Mary Bonauto

Last updated
Mary Bonauto
Born (1961-06-08) June 8, 1961 (age 62)
Newburgh, New York, U.S.
NationalityAmerican
Alma mater Hamilton College
Northeastern University School of Law
OccupationLawyer
Known forGay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders
GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders
Awards Brudner Prize,
MacArthur fellow

Mary L. Bonauto (born June 8, 1961) [1] is an American lawyer and civil rights advocate who has worked to eradicate discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and has been referred to by US Representative Barney Frank as "our Thurgood Marshall." She began working with the Massachusetts-based Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, now named GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders [2] (GLAD) organization in 1990. [3] A resident of Portland, Maine, Bonauto was one of the leaders who both worked with the Maine legislature to pass a same-sex marriage law and to defend it at the ballot in a narrow loss during the 2009 election campaign. These efforts were successful when, in the 2012 election, Maine voters approved the measure, making it the first state to allow same-sex marriage licenses via ballot vote. [4] Bonauto is best known for being lead counsel in the case Goodridge v. Department of Public Health which made Massachusetts the first state in which same-sex couples could marry in 2004. She is also responsible for leading the first strategic challenges to section three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Contents

On April 28, 2015, Bonauto was one of three attorneys who argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges arguing state bans on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional. This much-publicized case determined that state bans against same-sex marriage are unconstitutional and is considered one of the most important civil rights cases which came before the U.S. Supreme Court in modern history.

Biography

Bonauto was born in 1961 and grew up in Newburgh, New York in a Roman Catholic family. She graduated from Hamilton College and Northeastern University School of Law. [5] In 1987, after graduating from law school, she entered private practice in Maine, where she was at the time one of three openly gay private practice lawyers in the state. [3] She lives in Portland with her spouse Jennifer Wriggins, who is a professor at the University of Maine School of Law. The couple were married in Massachusetts. [6] They have twin daughters. [5]

Bonauto has litigated widely in areas such as job and public accommodations discrimination, securing domestic partner benefits and relationship protections, establishing second parent rights and de facto parent status, vindicating First Amendment protections, and challenging anti-gay harassment and violence. She has worked on public policy in all six New England states, and occasionally writes for legal publications. Bonauto filed her first marriage case in Vermont in July 1997. [3]

Yale University awarded its 2010-2011 Brudner Prize, which recognizes "an accomplished scholar or activist whose work has made significant contributions to the understanding of LGBT issues or furthered the tolerance of LGBT people," to Bonauto. [7]

In 2011, Bonauto was named one of the 50 most-powerful women in Boston by Boston Magazine . [8]

In 2012, she was named by Equality Forum as one of their 31 Icons of the LGBT History Month. [9]

In March 2013, Roberta Kaplan, the lawyer arguing for DOMA repeal in the Supreme Court, told the New York Times , "No gay person in this country would be married without Mary Bonauto." Former US Representative Barney Frank, said "She's our Thurgood Marshall." [5]

In June 2013 immediately following the DOMA Supreme Court decision, she was called in Slate a "Gay Marriage Hero" and "the legal architect of the DOMA repeal." [10]

She was named a MacArthur fellow in September 2014 for her work "breaking down legal barriers based on sexual orientation". [11]

In May 2016, she was awarded an honorary Doctor of Laws by Harvard University for "establishing the freedom to marry for same-sex couples nationwide". [12]

Work on same-sex marriage

Vermont

In 1997, Bonauto, on behalf of GLAD, along with Beth Robinson and Susan Murray, filed a lawsuit in Vermont on behalf of three couples seeking the freedom to marry: Stacy Jolles and Nina Beck; Stan Baker and Peter Harrigan; and Holly Puterbaugh and Lois Farnham. [3] The suit, Baker v. State of Vermont was ultimately appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court, which ruled in the couples' favor but invited the Vermont Legislature to legislate a solution. [13] In the spring of 2000, the Vermont Legislature enacted civil unions, which extended to same-sex couples all of the state-level benefits of marriage but in a different system from marriage itself. [3]

Massachusetts

GLAD led by Bonauto filed suit in Massachusetts on behalf of seven gay and lesbian couples denied the freedom to marry in 2001. [14] In the case, known as Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on November 18, 2003, became the first state high court to rule that excluding gay people from civil marriage violates equal protection guarantees. Same-sex couples began marrying on May 17, 2004. [3] The November 2003 ruling was contested politically for a number of years, but in June 2007, more than three-fourths of the state legislature voted to reject any proposal to amend the state constitution and reverse the Goodridge decision. [15]

Connecticut

In August 2004, GLAD, including Bonauto, filed suit in Connecticut [16] on behalf of seven gay and lesbian couples who wished to marry. The Connecticut legislature responded by passing a civil union law the next year. [17] On May 14, 2007, GLAD attorney Bennett Klein, joined by Bonauto, argued for the couples in the Connecticut Supreme Court. [18] On October 10, 2008, GLAD won a ruling that it was unjustified discrimination to place same-sex couples in the separate and lesser status of civil unions, and that sexual orientation was a "quasi-suspect" classification for equal protection purposes. [19]

Maine

Mary Bonauto (with suitcase) gives the thumbs up as she enters the Supreme Court in 2015. Marriage Equality Mary Bonauto (with suitcase) gives the thumbs up to Mary Breslauer as she enters the Supreme Court. Bonauto is arguing the case today (17300475741).jpg
Mary Bonauto (with suitcase) gives the thumbs up as she enters the Supreme Court in 2015.

