Movement on birth certificate ruling; a call for solutions from parties | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Movement on birth certificate ruling; a call for solutions from parties

Posted By on Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 5:54 PM

Late this afternoon, the attorney general's office released a letter to the Arkansas Supreme Court suggesting a path for the state of Arkansas to move forward to end discrimination against same-sex couples in issuing birth certificates.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the state's refusal to list both parents of a same-sex couple on a birth certificate — while giving presumptive parenthood to both parents in an opposite sex couple regardless of means of conception — was unconstitutional.

A letter from Lee Rudofsky, top deputy in Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, to Stacy Pectol, clerk of the Supreme Court, noted that the Supreme Court referred its reversal of the Arkansas Supreme Court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion but did not give "clear instructions" on how to proceed.

The letter acknowledged that the state used the birth certificate as more than a biological record (unlike the Arkansas Supreme Court had contended.)  Instead, it uses the certificate for other forms of legal recognition not equally available to same-sex married couples. A critical paragraph:

click to enlarge screen_shot_2017-06-27_at_5.39.14_pm.png

Rudofsky said the solution is a "gender neutral" reading of assisted reproduction statutes. (This could means couples with male and females as non-biological parents.) It would fix the constitutional violation and not create other problems, he said. Many other states already do the same. Arkansas could have done it long ago, including in the last legislative if only the state hadn't insisted on defending the indefensible and running up enormous legal bills  to defend discrimination against gay people, which is de facto and de jure state policy.

Simple: Married parents should be listed as parents on a birth certificate. Opposite sex couples aren't questioned about egg and sperm donors or, God forbid, whether a milkman intervened in the process.

The question is whether the resistant Arkansas Supreme Court can be persuaded to resolve this question without taking a summer vacation first. And if a remedy arises, will the legislatre insist in hearings on agency rules. Imagine if Jason Rapert or Bart Hester is given the floor on this.

Rudofsky suggested asking views of all parties to help the Arkansas Supreme Court make a "reasoned, informed and reflective" judgment.


Rutledge couldn't resist noting a "divided" Supreme Court in the case. It was divided in the opinion only on whether Arkansas should be summarily rebuffed. Three judges — the antti-gay Neal Gorscuh, Joseph Alito and Clarence Thomas — wanted more arguments first.

Tags: , , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store

Favorite

Comments (6)

Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • The long and winding road: No exception yet for 30 Crossing

    The Arkansas highway department's representative on the Metroplan board of directors told the board today that the department is requesting an exception to the planning agency's cap on six lanes for its 30 Crossing project to widen Interstate 30 from six to 10 (and more) lanes.
    • Jun 29, 2016
  • Two plead in fraud of sheriff's office

    A former employee of the Pulaski County sheriff and a North Little Rock woman who sold goods to the sheriff's office have pleaded guilty to mail fraud in a scheme to steal from the sheriff's office, according to a news release from the U.S. attorney's office.
    • May 16, 2017
  • Arkansas Times Recommends: A Literary Edition

    Arkansas Times Recommends is a series in which Times staff members (or whoever happens to be around at the time) highlight things we've been enjoying this week.
    • Jul 1, 2016

Most Shared

  • In the margins

    A rediscovered violin concerto brings an oft-forgotten composer into the limelight.
  • Donald Trump is historically unpopular — and not necessarily where you think

    My colleagues John Ray and Jesse Bacon and I estimate, in the first analysis of its kind for the 2018 election season, that the president's waning popularity isn't limited to coastal cities and states. The erosion of his electoral coalition has spread to The Natural State, extending far beyond the college towns and urban centers that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. From El Dorado to Sherwood, Fayetteville to Hot Springs, the president's approval rating is waning.
  • Arkansans join House vote to gut Americans with Disabilities Act

    Despite fierce protests from disabled people, the U.S. House voted today, mostly on party lines, to make it harder to sue businesses for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. Of course Arkansas congressmen were on the wrong side.

Most Recent Comments

 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation