Quantcast
Channel: BuzzFeed News
Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live

This Is What Your Favorite Political Websites Looked Like 10 Years Ago


After Winning The Super Bowl, Ravens Wide Receiver Torrey Smith Interned With A Congressman

0
0

Rep. Elijah Cummings says Smith did “outstanding work.”

The Baltimore Ravens' Torrey Smith celebrates after defeating the San Francisco 49ers, 34-31, in Super Bowl XLVII. He interned for Rep. Elijah Cummings during the offseason.

Image by Lloyd Fox/Baltimore Sun/MCT

WASHINGTON — Baltimore Ravens wide receiver Torrey Smith made an unconventional career move after his team won the Super Bowl: He took an internship with a member of Congress.

Smith interned during March for Rep. Elijah Cummings, a Maryland Democrat — and did an "outstanding job," the congressman said Friday.

"It was a pleasure having Torrey Smith intern with us, and I was glad that I could offer him the opportunity," Cummings said in a statement. "Torrey was eager to learn about the legislative process and was treated no differently than any of our other interns – all of whom play a meaningful and important role in helping me serve the constituents of Maryland's 7th District. I hope that this experience gave him the perspective he sought and I thank him for his outstanding work."

Smith worked primarily out of the congressman's Baltimore office, according to a post on the Ravens website, and performed average office duties such as reading letters from constituents.

The team's director of player development set up the internship for Smith, who was looking to do something interesting during his offseason.

First day at my internship 😁 instagr.am/p/Wb6JTVk-Rc/

— Torrey Smith (@TorreySmithWR) March 4, 2013

Source: instagram.com

Obama To Hit The Trail On A Mission To Revive Gun Control Fight

0
0

Gun control groups, White House prepare to step up the fight with legislation on the table

Image by Lior Mizrahi / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is ready to hit the road on a new campaign-style public relations trip, hoping to breathe new life into the push for stronger gun control laws.

With Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid planning to bring a scaled back package of gun legislation to the Senate floor early next month, the White House is hoping they can rebuild some of the momentum that has been lost in the months since the Newtown shootings.

A White House official would not comment on the timing of more presidential travel, but said people should expect to see Obama travel outside DC to bolster his insistence that gun control measures "deserve a vote" in Congress.

Obama will have help. Over the coming two-week congressional recess, representatives of the Brady Campaign and Mike Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns tell BuzzFeed they're gearing up for major campaigns aimed at ginning up votes for gun control over recess. That includes grassroots lobbying of members while they're home and other efforts.

The president got the ball rolling with his weekly address Saturday, which focused on gun violence. Obama called on congress take action.

"We've made progress over the last three months, but we're not there yet," he said. "And in the weeks ahead, I hope Members of Congress will join me in finishing the job – for our communities and, most importantly, for our kids."

Obama has been lobbying members on both sides on a number of legislative priorities, including gun violence. Talk of guns was part of Obama's recent "charm offensive" on Capitol Hill. But Reid's dropping of the ban on so-called assault weapons from the Senate gun bill and the withdrawal of an Obama judicial nominee opposed by the NRA are clear indications that momentum has shifted towards gun rights supporters on Capitol Hill.

The president and his allies hope to regain the upper hand, and advocates of gun control point to polling showing widespread public support for universal background checks (even among gun owners) as evidence that there's still interest in taking action following the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary.

But polling doesn't always equal votes in Congress, where aides on both sides of the aisle say much of the momentum has either stalled or been reversed. Indeed, several senior Democratic aides have said in recent weeks that at best Congress can be expected to pass some sort of mental health legislation and tighter controls on black market sales, and possibly a modest expansion of background checks — unless something significant changes.

Clearly aware of those dynamics, the president is hoping he can use the bully pulpit to force reticent members to take on the NRA.

At-Risk Democratic Senators Shy Away From Marriage Equality

0
0

Even as some political figures are more forthcoming with their support for marriage equality, lawmakers facing tough reelections avoid weighing in.

Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan doesn't want to talk about gay marriage.

