Federal Judge Blocks Oregon’s Domestic Partnership Law

The law scheduled to take effect January 1st would give some spousal rights to same-sex couples.

(PORTLAND, Ore.) - In a shocking move today, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) which postpones Oregon’s Domestic Partnership law from going into effect on January 2nd 2008 as scheduled. Basic Rights Oregon argued in their amicus brief to the court that the delay of this state law is unfair and uncalled for.

"This delay tactic results in real harm to countless Oregonians and their families, and is absolutely unnecessary."

The Alliance Defense Fund, an out-of-state conservative legal interest group, brought the case in U.S. District Court.

The plaintiffs in Lemons v. Bradbury claimed that voters who had signed referendum petitions to overturn Oregon’s new domestic partnership law, and whose signatures had been rejected by elections officials based on well-established criteria, should have those signatures restored.

In a provisional ruling in the case today, U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman issued a TRO to keep the laws from going into effect — at least until the next hearing on February 1st, 2008.

While the judge acknowledged the harm to couples who planned on registering on January 2nd, citing the amicus brief filed by Basic Rights Oregon, he nonetheless concluded that plaintiffs had alleged a “fundamental right” in the referendum process that would also be harmed.

The attorney for Oregon Basic Rights believes that the judge demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of Oregon’s initiative and referendum law.

"Basic Rights Oregon is appalled by this outrageous ruling, and we will continue to aggressively find opportunities to participate in the case as it moves forward, doing everything in our power to get caring and committed Oregon couples and their families the legal rights and protections they need."

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Jefferson December 31, 2007 10:18 am (Pacific time)

Moonbat is an excellent term for some individuals. People, Gore lost. He would have won the general election had he been able to win his home state of Tennesse! It appears those people knew what Gore was really about. Bush won the state of Florida by approximately 400,000 votes in 2004, compared to a little over 500 in 2000. Suffice, the people of Florida did not want Gore and they certainly did not want Kerry (a distant relative of feldman). If one looks at criminal prosecutions for voter fraud, then you are essentially talking democratic party fraud. By the way, Bubba Clinton, the serial sex harrassment offender (Henry/TFI does not want you to remember that) was disbarred! I called Hillary a carpet-bagger for empirical reasons. Remember Gore could not win his home state in the 2000 election, and Hillary knew she could not win in Arkansas, a state she lived in for many many years. Reason she could not win? Maybe feldman or the other individual who alludes to "unprovable fraud" can tell you? Tho' I would put my money on the fact that the Arkansas voter's knew her, really knew her! As will America in the not too distant future. The moonbats will continue to revise history people, call them on it, don't let them get away with that dangerous un-American behavior!

Jefferson December 31, 2007 10:17 am (Pacific time)

Henry Ruark December 30, 2007 1:18 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Re 2004 election, Florida is NOT the only state with deplorable record of subterfuge, illegal activities, vote-stealth, progressive defeat of legal elction rules, regulations. Ohio is example of other funny stuff --always with Bush gains as objective. Peculiar role played in Florida by C. Rice, later top Bush-pick in D.C., is still open to question and, last I knew, inquiry uncompleted. You can bet it will stay UNcompleted, too, at least for now, but can be resurrected later, as is historic record in such fraudulent actions in other key-vote changeovers.

Neal Feldman December 30, 2007 10:10 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - re the 2000 election: Every American should be outraged that a presidential election was stolen, and it has been conclusively proven to all but the most dyed in the wool wingnuts (or those ignorant of the facts) that by any proper analysis of the florida election in 2000 Al Gore did in fact defeat Shrub. This is why Shrub fought so hard in court because at the ballot box even he knew he had lost. This is undeniable (by a sane person at least which lets the likes of Jefferson off) fact no matter how deeply you delve into delusional denial about it. As to the rest of your wingnut anti-Clinton ravings they were old news and/or disproven in the 90s... they are ancient BS now... but clearly you have nothing better. Not surprising. As for 'carpetbagger' I presume you are aware of the right of US Citizens to actually move between states, that one is not legally required to remain, as a general rule, in one state for one's entire life? You continue to be pathetically feeble in every post you make. Not surprising again. Ah well...

Neal Feldman December 30, 2007 10:02 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - Actually that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is quite clear in the words I use. Your delusional rants continue unabated apparently. Ah well...

