland agencies have started letting state employees with same-sex spouses enroll for health benefits . . . The change will likely cost the state, said [Austin R. Nimocks], senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal team that supports opposite-sex marriage. ‘If you add people to insurance rolls it’s going to increase the cost,’ he said.”

ADF Attorney Austin R. Nimocks writing in the Washington Times: “To vote or not to vote? That definitely is the question posed to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals when it comes to the legal definition of marriage within the District. But it’s mind-boggling that anyone even had to ask this question when the right of the people to vote is so obviously beyond question.”

Baptist Press: “‘I think the thing that was the most encouraging was that the court of appeals was clearly focusing on the fundamental question here, and that’s the right to vote,’ lawyer [Austin Nimocks] told Baptist Press after arguing before the court on behalf of supporters of the initiative. ‘And that’s what this case has been about from the very beginning.’”

ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks appeared on the Michael Medved Show to discuss the National Day of Prayer and the DC marriage case.

The MP3 runs approximately 34 minutes.

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.”

CitizenLink: “Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, said the case has implications far beyond the Beltway. ‘In America, we respect the right to vote,’ he said. ‘This is about a basic, fundamental right that undergirds our entire democratic system in America, and here it’s happening in the cradle of liberty.’” | Oral Argument Audio

Metro Weekly: “The Alliance Defense Fund attorney representing Jackson and the others, David Austin R. Nimocks, argued that the BOEE was incorrect. He told the court on Tuesday the definition of initiatives provided for by the CAA is specific and that the D.C. Court of Appeals has held that the two procedures addressed in it are those relating to ”responsible fiscal management” and ”the right of initiative for everything else.’” | Oral Argument Audio

Charisma: “‘This is about the fundamental right to vote,’ Nimocks told Charisma. ‘The citizens of D.C. are trying to exercise that fundamental right. That’s why the Court of Appeals is interested in this case … and we’re very hopeful they will uphold that very fundamental premise, that the citizens have the right to exercise their voice.’” | Oral Argument Audio

My FOX DC: “Attorneys for the Alliance Defense Fund argued that the city’s charter authorizes referenda in all subject areas save one: appropriations. ‘This case is about the people’s right to legislate,’ declared ADF attorney Austin Nimmocks. ‘What the Council did here is inconsistent with the charter.’” | Oral Argument Audio