Image by Daily Free Press, Zach Frailey / AP

WASHINGTON — One week after Republican Sen. Rob Portman declared his support for marriage equality, some Democratic senators whose seats might be vulnerable in 2014 are hesitant to do the same — or even talk about the issue at all.

Sens. Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, Mark Begich and Mark Pryor, all moderate Democrats who will face fierce reelection battles during the midterm election cycle, either would not state their position on marriage, or declined to comment via their office.

"I am really concerned right now about the budget, about jobs in my state," Hagan, of North Carolina, responded when asked about her stance on marriage equality. Ironically, last year Hagan went on record opposing a same-sex marriage ban in North Carolina, saying it would have "far-reaching negative consequences."

Landrieu was more forthcoming — but said she would need to "think really carefully" about the issue moving forward.

"I feel very strongly that people should be allowed to love who they love, but unfortunately my state has a very strong ban against gay marriage constitutionally, so I'm going to have to think really carefully and listen to the voters of my state about that issue," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, who hails from Louisiana. "But it's very tough because I think most people believe that people should love who they love."

The offices of Begich and Pryor declined to comment for this story.

The issue of same-sex marriage has taken on particular prominence as the Supreme Court considers whether the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8 marriage amendment are constitutional, and as political figures such as Portman and, early this week, Hillary Clinton, have been emboldened to declare their support for same-sex marriage.

But the reluctance among at-risk Democratic senators to broach the issue indicates that the political fight over this issue is far from over, and lawmakers won't necessarily rush to add their voices to those backing marriage rights for the LGBT community.

Indeed, the fact that Democrats like Hagan who have previously staked out positions opposing restrictions on marriage rights are unwilling to talk about the issue makes clear that some politicians remain uncomfortable with the issue, regardless of their position.

Hagan, Landrieu, Pryor and Begich did not sign on to an amicus brief opposing the Defense of Marriage Act, filed on behalf of Democratic lawmakers to the Supreme Court as it considers the act.

Still, in the past all four lawmakers have taken public positions on marriage equality.

In 2006, as the Senate considered a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, Pryor and Landrieu both affirmed marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but opposed the amendment. Pryor said bluntly in a statement released at the time, "I oppose gay marriage." Both said it should be an issue decided by the states.

As of 2008, Begich supported benefits for gay couples and opposed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, according to a profile of the senator in The New York Times.

Meanwhile, other Democrats are taking a more aggressive position. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the House Democratic campaign arm, has set up a new web page asking voters to sign a petition in support of repeal of DOMA.

"We must show that the American people stand behind the President and support extending the rights and responsibilities of marriage to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans," the petition says. "Now is the time to show your support for marriage equality."

Chris Matthews Was A "Goldwater Radical" In High School

0
0

The MSNBC host used to lean to the right. Apparently Matthews has always had a thing for politicians named Barry.

Ralph Reed Says Science Shows Biological Parents Are The Best

0
0

“It’s not even a close call,” Christian conservative leader says.

Image by Win McNamee / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Faith and Freedom coalition, Ralph Reed, argued that LGBT, adoptive, single parents and foster parents are less capable of properly raising children than their biological parents Sunday on Meet the Press.

During his Meet the Press appearance, Reed, who is one of the original architects of the culture wars of the 1990s and remains one of the leaders of the social conservative movement in the United States, said, "The verdict of social science is overwhelming and irrefutable, and that is without regards to straight or gay," that biological, two-parent homes are the best environment for children.

"This applies to one-parent households, this applies to foster homes, it applies to the whole panoply, they've looked at them all," Reed said, adding that "the enduring, loving intact biological mother and father is best for children and it's not even a close call."

Reed's comments come as the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Prop 8, both of which place limits on the recognition of same-sex couples' relationships.

View Video ›

The Time C-SPAN Interviewed Space Ghost

Sen. Claire McCaskill Announces Support For Marriage Equality

0
0

“I find myself unable to look them in the eye without honestly confronting this uncomfortable inequality,” moderate Missouri Democrat says.

