Same-sex marriage challenge outlined

In papers filed with the Constitutional Court challenging a recent Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that same-sex marriages be declared legal, the Ministry of Home Affairs argues that the SCA erred in developing the common law in ‘a manner inconsistent with its obligations under Section 39 (2) of the Constitution’. A Sunday Times report says Section 39 (2) states that ‘when developing the common law or customary law, every court ... must promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights’ enshrined in the Constitution. The ministry also argues that the SCA erred in ruling that the extension of the common law definition of marriage to include same-sex couples could not be regarded as fundamentally changing the traditional understanding of marriage. The ministry says that if the Constitutional Court upholds the SCA decision, it will ask the Constitutional Court to suspend the order. This would allow the SA Law Reform Commission to complete its research involving same-s ex unions and submit a report to Parliament, when Parliament could pass ‘appropriate legislation’.

Another victory for gay rights activists

In a majority 4-to-3 decision, the Montana Supreme Court has ruled that the state’s universities must provide their gay employees with insurance coverage for their domestic partners. The judges said the ruling had nothing to do with the rights of gay couples to marry. But a dissenting judge criticised his colleagues as ‘radically altering common law marriage in Montana’, reports The New York Times. Gay rights advocates said the decision was an important victory on the narrower point. ‘It is the first time that any state high court has ruled that a state has a constitutional obligation to provide domestic partner healthcare benefits,’ said James Esseks, the litigation director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Lesbian and G ay Rights and AIDS Projects, which represented the two lesbian couples who brought the suit challenging the state's policy.
Full report in The New York Times

 

Provided courtesy of Legalbrief Today. To participate in a free month’s subscription to Legalbrief’s daily legal news service click here.

               

Supreme Court to look at gay rights to adopt

Gay rights issues will be top of the agenda at the US Supreme Court justices' first private conference of the new year today (Friday). The Florida gay adoption case, Lofton v Secretary of the Florida Department of Children and Families, is one of dozens of cases the court will discuss at its conference with an eye toward granting or denying review, reports the Legal Times. If the justices do grant review, the case will give the court its first chance to comment on the scope of its 2003 Lawrence v Texas ruling that announced due process and privacy rights for homosexuals. The 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals narrowly applied Lawrence and an earlier ruling – Romer v Evans – on January 28, 2004, when it upheld Florida's 1977 law excluding g ay people from eligibility as adoptive parents. Florida is the only state that explicitly bars homosexuals from adopting children.

 

Provided courtesy of Legalbrief Today. To participate in a free month’s subscription to Legalbrief’s daily legal news service click here.

 

US court gives SA woman custody of child

A SA woman, Hayley Reyersbach, has been granted full custody of her three-year-old daughter by a US court after two years of legal battles in SA and America. The Daily News reports the first court ruling was in February 2003 when the Durban High Court ruled that Reyersbach, who had fled the US six months earlier with her 16-month-old daughter, must return Alyssa to her father, Robert Pennello, in New Jersey. Reyersbach appealed against the decision in the Pietermaritzburg High court, which ruled that Alyssa could remain with her mother until the custody hearing was finalised. Pennello, however, appealed against this decision and in July he and Reyersbach divorced, leaving her without a green card. In December 2003, the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein ruled that Reyersbach and Alyssa must return to New Jersey. The order to return to New Jersey was granted under the provisions of The Hague Convention, which deems Reyersbach's actions in America in leaving the country with her daughter to be child abduction. Her final appeal to the Constitutional Court was refused.
Full report in the Daily News

 

Provided courtesy of Legalbrief Today. To participate in a free month’s subscription to Legalbrief’s daily legal news service click here.

 

Three-month amnesty for illegal firearms

A three-month amnesty period in which to hand in illegal firearms and ammunition began on January 1, according to the Department of Safety and Security. Illegal firearms and ammunition can be handed to any police station in SA without fear of prosecution until March 31, said Safety and Security spokesperson Trevor Bloem in an IoL report. Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula announced the amnesty in terms of the Firearms Control Act, 2000. The amnesty does not extend to any offences committed with illegal firearms.
Full report on the IoL site

 

Provided courtesy of Legalbrief Today. To participate in a free month’s subscription to Legalbrief’s daily legal news service click here.