Tag Archives: ZZ: Jackson v District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics

Oregon Faith Report: “Georgene Rice of KPDQ-FM interviews, Maggie Gallagher, with the National Organization for Marriage in California. She discusses the Supreme Court’s recent decision to deny an appeal to the D.C. same-sex marriage decision. They discuss whether it was a procedural decision or if it goes to the merits of the question of same-sex marriage. She also outlines the other defense of marriage actions that are being considered in the courts all across the nation.”

“Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC), told The Hill that he will push for a vote on the controversial issue in the 112th Congress. The RSC has 175 members.”

Pink Paper: “‘For almost two years, the National Organisation for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund, along with Bishop Harry Jackson, have fought a losing battle to shamelessly harm gay and lesbian couples in D.C. who seek nothing more than to share in the rights and responsibilities of marriage,’ said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.”

Candace Chellew-Hodge writing at Religion Dispatches: “‘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.”

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.’”

Ms. Magazine: “Yesterday the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case filed by Bishop Harry Jackson, the National Organization for Marriage, and the Alliance Defense Fund challenging the District of Columbia’s law allowing same-sex couples to marry.”

Human Rights Campaign press release: “‘Today’s action by the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that D.C.’s human rights protections are strong enough to withstand the hateful efforts of outside anti-LGBT groups to put people’s basic civil rights on the ballot,’ said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. ‘For almost two years, the National Organization for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund, along with Bishop Harry Jackson, have fought a losing battle to shamelessly harm gay and lesbian couples in D.C. who seek nothing more than to share in the rights and responsibilities of marriage. The D.C. Council and Mayor courageously made marriage equality a reality last year, and the courts have since upheld the rights of D.C. residents to govern ourselves and take the necessary steps to eliminate discrimination in our community.’”

MetroWeekly / lastword: “Jackson has been working with a number of local and national groups including members of the National Organization for Marriage, Alliance Defense Fund, Family Research Council, several African-American baptist preachers and the head of Washington’s Catholic Archdiocese, Donald Wuerl . . . Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington’s only (nonvoting) Congressional voice, calling out people like Harry Jackson . . .”

LezGetReal: “The Christian Post recently stated in one article: ‘Alliance Defense Fund Legal Counsel [Dale Schowengerdt] criticized DOJ’s defense as “deficient.” “The administration refuses to make the argument that the Congress made [when establishing DOMA],” asserted Schowengerdt.’”

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.’”

All Headline News: “Without comment, the court refused to hear the petition from conservatives led by Bishops Harry Jackson and the Alliance Defense Fund seeking a referendum on the District of Columbia’s gay marriage law.”

SDLGN: “‘For almost two years, the National Organization for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund, along with Bishop Harry Jackson, have fought a losing battle to shamelessly harm gay and lesbian couples in D.C. who seek nothing more than to share in the rights and responsibilities of marriage. The D.C. Council and mayor courageously made marriage equality a reality last year, and the courts have since upheld the rights of D.C. residents to govern ourselves and take the necessary steps to eliminate discrimination in our community.’”

Keen News Service: “The U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday refused to hear the appeal of a group of clergy in Washington, D.C., who want to put the city’s new marriage equality law on the ballot . . . The clergy group took Justice Roberts’ note to heart and, with the help of the Alliance Defense Fund, a right-wing legal group, filed this new challenge. The new challenge argued that the decisions by the D.C. Courts ‘approved a Council-imposed limitation on the people’s Charter-based initiative power.’”

“The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from opponents of same-sex marriage who want to overturn the District of Columbia’s gay marriage law.”

Washington Blade: “The U.S. Supreme Court could decide as soon as Tuesday whether or not to hear a case seeking to force the District of Columbia to allow voters to decide whether to repeal the city’s same-sex marriage law.”

Keen News Service: “The lawsuit is Jackson v. D.C., an appeal that asks whether the District of Columbia charter (the city’s equivalent to a constitution) can bar voters from considering a ballot measure that would amend the charter in a way that would violate the city’s human rights law . . . And in its new petition, filed October 12 by the right-wing Alliance Defense Fund, the Jackson group argues the D.C. Court of Appeals decision has ‘left the District’s citizens without immediate recourse on the issue of marriage’ and ‘approved a Council-imposed limitation on the people’s Charter-based initiative power.’”