Image by Susan Walsh / AP

WASHINGTON — Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill Sunday announced her support of marriage equality for the LGBT community.

In a statement posted on the senator's tumblr page, McCaskill wrote that she has "come to the conclusion that our government should not limit the right to marry based on who you love. While churches should never be required to conduct marriages outside of their religious beliefs, neither should the government tell people who they have a right to marry."

McCaskill titled the post with the famous wedding verse from Corintheans 1:13, "And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love."

Although there is significant support for marriage equality within the Democratic Party, McCaskill is one of the first national moderate Democrats to throw her support behind it.

In fact, a number of her fellow moderates — Sens. Mary Landrieu, Kay Hagan, Mark Begich and Mark Pryor — refused to answer questions about marriage equality directly when asked by BuzzFeed this week.

McCaskill's statement notes that her "views on this subject have changed over time, but as many of my gay and lesbian friends, colleagues and staff embrace long term committed relationships, I find myself unable to look them in the eye without honestly confronting this uncomfortable inequality."

Prior to her re-election this past November, McCaskill had refused to state a personal position in May 2012 when President Obama announced his personal support for marriage equality.

McCaskill's support comes as the Supreme Court is set to begin hearing arguments on cases challenging California's Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.


The Lawyer And Writer Who Made Marriage Equality Happen

0
0

Evan Wolfson and Andrew Sullivan have been arguing since the 1980s that marriage equality is the key step to advancing gay rights in society. This week, the Supreme Court could make their early writings — and lives' work — a reality.

"Some people only remember back to the wave that woke them up."

Evan Wolfson sat in his Manhattan office less than a week before the Supreme Court's landmark hearings on same-sex couples' marriage rights — a cause to which he has devoted most of his adult life, beginning with the formative 1983 paper he wrote on the subject while in Harvard Law School.

With Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. looking down at him from pictures on the wall, Wolfson — a balding, professorial man who speaks quickly in paragraphs that contain many commas but few periods — had no doubt about his influences, or about the moral strength of his cause. Now, 30 years after he started this fight, he marvels at how marriage equality — once a marginalized, abstract notion that seemed absurd in all corners of society — has come within a gavel's strike of being the law of the land.

"By historical standards, this has gone very quickly. Even if you remember that it didn't happen in the last 10 minutes, it has gone very quickly," Wolfson said. He launched Freedom to Marry in 2003 in an attempt to move beyond the existing legal groups and provide an educational and political effort solely devoted to advancing the cause of marriage equality. "It's gone very quickly because of the power of marriage and because of the absence of any really good reason for excluding couples," he said.

Wolfson wasn't the first person to call for marriage equality. Indeed, the first wave began moving in the aftermath of the 1969 Stonewall riots that gave birth to the modern LGBT civil rights movement. At the time, the courts pushed back strongly. A Kentucky Court of Appeals judge put the general view of the courts most bluntly in 1973 when he wrote that Kentucky couldn't grant a marriage license to a same-sex couple because "what they propose is not a marriage," and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a similar claim a year earlier as lacking "a substantial federal question."

Since the 1980s, though, Wolfson and his unlikely compatriot in the cause — the self-identified conservative-libertarian writer Andrew Sullivan — have been arguing forcefully and persuasively that achieving marriage equality is the key step to advancing gay rights in society. Although neither will be talking to the justices this week, their writings — and lives' work — echo throughout the arguments that have resulted in successful court decisions and unprecedented public support for their once-novel proposal.

While a Harvard Law School student in April 1983, Wolfson, just 26 at the time, authored "Samesex Marriage and Morality: The Human Rights Vision of the Constitution." Although it is certainly not the same language he would use today at Freedom to Marry, many of the arguments and themes are remarkably resonant.

"By abolishing sexualist discrimination and permitting full and equal self-expression on the part of all lovers for all beloveds … we will create a society more safely and richly founded on our individual freedom and equality. Such a society, where people are equally free to love and choose according to the dictates of their heart, best promotes the just and moral pursuit of happiness," Wolfson wrote.

At 56, watching history take place before his eyes, he doesn't speak all that differently. Marriage equality "will vastly further the integration of gay people and our loved ones into the larger society, the fabric of society, the fabric of family," he said. "And it will lighten the load of sexism and gender expectations that everyone carries. It won't eliminate it, but it will further people in the right direction."

By taking up the issue in the '80s, Wolfson put himself in a small minority — even within gay-rights circles, where advocates were more focused on workplace discrimination, AIDS issues and hate crimes than on marriage rights. But it wasn't too long before he won key support from an unexpected ally on the political right.

On Aug. 28, 1989, a conservative British writer at The New Republic, Andrew Sullivan, 26 at the time, authored a cover story, "Here Comes the Groom," outlining the conservative case for marriage equality.

"Legal gay marriage could … help bridge the gulf often found between gays and their parents. It could bring the essence of gay life — a gay couple — into the heart of the traditional straight family in a way the family can most understand and the gay offspring can most easily acknowledge. It could do as much to heal the gay-straight rift as any amount of gay rights legislation," he wrote.

For some gay rights advocates, the first "wave" to wake them up came in 1993, when a Hawaii Supreme Court ruling appeared to set the state on a path that could lead to marriage equality. But the ruling enflamed the culture wars and awoke the federal government. In 1996, the Republican-led Congress rushed DOMA through both chambers with support from Democratic President Bill Clinton — enshrining the notion that marriage is between a man and a woman in federal law.

For other advocates, it wasn't until the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in favor of same-sex couples 10 years ago in a case brought by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders' Mary Bonauto that the marriage movement became a real part of the political and legal debate. Even more recently, the marriage debate began in earnest when California's voters ended same-sex couples' marriage rights with the passage of Proposition 8 in November 2008. As 2009 began, a unanimous Iowa Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality and several New England legislatures passed marriage equality measures.

The four years since, all parties engaged on the issue agree, have been a tidal wave of action — one that reaches the steps of the Supreme Court Tuesday morning.

Nearly 25 years after his New Republic cover story, talking with Sullivan at a coffee shop a few blocks from where the Stonewall riots took place in 1969, his argument has not changed much. In the nine states that now allow marriage for gay couples, plus the District of Columbia, Sullivan said something profound is happening.

"What this means, is you're marrying into another family, so the family has to own the gay member, then they have to own the gay marriage as a marriage like the other marriages in the family," Sullivan said. "And that total absence of a distinction is incredibly empowering for the gay people who go through it."

The famously bearded Sullivan is grizzled — looking ever more like a wizard, his mother tells him — and he is hard at work, having just finished a post for his highly trafficked blog, The Dish, before beginning to talk about the long fight he and Wolfson have helped to lead to advance marriage equality.

Long before Ted Olson and David Boies teamed up to take on Proposition 8, Wolfson and Sullivan were the original "odd couple" of the marriage equality movement.

The issue, unexpectedly for both Sullivan and Wolfson, also has become personal. Both men now wear a wedding ring. Sullivan married Aaron Tone in Massachusetts in 2007, and Wolfson married Cheng He in New York in 2011.

"As I often say, I was a victim of my own arguments," Sullivan said. "But it wasn't an argument that got me there. It was just meeting this one person. It really was."

Sullivan met his now-husband nine years ago at a gay circuit party — "which is not exactly where you think traditional marriage begins: semi-naked on the dance floor at 4 a.m. in the morning," he joked.

Looking at his phone, which occasionally lights up with a text message from his husband, Sullivan added, "But, we just said good-bye, he's walking the dogs, and we're still living together and sharing our lives together."

"Even me, I was shocked," Sullivan said of the experience of getting married. "I think there were two moments in my life when I was really shocked by the way I felt. The first was how much shame I felt when I found out I was HIV positive. And the second was how much joy I felt when I got married. I didn't anticipate either of those things. And that's the arc. That's what we're really talking about. We're talking about the human heart here, and its ability to heal."

Wolfson described a similar shock about his marriage.

