Last week's 8-1 U.S. Supreme Court decision rejecting a First Amendment challenge to a Washington state statute was a victory for transparency. The ruling upheld the requirement for public disclosure of the names of people who sign petitions to place initiatives or referendums on the ballot. The case was brought by anti-gay groups who sued the state to block disclosure of the names of people who had signed petitions for Referendum 71, which would have overturned a state law that expanded Washington state's existing domestic partner law by providing for more rights and obligations.
Given the conservative swing the high court has taken in recent years, the solid decision, with only Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting, was a surprising setback for the anti-gay groups that want to put our rights to a public vote and also hide from public view the individuals who want to do that. They can't have it both ways, the court said.
It was Chief Justice John Roberts who wrote the decision in the case, Doe v. Reed, and his analysis is on target: "Public disclosure thus helps ensure that the only signatures counted are those that should be, and that the only referenda placed on the ballot are those that garner enough valid signatures. Public disclosure also promotes transparency and accountability in the electoral process to an extent other measures cannot," Roberts wrote for the majority. "In light of the foregoing, we reject plaintiffs' argument and conclude that public disclosure of referendum petitions in general is substantially related to the important interest of preserving the integrity of the electoral process."
The decision is also a significant roadblock to a new strategy employed by anti-gay groups, including protectmarriage.com during the federal Proposition 8 trial here in California. The tactic involves the false argument that marriage equality opponents will be harassed and bullied, so names of those who sign petitions to strip away rights from LGBTs should be shielded. Citing that false fear, attorneys for the anti-gay side in the Prop 8 trial called only two witnesses, neither of whom was very convincing. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in and halted broadcast of the trial, apparently persuaded by the defendants' arguments. Given that decision, we are even more surprised by last week's verdict to allow the release of petitioners' names.
To be sure, there were signs during oral argument that the case would result in a victory for open government. Staunch conservative Justice Antonin Scalia spoke what many in the community believe when he said, " ... running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage. And the First Amendment does not protect you from criticism or even nasty phone calls when you exercise your political rights to legislate, or to take part in the legislative process."
That's exactly right.
Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which joined other pro-equality groups in filing an amicus brief in the case, said the court's decision "is a serious defeat for groups who seek to abuse the democratic process to strip rights from vulnerable minorities, and who now wish to do so in secrecy, without even the minimal accountability imposed by laws designed to prevent fraud and abuse."
People who sign ballot petitions should exercise due diligence before they affix their name to the signature line. And they should be prepared for their names to become public, no matter what the issue. That's how a democracy operates openly.
Dems put gays in closet
During the July 4th weekend, we thought readers would want to know that since the election of President Barack Obama, the Democratic National Committee hasn't changed its pathetic efforts to raise money from LGBT Democrats and our straight allies.
Recently the DNC mailed out the latest "2010 Presidential Survey" to Democrats across the country. And once again, there was nothing in the two-page questionnaire that related to LGBT issues. Not one LGBT issue �" such as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act �" is even an option on the DNC's list of national priorities.
We doubt that many people even bothered to complete the survey, and we certainly know that the results are not scientific or in any way representative of the national party. But geez, if the DNC is going to expend all this energy to come up with a survey, at least put our issues out there.
Better yet, do away with the survey all together and just send a simple letter. It's cheaper, and more honest anyway.