Washington Blade: “Attorneys for Bishop Harry Jackson, the minister who has led efforts to kill D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, filed a petition last week asking the U.S. Supreme to weigh in on whether the city should allow voters to decide whether to overturn the law . . . The group is being represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative religious-oriented litigation group that has challenged same-sex marriages laws in other states.”

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.

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.’”

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 . . . ”

Windy City Times: “While Bishop Harry Jackson, a pastor in Maryland, has been the public face of this litigation, the truth is that outside groups like the National Organization for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund are the driving force behind these anti-equality measures.”

Charisma: “This case involves the fundamental right of individual Americans to vote,” said Byron Babione, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) and a member of its Marriage Litigation Center. “It is an extremely important issue and one which could be very attractive to the Supreme Court. We are weighing our options about whether to appeal, and we feel like our case would be very strong.”

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

“D.C.’s highest court has ruled against opponents of the city’s same-sex marriage law, saying they cannot ask voters to overturn it.”

“. . . once the balance shifts against the rights of freedom of religious expression, both on a personal level and on an institutional level, ‘we are going to find ourselves in a situation we’ve never faced before in the United States.’ He called it the ‘tip of the iceberg,’ saying that the erosion of the freedom of religious expression would spread across the Western world . . . ”

MyFoxDC: “The courts in D.C. processed only 3,096 applications for marriage licenses all last year. Since the first legal same-sex weddings in the District back on March 9, 2,094 couples have applied to get married in the nation’s capitol.”

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.’”

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

OneNewsNow: “Attorney Austin R. Nimocks, Jr., with the Alliance Defense Fund, argued before the Court of Appeals on Tuesday. ‘The charter of the District of Columbia, like the constitution of a state, is a preeminent document,’ he explains. ‘And the charter of DC says citizens…have the right to vote on any topic other than budget matters.’” | ADF News Release | Oral Argument Audio

WJZ (AP): “The city’s law on ballot initiatives specifically prohibits bringing measures that would violate the Human Rights Act. However, attorney Austin R. Nimocks of the the Alliance Defense Fund, which represents Jackson and other gay marriage opponents, said that limitation goes against the city’s charter . . . ‘Whatever the council can do, the people can do, he told the judges.” | ADF News Release | Oral Argument Audio

The Blog of LegalTimes: “Arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs, Alliance Defense Fund attorney [Austin Nimocks] said applying the Human Rights Act restrictions on discrimination to the initiative process contradicts D.C.’s Charter Amendments Act. The latter statute amended the D.C. Home Rule Act in 1977 to create the initiative process.” | ADF News Release | Oral Arguments Audio

Prayer and Action: “An open lesbian, Demeo’s nomination was stalled longer than any other White House appointee because of her extreme support for same-sex ‘marriage.’ Why is that significant? Because today, Demeo sits on the very bench that will decide the fate of marriage in our nation’s capital: the D.C. Superior Court . . . The arguments kicked off this morning. In an unusual twist that reflected the importance of this case, all nine judges met to hear the suit. FRC’s Peter Sprigg was in the courtroom during the trial. Peter reports that [Austin Nimocks] of the Alliance Defense Fund was brilliant in his defense of the people’s right to vote–much stronger that the counsel for the District.” | Oral Arguments Audio

The MP3 recording from today’s oral arguments runs approximately 1.5 hours. ADF attorney Austin R. Nimocks argued on behalf of the plaintiffs. | Related ADF press release: ADF attorneys available to media following hearing over DC marriage initiative

ADF, Stand4MarriageDC appealed decision denying DC voters a say on definition of marriage

News8: “‘I believe all of them will pay political consequences for their actions,’ said Bob King, who has teamed up with Bishop Harry Jackson and the National Organization for Marriage to form a political action committee. It will support D.C. candidates who oppose same-sex marriage, including, for example, mayoral candidate Leo Alexander.”