"I was never really in this because of my own personal desire to get married. To me this was always … about, number one, what was right in terms of the American values of liberty and justice and equality and freedom and the pursuit of happiness, and secondly, because it would be an engine of change. It would help transform people's understanding of who gay people are."

"But, once I met the love of my life," Wolfson says of Cheng He, who he told The New York Times he first encountered on the dating website gay.com, "I, like many others, got to experience … the true power of marriage and, within the power of marriage, the power of the wedding."

It's more than that, though, he says. "It's also the power of the wedding vocabulary and the wedding conversation and how everybody wants to talk to you about your wedding. And they want to celebrate your wedding, and they want to read about your wedding in The New York Times. And they want to tell you how your wedding should have been arranged differently," he laughs.

Sullivan echoed that, saying, "My role was always a little weird at Christmas. I was like, 'Aaron's boyfriend, whatever.' … But when they found out we were engaged to be married, it all changed. They suddenly had a vocabulary, a linguistic architecture to put me in. I was a fiancé. 'Oh, now I know who you are. Now I know what your relationship to my son is. Now I know what to expect from you. And you better show up for Christmas.'"

He looked up and smiled. "Even though I can't stand Christmas, and Christmas in Detroit is not a fate I would wish on anyone. But that's the price of gay marriage. It's OK, Aaron had to go to my sister's 50th in snowy England last year."

Wolfson said that's one of the primary changes that comes about through marriage equality.

"When you ask what's going on here, that's what's going on here," he said. "That broke the back of anti-gay prejudice and discomfort, and it helped us move from a movement goal of wanting to be let alone to wanting to be let in. And we're in."


View Entire List ›

What Is Going To Happen At The Supreme Court This Week?

0
0

After years of winding through the courts, two definitive cases in the marriage debate will finally reach the Supremes. Here's what they'll be considering.

Image by Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The line began last Thursday.

In a clear sign that the two cases that will be brought before the Supreme Court this week represent a historic moment in the fight for marriage equality, people began lining up outside days ago in hopes of nabbing a seat in the courthouse while justices consider the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, and the Defense of Marriage Act.

The cases have been winding through the courts since 2009, and every court to hear the challenges since then has sided with proponents of marriage equality. Now, however, the cases have reached a closely divided Supreme Court, and all eyes — and ears — this week will be on the nine justices.

First up is California's Proposition 8 on Tuesday.

First up is California's Proposition 8 on Tuesday.

Plaintiffs Sandy Stier (left) and Kris Perry.

Image by Jason Merritt / Getty Images

On Tuesday, the justices will consider whether the 2008 amendment to California's constitution banning marriage for gay couples is allowed under the U.S. Constitution.

Prior to the statewide vote that narrowly passed the amendment, the California Supreme Court had ruled that the state's constitution required that same-sex couple be allowed to marry. Proposition 8 ended that right, but about 18,000 couples married during the interim.

The justices also will be deciding, as a preliminary matter, whether the proponents of Proposition 8 — the people who put the measure on the ballot — have the right to take the case to the Supreme Court.

Normally, it would be the government of California defending the law. In this case, however, none of the state officials — now led by Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris — have been willing to defend the law. As such, the proponents, who have some legal rights under California law, have been defending the measure.

If the justices decide the proponents don't have the right to appeal the case, then the Supreme Court won't decide the ultimate question of whether the law is constitutional. This would mean the trial court judge's decision striking down the law stands, but it would not apply outside the state (and some have questioned whether it would even apply to the whole state).


View Entire List ›

Obama Catches Up New Citizens On The State Of The Immigration Fight

0
0

“We are making progress but we've got to finish the job,” the president tells new Americans

Image by Yuri Gripas / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform is a real possibility, President Barack Obama told a group of new citizens Monday, but only if Congress can find "the political courage to do what's required to be done."

The White House hosted a citizenship ceremony for more than a dozen new Americans from across the globe, including many who have already served in the U.S. military. Obama, who has been pushing hard for immigration reform since winning reelection last November, welcomed the new Americans by giving them his summary of one of the country's thorniest political fights. The long-simmering debate may be nearing its conclusion, Obama said.