In 2009, Maine became the first state to pass a same-sex marriage law through the legislature, instead of through the court system, and also have it signed into law by the Governor. [20] Bonauto was instrumental in the campaign to enact the law, and was the architect of an unprecedentedly large public hearing on April 22, 2009, where proponents and opponents presented their arguments. [21] After the law was passed, a "people's veto" referendum campaign was begun and the voters overturned the law in November 2009, by a 53–47 margin. [6] [22] In the wake of this veto, Mary Bonauto was a leader in the coalition that came together to run a two-year public education campaign, that led in January 2012 to a direct ballot vote on the issue. [23] On November 6, 2012, voters confirmed the right of same-sex couples to receive a marriage license, the law taking effect on December 29, 2012, becoming the first state to do so by ballot vote. [24]

Obergefell v. Hodges

In March 2015, lawyers preparing to argue a consolidation of the Supreme Court cases titled Obergefell v. Hodges selected Bonauto to argue [25] on behalf of the Michigan case DeBoer v. Snyder and the Kentucky case Love v. Beshear . On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bonauto and the plaintiffs thus declaring all state bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

DOMA

Gill v. Office of Personnel Management

In March 2009, Bonauto and GLAD, along with co-counsel from Foley Hoag, Jenner & Block, and Sullivan & Worcester, filed in U.S. District Court in Boston a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). [26] The case claims that the federal definition of marriage created by DOMA to exclude married same-sex couples from all federal marital protections violates equal protection guarantees. U.S. District Judge Joseph L. Tauro heard oral arguments from Bonauto and co-counsel on the merits of the case on May 6, 2010. [27] On July 8, 2010, Judge Tauro ruled that Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional with respect to claims brought by the seven married same-sex couples and three widowers from Massachusetts GLAD is representing in the case. [28] The Department of Justice will now decide whether to appeal the ruling. [29] On October 12, 2010, the Department of Justice filed a notice to appeal the District Court ruling. [30] On May 31, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the District Court decision finding section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional. In July 2012 the Department of Justice filed a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court but the petition was denied in the wake of the Court's landmark decision in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of DOMA was unconstitutional.

Pederson v. Office of Personnel Management

On November 9, 2010, Bonauto and GLAD filed a second major, multi-plaintiff lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Section 3. [31] The case specifically addressed married couples in Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire. On July 31, 2012, the Connecticut Federal District Court Judge Bryant ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional. [32] On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor .

See also

Related Research Articles

Baker v. Vermont, 744 A.2d 864, was a lawsuit decided by Vermont Supreme Court on December 20, 1999. It was one of the first judicial affirmations of the right of same-sex couples to treatment equivalent to that afforded different-sex couples. The decision held that the state's prohibition on same-sex marriage denied rights granted by the Vermont Constitution. The court ordered the Vermont legislature to either allow same-sex marriages or implement an alternative legal mechanism according similar rights to same-sex couples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Defense of Marriage Act</span> 1996 U.S. federal law, repealed in 2022

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was a United States federal law passed by the 104th United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996. It banned federal recognition of same-sex marriage by limiting the definition of marriage to the union of one man and one woman, and it further allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states.

The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), also referred to by proponents as the Marriage Protection Amendment, was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would legally define marriage as a union of one man and one woman. The FMA would also prevent judicial extension of marriage rights to same-sex (gay) or other unmarried homosexual couples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex marriage in the United States</span> Overview of the status of same-sex marriage in United States

The availability of legally recognized same-sex marriage in the United States expanded from one state (Massachusetts) in 2004 to all fifty states in 2015 through various court rulings, state legislation, and direct popular votes. States each have separate marriage laws, which must adhere to rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States that recognize marriage as a fundamental right guaranteed by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as first established in the 1967 landmark civil rights case of Loving v. Virginia.

<i>Goodridge v. Department of Public Health</i> 2003 US state court case which legalized gay marriage in Massachusetts

Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, 798 N.E.2d 941, is a landmark Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case in which the Court held that the Massachusetts Constitution requires the state to legally recognize same-sex marriage. The November 18, 2003, decision was the first by a U.S. state's highest court to find that same-sex couples had the right to marry. Despite numerous attempts to delay the ruling, and to reverse it, the first marriage licenses were issued to same-sex couples on May 17, 2004, and the ruling has been in full effect since that date.

GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) is a non-profit legal rights organization in the United States. The organization works to end discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status, and gender identity and expression. The organization primarily achieves this goal through litigation, advocacy, and education work in all areas of LGBT rights and the rights of people living with HIV. In addition, GLAD operates a legal information line, GLAD Answers, where LGBTQ & HIV+ residents of New England can receive attorney referrals and information about their rights. The organization changed its name to GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders in February 2016.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Massachusetts since May 17, 2004, as a result of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruling in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health that it was unconstitutional under the Massachusetts Constitution to allow only opposite-sex couples to marry. Massachusetts became the sixth jurisdiction in the world to legalize same-sex marriage. It was the first U.S. state to open marriage to same-sex couples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions</span>

Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions of several different types passed, banning legal recognition of same-sex unions in U.S. state constitutions, referred to by proponents as "defense of marriage amendments" or "marriage protection amendments." These state amendments are different from the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage in every U.S. state, and Section 2 of the Defense of Marriage Act, more commonly known as DOMA, which allowed the states not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. The amendments define marriage as a union between one man and one woman and prevent civil unions or same-sex marriages from being legalized, though some of the amendments bar only the latter. The Obergefell decision in June 2015 invalidated these state constitutional amendments insofar as they prevented same-sex couples from marrying, even though the actual text of these amendments remain written into the state constitutions.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Vermont since September 1, 2009. Vermont was the first state to introduce civil unions on July 1, 2000, and the first state to introduce same-sex marriage by enacting a statute without being required to do so by a court decision. Same-sex marriage became legal earlier as the result of court decisions, not legislation, in four states: Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, and Iowa.

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 207, Section 11, more commonly known as the 1913 law, is a Massachusetts law enacted in 1913 and repealed in 2008 that invalidated the marriage of non-residents if the marriage was invalid in the state where they lived. It originated during a period of heightened antipathy to interracial marriage and went largely unenforced until used between 2004 and 2008 to deny marriage licenses to out-of-state same-sex couples.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Connecticut since November 12, 2008, following a state court decision that found the state's civil unions failed to provide same-sex couples with rights and privileges equivalent to those of marriage. Connecticut was the second U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage, after neighboring Massachusetts.

In response to court action in a number of states, the United States federal government and a number of state legislatures passed or attempted to pass legislation either prohibiting or allowing same-sex marriage or other types of same-sex unions.

Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health, 289 Conn. 135, 957 A.2d 407, is a 2008 decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court holding that allowing same-sex couples to form same-sex unions but not marriages violates the Connecticut Constitution. It was the third time that a ruling by the highest court of a U.S. state legalized same-sex marriage, following Massachusetts in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003) and California in In re Marriage Cases (2008). The decision legalized same-sex marriage in Connecticut when it came into effect on November 12, 2008. There were no attempts made to amend the state constitution to overrule the decision, and gender-neutral marriage statutes were passed into law in 2009.

<i>Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services</i>

Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services 682 F.3d 1 is a United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decision that affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the section that defines the terms "marriage" as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and "spouse" as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." Both courts found DOMA to be unconstitutional, though for different reasons. The trial court held that DOMA violates the Tenth Amendment and Spending Clause. In a companion case, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, the same judge held that DOMA violates the Equal Protection Clause. On May 31, 2012, the First Circuit held the act violates the Equal Protection Clause, while federalism concerns affect the equal protection analysis, DOMA does not violate the Spending Clause or Tenth Amendment.

<i>Gill v. Office of Personnel Management</i>

Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management, 682 F.3d 1 is a United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decision that affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the section that defines the term "marriage" as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and "spouse" as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."

Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management is a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, Section 3, which defined the federal definition of marriage to be a union of a man and a woman, entirely excluding legally married same-sex couples. The District Court that originally heard the case ruled Section 3 unconstitutional. On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional, and denied appeal of Pedersen the next day.

United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744 (2013), is a landmark United States Supreme Court civil rights case concerning same-sex marriage. The Court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages, was a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

<i>Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management</i> Lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management, 824 F. Supp. 2d 968, was a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff, Karen Golinski, challenged the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined, for the purposes of federal law, marriage as being between one man and one woman, and spouse as a husband or wife of the opposite sex.

This article contains a timeline of significant events regarding same-sex marriage in the United States. On June 26, 2015, the landmark US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges effectively ended restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States.