Metro Weekly: “As D.C. enters its second month of same-sex couples being able to obtain marriage licenses, some wonder if – as with California and Maine – this apparent equality might be short lived . . . the D.C. Court of Appeals hears oral arguments at 10 a.m., May 4, in Rev. Harry Jackson’s lawsuit attempting to hold an initiative vote on marriage equality in the District. Jackson’s lawyers with the Alliance Defense Fund were unsuccessful in their attempts – all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court – to halt the marriage law from taking effect until a referendum could be held, but the case seeking an initiative remains.”

Catholic News Agency: “Opponents of a Washington, D.C. same-sex ‘marriage’ law are appealing a court order that denied a motion to prevent the law from going into effect . . . ‘The people have a right to have the final say on any law regarding marriage passed by the D.C. Council. The D.C. Charter makes that right clear, and officials should not be ignoring the right of the people to vote for or against the new definition of marriage fabricated by the council,’ said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks.”

Baptist Press: “Opponents of the law, though, hope to take advantage of a section in the D.C. Charter that allows citizens to gather signatures to place the issue on the ballot . . . they were heartened March 2 when Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts — while turning back their long-shot emergency appeal to prevent the law from taking effect — said in a three-page opinion that their ‘argument has some force’ . . . The lawsuit was filed by the Alliance Defense Fund and Stand for Marriage D.C.”

Capitol Hill Prayer Partners’ Capitol Hill Daily Brief: “Our friends at the Alliance Defense Fund are already on the move to block the law — even if Congress won’t. This week, attorneys are filing an injunction with the U.S. Supreme Court until D.C. voters have the opportunity to exercise their rights. Until then, D.C.’s Catholic Charities is one of many organizations who are dealing with the internal fallout from the bill.”

North Carolina Family Policy Council: “By the afternoon of March 3—the date D.C.’s same-sex ‘marriage’ law went into effect—more than 50 same-sex couples had completed applications for marriage licenses at the District’s marriage bureau, while at least that many continued to wait in line . . . Bishop Harry Jackson, with the legal support of Stand4MarriageDC and the Alliance Defense Fund, had appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to delay implementation of the law until the D.C. Court of Appeals issues a ruling on whether the citizens of D.C. have a right to vote on the bill’s passage via referendum. The Supreme Court denied that request. The lawsuit challenging the marriage redefinition law is awaiting a decision from the D.C. Court of Appeals.”

LifeSiteNews: “Traditional marriage supporters represented by the Alliance Defense Fund had argued to lower courts that the marriage question should be put to DC voters, but were ignored. According to ADF, 59 percent of voters in the district say they want to vote on the D.C. Council’s new law changing the legal definition of marriage.”

The Blog of LegalTimes: “[Foley & Lardner partner Cleta Mitchell] was listed alongside lawyers from the Alliance Defense Fund on a petition asking Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. to stay the new law until the full Supreme Court could decide whether to hear their appeal of the local court decision.”

“Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. on Tuesday declined to stop a new law allowing gay marriage in Washington, D.C., clearing the way for the district to begin handing out marriage licenses to same-sex couples . . . Mitchell was listed alongside lawyers from the Alliance Defense Fund on the petition asking Roberts to stay the new law . . . (Law.com – National Law Journal)

Associated Press: “At least 50 same-sex couples were lined up to apply for marriage licenses when city offices opened Wednesday, the day the unions became legal in the nation’s capitol.”

CitizenLink: “The U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene in the Washington, D.C., marriage battle . . . ‘The people have a right to have the final say on any law regarding marriage passed by the D.C. Council,’ said Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund. ‘The D.C. Charter makes that right clear, and officials should not be ignoring the right of the people to vote for or against the new definition of marriage fabricated by the council.’”

Metro Weekly: “Aided by lawyers from the national organization Alliance Defense Fund, Jackson filed a request for an immediate stay of the law with Chief Justice John Roberts, who is responsible for hearing appeals coming from the District. Roberts has the ability either to make the decision himself or to turn the matter over to the full court for a decision.”

The court on Tuesday turned down requests from gay marriage opponents to stop the law, which will take effect on Wednesday.”

OnTopMag (“gay advocacy website”): “A District of Columbia appeals court rejected a last-minute effort to stop a gay marriage law from taking effect as early as Wednesday . . . ‘The people have a right to have the final say on any law regarding marriage passed by the DC Council,’ Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Christian-based Alliance Defense Fund, which is representing opponents in the challenge, said in a statement announcing the appeal.”