"Immigration makes us stronger. It keeps us vibrant, it keeps us hungry, it keeps us prosperous. It is part of what makes this such a dynamic country. We want to keep attracting the best and the brightest that the world has to offer. We need to do a better job of welcoming them.

We've known for years that our immigration system is broken, but we're not doing enough to harness the talent and ingenuity of all those who want to work hard and find a place here in America. And after avoiding the problem for years, the time has come to fix it once and for all. The time has come for a comprehensive, sensible immigration reform.

Now, a couple of months ago in Nevada and then last month again in my State of the Union Address, I talked about how Republicans and Democrats were ready to tackle this problem together. And the good news is that since then we've seen some real action in Congress. There are bipartisan groups in both the House and the Senate who are tackling this challenge and I applaud them for that. We are making progress but we've got to finish the job. Because this issue is not new. Everyone pretty much knows what's broken, everybody knows how to fix it. We've all proposed solutions and we've got a lot of white papers and studies. We just got at this point to work up the political courage to do what's required to be done.

So I expect a bill to be put forth. I expect the debate to begin next month. I want to sign that bill into law as soon as possible."

MSNBC Employees Criticize MSNBC On MSNBC

0
0

You don't see this kind of stuff on cable news all the time.

View Video ›

After a Friday night broadcast of Rachel Maddow's Hubris documentary, MSNBC's Chris Hayes hosted a panel loaded with network hosts and paid contributors to discuss subjects raised in the hour-long production — and air some footage that didn't make the cut.

Then, something magical happened. Hayes, the newest addition to MSNBC's prime-time rotation, got all up in the face of the network's "statesman," Chris Matthews.

Hayes followed up with this haymaker.


View Entire List ›

State Department Laments Resignation Of Syrian Opposition Leader

0
0

Won't say who they're working with now.

Secretary of State John Kerry talks with New Syrian National Coalition head Moaz al-Khatib during a meeting in Rome on February 28.

Image by Remo Casilli / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The State Department Tuesday said it is "sorry" to see Syrian opposition leader Moaz al-Khatib's resignation, but can't specifically name a new leader they'll start working with after his departure.

The surprise resignation of al-Khatib has intensified a moment of disarray among the Syrian rebels, reports say, along with the refusal of a key Free Syrian Army leader to recognize an interim prime minister.

"We're sorry to see the Khatib announcement," deputy spokesman Patrick Ventrell told reporters. "This is somebody that we've worked very well with."

"The bottom line is what we're looking for is unity," Ventrell said, saying that the U.S. will "continue to urge unity."

Calling Khatib "courageous," Ventrell said that "Some of this is still playing out. Al-Khatib has said he'll continue to speak for Syrian opposition" and told reporters that it was too soon to talk about next steps: "We haven't had independent confirmation that he's stepped down. Let's wait and see what happens at the Arab League." Khatib is expected to speak at an Arab League summit in Doha on Wednesday.

"The opposition doesn't rely one one individual or another," Ventrell said when asked who the U.S.'s next point person in Syria would be. "We're still watching this develops."

Ventrell did not mention reports of arms deliveries to the rebels facilitated by the CIA, saying that "We're doing everything we can to accelerate the transition and support them" and that the U.S. remains the leader in humanitarian aid to Syria.

The Senators Who Flipped On DOMA

0
0

These Senators voted for the original DOMA law while in the Senate and House and now support the repeal of the law. An asterisk denotes they voted for the law as members of the House.

Jay Rockefeller

Jay Rockefeller

The Senator's staff tells BuzzFeed he no longer supports the law.

Image by The Herald-Dispatch, Sholten Singer / AP

Tom Harkin

Tom Harkin

Image by T.J. Kirkpatrick / Getty Images

Barbara Mikulski

Barbara Mikulski

Image by Jessica Rinaldi / Reuters

Carl Levin

Carl Levin

Image by T.J. Kirkpatrick / Getty Images


View Entire List ›

In Supreme Court Same-Sex Marriage Decision, Public Opinion Is No Guarantee

0
0

Opinion polling now favors same-sex marriage, but the Supreme Court has flouted public opinion in major decisions in the past.