In the United States, the history of same-sex marriage dates from the early 1940s, when the first lawsuits seeking legal recognition of same-sex relationships brought the question of civil marriage rights and benefits for same-sex couples to public attention though they proved unsuccessful. However marriage wasn't a request for the LGBTQ movement until the Second National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Washington (1987). The subject became increasingly prominent in U.S. politics following the 1993 Hawaii Supreme Court decision in Baehr v. Miike that suggested the possibility that the state's prohibition might be unconstitutional. That decision was met by actions at both the federal and state level to restrict marriage to male-female couples, notably the enactment at the federal level of the Defense of Marriage Act.

References

  1. ↑ Bonauto, Mary (2015). "Bonauto, Mary" (PDF). GLBT Archive.
  2. ↑ GLAD: "GLAD Now Stands for GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders" February 23, 2016, accessed June 22, 2017
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 New York Times: "Toward a More Perfect Union," May 5, 2004, accessed June 29, 2010
  4. ↑ National Conference of State Legislature: "Same-Sex Marriage Laws", accessed June 22, 2017
  5. 1 2 3 Stolberg, Sheryl Gay (March 27, 2013). "In Fight for Marriage Rights, 'She's Our Thurgood Marshall'". New York Times. Retrieved July 13, 2013.
  6. 1 2 Portland Press Herald : "Mainer challenging U.S. Defense of Marriage Act," May 2, 2010, accessed June 29, 2010
  7. ↑ Yale University: James Robert Brudner '83 Memorial Prize and Lectures', accessed December 1, 2010
  8. ↑ "Bonauto makes Boston 50-most-powerful list". Portland Press Herald. 4 February 2011. Retrieved 4 February 2011.
  9. ↑ "Mary Bonauto biography". LGBT History Month.
  10. ↑ Mary Bonauto, Gay Marriage Hero Slate. June 2013.
  11. ↑ Levenson, Eric (September 17, 2014). "Mary Bonauto and Harvard Math Professor Win $625,000 MacArthur 'Genius' Grants". Boston Globe. Retrieved September 17, 2014.
  12. ↑ Harvard Gazette. May 2016.
  13. ↑ Baker v. State December 20, 1999 Archived March 3, 2012, at the Wayback Machine , accessed July 12, 2010
  14. ↑ GLAD: "Goodridge et al. v. Dept. Public Health," November 18, 2003, accessed July 12, 2010
  15. ↑ New York Times: Pam Belluck, "Massachusetts Gay Marriage to Remain Legal," June 15, 2007, accessed July 12, 2010
  16. ↑ GLAD: Kerrigan & Mock v. Connecticut Dept. of Public Health, October 10, 2008, accessed July 12, 2010
  17. ↑ General Assembly, State of Connecticut: "An Act Concerning Civil Unions," April 20, 2005, accessed July 12, 2010
  18. ↑ GLAD: Kerrigan & Mock v. Connecticut Dept. of Public Health, October 10, 2008, accessed April 15, 2015
  19. ↑ New York Times: Robert D. McFadden, "Gay Marriage Is Ruled Legal in Connecticut," October 10, 2008, accessed July 12, 2010
  20. ↑ New York Times: Abby Goodnough, "Maine Governor Signs Same-Sex Marriage Bill," May 6, 2009, accessed July 12, 2010
  21. ↑ GLAD: "GLAD Helps Make ME Hearing a Huge Success" Archived 2011-07-24 at the Wayback Machine , accessed July 12, 2010
  22. ↑ Bangor Daily News: "Statewide Results," November 10, 2009 Archived December 23, 2010, at the Wayback Machine , accessed July 12, 2010
  23. ↑ GLAD: "Victory! Maine Voters Say Yes to Marriage Equality" Archived 2015-04-08 at the Wayback Machine , accessed April 3, 2015
  24. ↑ National Conference of State Legislature: "Same-Sex Marriage Laws", accessed April 3, 2015
  25. ↑ Dennison, Lyle (March 31, 2015). "Lawyers for same-sex marriage plea named". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved March 31, 2015.
  26. ↑ GLAD: Challenging Federal Marriage Discrimination, accessed July 12, 2010
  27. ↑ Christian Science Monitor: Will Buchanan, "Legal challenge of federal gay marriage ban begins," May 6, 2010, accessed July 12, 2010
  28. ↑ New York Times: Abby Goodnough and John Schwartz, "Judge Topples U.S. Rejection of Gay Unions," July 8, 2010, accessed July 12, 2010
  29. ↑ Washington Post: Denise Lavoie, "White House silent on Mass. gay marriage ruling," July 9, 201 [ dead link ], accessed July 12, 2010
  30. ↑ GLAD: "Gill v. Office of Personnel Management Notice of Appeal" Archived 2015-09-24 at the Wayback Machine , accessed April 3, 2015
  31. ↑ GLAD: Pedersen et al. v. Office of Personnel Management et al., accessed April 3, 2015
  32. ↑ GLAD: "Pederson v. Office of Personnel Management" Archived 2012-09-16 at the Wayback Machine , accessed April 3, 2015
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.