“D.C. Superior Court officials are preparing for what they expect to be a flood of same-sex couples descending on the courthouse Wednesday to apply for marriage licenses.”

AP: “Court papers filed Monday with Chief Justice John Roberts argue that Washington residents should be able to vote on the matter.”

Baptist Press: “Richard Land has joined two dozen other Christian and conservative leaders in urging Congress to pass legislation requiring a public vote before the District of Columbia issues marriage licenses to homosexual couples . . . the Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit on behalf of eight D.C. citizens calling for approval of an attempt to place the measure on the ballot . . . The bills, which are S. 2980 in the Senate and H.R. 4430 in the House, both bar the D.C. government from issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples ‘until the people of the District of Columbia have the opportunity to hold a referendum or initiative on the question of whether the District of Columbia should issue same-sex marriage licenses.’”

Catholic News Agency: “Opponents of a Washington, D.C. same-sex “marriage” law are appealing a court order that denied a motion to prevent the law from going into effect . . . ‘The people have a right to have the final say on any law regarding marriage passed by the D.C. Council. The D.C. Charter makes that right clear, and officials should not be ignoring the right of the people to vote for or against the new definition of marriage fabricated by the council,’ said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks.”

DC Headlines Examiner: “Stand4MarriageDC and the Alliance Defense Fund, two conservative groups active in the nation’s capital, lodged the appeal on Wednesday. Attorneys for the two organizations placed the appeal in the hopes of allowing the issue of same-sex marriage to be decided by a popular vote. ‘We are appealing because the District’s marriage redefinition law shouldn’t go into effect until voters have the opportunity to vote on a critical matter that affects everyone in the District,’ senior legal counsel Austin R. Nimocks said in a news release picked up by the Washington Post.”

Washington Post, D.C. Wire: “Attorneys for Stand4MarriageDC and the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal organization, today appealed a court order that upheld a D.C. Board of Elections ruling against a referendum on the issue . . . ‘We are appealing because the District’s marriage redefinition law shouldn’t go into effect until voters have the opportunity to vote on a critical matter that affects everyone in the District,’ senior legal counsel Austin R. Nimocks said in a news release.”

Alliance Defense Fund and Stand4MarriageDC attorneys appealed a court order Monday that denied their motion to keep a D.C. marriage redefinition law from going into effect on the projected date of March 3.

CitizenLink: “A Washington, D.C., judge denied another request, on Friday, to allow voters to have a say in whether the District will recognize gay marriages . . . ‘A new definition of marriage should not be imposed upon the people of D.C. without their consent, and the majority of D.C. residents agree,’ Nimocks said. ‘The court should support the people’s right to vote on this referendum, which would allow them to partake in a legitimate democratic process to decide a critical matter that affects everyone in the district.’”

OneNewsNow: “Alliance Defense Fund attorney Austin R. Nimocks was there for the verdict. ‘The judge gave us a preliminary ruling which he will memorialize in writing, denying the relief that we were requesting, denying stopping the same-sex marriage legislation from going into effect until the citizens have had a right to vote,’ he summarizes.”

Washington Post: “A third Superior Court judge has denied a request by opponents of same-sex marriage to overturn D.C. Board of Elections rulings against a referendum on the issue . . . Holeman’s ruling will not be official until Monday, said Austin Nimocks, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund. Once it is, opponents plan to file an immediate appeal.”

ADF, Stand4MarriageDC appealing Board of Election’s decision to shut out voters

OneNewsNow: “Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney Tim Tracey explains the current legal efforts on voters’ behalf. ‘[T]his is yet another appeal to the DC Superior Court in the hopes of vindicating the people’s right to vote,’ he says. ‘And at the same time that we filed that appeal, we filed a motion to stay the effective date of the same-sex marriage law that was passed by the [DC] Council in December of last year.’”

Alliance Defense Fund and Stand4MarriageDC attorneys have appealed an opinion and order issued by the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics last week that denied the district’s voters the right to vote on a marriage redefinition law passed by the D.C. Council.