Data via Gallup, Gallup Brain, Gallup, BSOS, National Review, Pew, Google Books.

More Americans now favor marriage eqaulity than oppose it — recent polls have found from 49% to a full 58% in favor. But that doesn't necessarily mean the Supreme Court will rule in favor of gay marriage when it considers challenges to California's Prop. 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act this week — in several major decisions concerning civil rights and liberties in the last half-century, the Court has run counter to public opinion.

In the cases of Loving v. Virginia, which struck down state laws banning interracial marriage; Abington School District v. Schempp, which declared Bible reading in public schools unconstitutional; and Texas v. Johnson, which found flag-burning to be constitutionally protected, large majorities of Americans at the time disagreed with the Supreme Court's decision. On interracial marriage, public opinion is now aligned with the Court's decision — on flag-burning and prayer in schools it's not, though it may be moving in that direction.

Some court-watchers think the recent polling on gay marriage will make the Court more comfortable ruling in favor of it; but if they chose to go against the polls, it wouldn't be the first time.


The 7 Most God-Awful Websites In The Senate

White House Rejects Republican Worries About Looming National Gun Registry

0
0

A day after Karl Rove warned Obama's gun laws will lead to a national registry of gun owners, the White House says that's baloney.

Image by Rich Pedroncelli / AP

WASHINGTON — The White House Monday again rejected Republican claims the administration is hoping to implement a stealth national gun registry, insisting President Barack Obama's national background check plan is not the first step in a broader effort.

"That is not something that the president has supported," Josh Earnest, deputy White House press secretary, told reporters at the daily briefing. "He's supported a lot of things, but in the context of what you're asking, the president supports background checks, the president's supported laws against trafficking of guns, the president has supported laws against straw purchasing, which basically is holding people accountable for purchasing weapons and then transferring them to people who couldn't lawfully purchase those weapons on their own."

"These are the kinds of reforms the president is seeking in the system," Earnest said. "He's not seeking a registry."

On Sunday, Karl Rove warned that universal background checks would lead the government to keep a list of gun owners, a common refrain from the National Rifle Association and its allies.

"We're talking about, in this instance, having a registry where if a grandfather wants to give a treasured shotgun to his grandson, or granddaughter, he has to register with the government and go and get approval as the government to give that gun to his grandchild," Rove said on ABC's This Week.

Existing federal law explicitly makes a national gun registry illegal. The NRA and its allies say they have a 2008 quote from Obama that proves he's in favor of a registry and they warn that expanding background checks are simply a step down a slippery slope to a registry coming to pass. After that, the NRA warns, government confiscation of firearms is the next step.

Earnest smacked down that notion as well.

"The president does not believe that there's any reason that guns would be taken away from law-abiding citizens," he said. "There's no reason for that, that's not part of any proposal the president has offered and it's not something that we support at all."

Obama is pushing hard to keep his gun law reforms afloat on Capitol Hill amid mounting resistance from the NRA and other groups. Despite the talk about a gun registry and the warnings of confiscation, polls show the public is on Obama's side when it comes to expanding background checks. Eighty-one percent of gun-owning households supported the idea in a Fox News poll released last week.

Sen. Mark Warner Reverses Course, Supports Marriage Equality

0
0

“[M]y views on gay marriage have evolved, and this is the inevitable extension of my efforts to promote equality and opportunity for everyone,” he writes.

Image by Cliff Owen / AP

WASHINGTON — On the eve of the Supreme Court's argument's on same-sex couples' marriage rights, Virginia Sen. Mark Warner reversed his longstanding position and announced his support for marriage equality,

On Facebook, he wrote Monday afternoon, "I support marriage equality because it is the fair and right thing to do. Like many Virginians and Americans, my views on gay marriage have evolved, and this is the inevitable extension of my efforts to promote equality and opportunity for everyone."

