Tag Archives: ZZ: McConkey v Van Hollen

LifeSiteNews: “‘Voters adopted the marriage amendment in Wisconsin for one clear and simple reason: to protect the institution of marriage,’ said ADF Litigation Counsel [Jim Campbell]. ‘We should be strengthening – not undermining – marriage, which is one man and one woman. Once again, activists tried to use the courts to force something on the people that they have repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected.’”

Catholic News Agency: “A lawsuit challenging a Wisconsin constitutional amendment which protected the definition of marriage failed to persuade the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which unanimously rejected its arguments. … The ADF filed an amicus brief in the case. Its litigation counsel [Jim Campbell] said in a statement that voters adopted the measure ‘for one clear and simple reason: to protect the institution of marriage.’ ‘We should be strengthening–not undermining–marriage, which is one man and one woman. Once again, activists tried to use the courts to force something on the people that they have repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected.’”

Baptist Press: “Supporters of traditional marriage gained a big legal win at the Wisconsin Supreme Court June 30, although both sides in the nationwide struggle over marriage’s definition now are watching Hawaii and California, two states where the next round of political and legal battles will take place. … In Hawaii, Republican Gov. Linda Lingle has until Tuesday, July 6, to make her decision on a bill that would legalize civil unions in the state. She could either sign, veto or let the bill become law without her signature.”

Leonard Link: “The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unanimously yesterday that the state’s anti-marriage constitutional amendment . . . does not violate the ‘single subject’ rule. Although this was a private voter lawsuit rather than an action instigated by LGBT public interest groups, the case attracted organization amicus briefs on both sides of the issue. ACLU and Lambda Legal and the League of Women Voters supported McConkey’s appeal, while the Wisconsin Family Council (represented by Alliance Defense Fund), and an organization calling itself ‘Community Leaders Dedicated to Children Raised by Married Mothers and Fathers,’ filed briefs defending the amendment.”

Christian Post: “The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a state constitutional amendment that affirms traditional marriage and bans same-sex civil unions. … [Jim Campbell], litigation counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief last year on behalf of the Wisconsin Family Council, maintained that voters adopted the amendment ‘for one clear and simple reason: to protect the institution of marriage.’” | ADF News Release

Evangelical Examiner: “‘Voters adopted the marriage amendment in Wisconsin for one clear and simple reason: to protect the institution of marriage,’ said ADF Litigation Counsel [Jim Campbell]. ‘We should be strengthening–not undermining–marriage, which is one man and one woman. Once again, activists tried to use the courts to force something on the people that they have repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected.’” | ADF News Release

State high court unanimously thwarts attack on marriage amendment adopted by voters

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: “The case centers on the technical process of amending the constitution and does not hinge on the merits of whether gay couples should be allowed to marry or enter into civil unions. If the court eliminates the constitutional ban, gay marriage would still be illegal because of a state law.”