I hope the plaintiffs have made the point that the supposed religious objection is narrowly (i.e. prejudicially) scoped in law and transparently hypocritical on the part of the objectors, since they did not object to issuing licenses to adulterers, divorcés, atheists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and other heterosexual offenders of their professed religious code prior to same-sex marriage being determined to be an inalienable right. It's very clear that this law was hastily passed as an end-run to exempt officials from giving licenses to same-sex couples, and those alone. If there is the least inconvenience to same-sex couples (specifically) as a result of this law, religious "accommodation" cannot stand as an excuse.
Officials who wish to pick and choose their duties based on whom they may have to serve should be summarily dismissed.
If this is a new one, wouldn't it make the third for Chiapas?
Alabama, when Judge Roy Moore becomes governor.
While they're updating the map, they might want to revert the color of Isla Tiburón in Sonora. As it is, it looks like it's rebelling against the rest of the state (which, given the state government's illegal actions, would be a good thing, but is presently just wishful thinking). For that matter, Sonora should also be gold, since they already have five amparos against them.
You wrote:
>> Then, on 3 June 2015, a ruling by the First Chamber of Mexico's Supreme Court cemented the jurisprudence nationwide, henceforth requiring judges to grant the injunctions of same-sex couples seeking to marry, whether it be to individual couples or groups of couples who sue together. At the same time, this jurisprudence also eliminated the ability on the part of any official to appeal such judicial decision.
What am I missing here? Wouldn't this render moot the current appeals (as in Baja California and Yucatán), as well as the appeals threatened by other states? Or was the elimination of the right to appeal limited to just Querétaro (or whichever state that ruling applied to)?
Fortunately, your estimate ignores several important factors: the influence of the European Union (particularly the court's rulings on civil rights) and the success of SSM in closer, competitive neighbors. Do they want to see people and businesses migrating elsewhere because of the more hostile environment in the Ukraine and other former-Soviet satellites? Then there are the conclusions from psychologists and social scientists, and (we hope) disaffectation with restrictive religious institutions, and the largely egalitarian influence of the Internet on younger people. So I think change will accelerate from this point in most regions, particularly those which view themselves as relatively modern and progressive. And I'm hardly an optimistic type.
Not quite every. For instance, Jersey is still foot-dragging. Last September they finally passed a resolution for same-sex marriage in principle, but even if there are no hold-ups with the legislation proper, SSM in Jersey probably won't become effective until late in 2017.
Apart from hastening the ability of couples to marry without amparos, I'm not sure the executive order path is good. Better to keep pressure on the legislatures to take action; an executive order relieves that pressure, while also allowing the order to be rescinded by the next governor (as we've seen done in the US with non-discrimination policies).
Why is there no US or international crowdfunding campaign to raise money to assist Mexican couples to get the requisite five amparos in all states? There's already a judge who's been issuing amparos in recalcitrant states. If we could find one or two other judges willing to do the same thing, we could get the requisite number of amparos in all states and put additional pressure on the national legislature to pass a blanket law. Why is this not being organized? Considering how quickly much more money was amassed for the Ali Forney Center to (potentially) buy the Harlem hate church, fundraising for amparos should be a piece of cake--it's not like we're looking at the million-dollar appeals that had to occur here in the states; the highest court has already ruled repeatedly and the path is well laid out. Let's get with it and help our Mexican sisters and brothers!
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Joint