As recently as March 1, after signing his name to the Supreme Court brief from members of Congress opposing the Defense of Marriage Act, Warner said in a statement he was "proud to lend [his] name to the amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse this discriminatory law." He added, "Marriage equality now receives growing bipartisan support, and DOMA repeal is supported by a significant number of leading U.S. businesses, who correctly believe that DOMA represents an impediment to economic competitiveness."

A spokesman would not, however, state Warner's position on marriage equality at the time, telling the National Journal, "It's fair to say his thinking on that is evolving. I don't have anything to add to the statement you just received."

Detailing his record on the issue, Warner noted in Monday's statement, "I was proud to be the first Virginia governor to extend anti-discrimination protections to LGBT state workers. In 2010, I supported an end to the military's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, and earlier this month I signed an amicus brief urging the repeal of DOMA. I believe we should continue working to expand equal rights and opportunities for all Americans."

Warner did not support marriage equality during his last election; he had opposed Virginia's marriage amendment, however, which was approved by voters in 2006. He is up for re-election in 2014.

Alaska Sen. Mark Begich Says "Same Sex Couples Should Be Able To Marry"

0
0

“Government should keep out of individuals' personal lives — if someone wants to marry someone they love, they should be able to,” the senator says in a statement.

Image by Alex Wong / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — After remaining mum on the subject when asked about it last week, Sen. Mark Begich's office issued a statement Monday night from the senator supporting marriage equality.

"I believe that same sex couples should be able to marry and should have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities as any other married couple," the Alaskan senator said in what appears to be his first direct statement on the subject.

"Government should keep out of individuals' personal lives — if someone wants to marry someone they love, they should be able to. Alaskans are fed up with government intrusion into our private lives, our daily business, and in the way we manage our resources and economy," he continued.

Although Begich's office did not respond to an earlier request for comment about his views on marriage equality, the Human Rights Campaign informed BuzzFeed Monday afternoon that Begich's office had told the LGBT rights organization that Begich supported the following statement:

"Gay and lesbian couples should not be denied the ability to pledge their love and commitment through the civil institution of marriage. I believe that two committed adults of the same sex should be able to receive a government-issued marriage license, while religious institutions retain their right to determine which marriages they will perform."

When asked about HRC's claim Monday evening, Begich's office provided BuzzFeed with the direct statement of support for marriage equality.

Although he has opposed a proposed federal marriage amendment and supported same-sex partner benefits, The New York Times in December 2008 reported that Begich "did not respond directly when asked more than once whether he was for or against same-sex marriage."

More recently, Begich was one of 15 Democratic senators who did not join a Supreme Court brief supporting Edith Windsor's case asking the court to declare the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. Begich is up for reelection in 2014.

Proposition 8 Plaintiffs Await High Court Hearing

0
0

Jeff Zarrillo, Paul Katami, Sandy Stier, and Kris Perry are in Washington, D.C., and ready for Tuesday's arguments in their case challenging California's Proposition 8 marriage amendment.

The two couples challenging Proposition 8

The two couples challenging Proposition 8

Image by Chris Geidner/Buzzfeed

WASHINGTON — Jeff Zarrillo, Paul Katami, Sandy Stier and Kris Perry, were ready to go at the Supreme Court a little more than an hour before the justices will hear their case challenging California's Proposition 8.

The backers of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought the lawsuit in 2009, were first in line Tuesday at the court. Director and actor Rob Reiner was first in line, along with his wife, Michelle. Among the other AFER backers at the front of the line are AFER executive director Adam Umhoefer, Bruce Cohen, Cleve Jones, Dustin Lance Black and Ken Mehlman.

The arguments are due to begin at 10 a.m. and last for an hour, with the audio and transcript to be released by 1 p.m.

For more on the cases, read: "What Is Going To Happen At The Supreme Court This Week?"

The American Foundation for Equal Rights team

The American Foundation for Equal Rights team

Image by Chris Geidner/Buzzfeed

The Supreme Court, March 26, 2013.

The Supreme Court, March 26, 2013.

Image by Chris Geidner/Buzzfeed


View Entire List ›

Viewing all 15742 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images