Jefferson December 29, 2007 12:27 pm (Pacific time)

People please note Feldman still cannot handle the fact that AlGore lost in 2000 (even though a re-count by several leftist media organizations upheld the victory). Maybe feldman will tell you, if you ask nicely, that if Gore won his home state, he would have been elected. He could not even win his home state! LOL Then here's Hillary Clinton, carpet bagger, running for president with as much executive experience as feldman. She found that she could not get elected in the state she was a first lady, Arkansas, so they back up the hippy van and move to New York. Though maybe she does have some financial experience, e.g., turning ten thousand into $100 thousand bucks (thank you Tyson chicken, major contributor to Bubba)...then we have the Rose firm billing records...the vast right wing conspiracy also lied about her monogamous hubby, ad nauseum. Losers!

Jefferson December 29, 2007 12:15 pm (Pacific time)

People what feldman is essentially saying: "When the judges rule the way I want, that's fine, but they are in violation if they do the opposite." Goron! Bottom line: Let the people vote on this issue. What's the problem? The interloper's have always pushed for the destruction of American values...they are going to lose.

Neal Feldman December 29, 2007 11:32 am (Pacific time)

And I have no issue with a vote since the polls show that HB2007 is supported by nearly 70% of likely voters. I just do not see a reason to give the religious reich what is not properly theirs (a blace on the ballot when they failed to get enough signatures) and I see no reason to delay those benefiting from HB2007 being forced to wait any longer for what rights are rightly theirs. They have waited enough. Oh, and Jefferson (and other wingnuts) where were your agonized primal screams of rage when Empress Minnis gutted, stuffed and buried SB1000? Kinda takes all the puffed up umbrage out of your sails pointing this out doesn't it? Ah well...

Neal Feldman December 29, 2007 11:27 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - Only wingnuts like yourself would fault judges properly applying the law and constitution to block votes, however popular, that are illegal due to constitutional violations. But oh look... Measure 50 with the cut and cap and double majority provisions which clearly couples unrelated issues. By all rights it too should be ruled unconstitutional, retroactively passing all passed levies blocked by the double majority but it would also result in back taxes being owed by most because the cut and cap of property taxes would be retroactively reversed as well (plus the increases in taxes due to the passed levies) and no judge or politician wants to go down in history as doing that unfortunately. But by all rights they should. All things being equal. But that is what you wingnuts do not get. Where was your scream of outrage when Shrub was appointed president illegally in 2000? And the outraged screams of your fellow wingnuts? I see... You just do not get that these freaks were already incredibly lucky with the sample selection. The rate of approval on the signatures was unprecedented. It is far more likely if every signature is individually counted that their rate will drop, not rise. It just happens that the right are incredibly poor losers, especially when their goal is bigotry entrenched. And I have no issue with mormons in general, but when they put their religion ahead of the law and act to pay back the religious reich for supporting the guy who appointed them, yeah, I got a bit of a problem with that. You should too, if you were not such a biased and blind neocon partisan idiot. Ah well...

Neal Feldman December 29, 2007 11:16 am (Pacific time)

They failed to get the required number of signatures. Why should they get on the ballot anyway? Close is good enough? Well then I guess the Salem Transit levy should be put into effect from Nov 06 right? After all, according to you close is good enough! Ah well...

Henry Ruark December 29, 2007 10:10 am (Pacific time)

Odd action to blame unions for control of legislators, long known to be subservient to all those "corporate campaign contributions" which bought Big T its demeaning purchase of product-tax escape, not so long ago... But that's one more example of NeoCon Nonentity lying distortion of realities for personal psychological reasons now extremely obvious.

Jefferson December 29, 2007 8:00 am (Pacific time)

People it's amazing how the moonbats remain silent when some federal judge (usually a Carter or Clintoon appointee) overturns a vote that state voter's have "already" voted on and passed (this is also seen on the state supreme court level by lefty judges). Note: what you will be hearing from now on from the moonbats is "talking points", e.g. , "gee the federal judge does not understand the referendum process", or something to that effect. People what happened is the left put on pressure to have enough signatures disqualified (the loons don't want the statewide vote because they know that the voter see's through thier fraud). Less than 100 votes were needed as per some demo-controlled clerks who decided to throw out just enough votes (reminds me of the re-count process in Washington when King county kept finding new votes from somewhere?). Dems are great at cherry-picking, but keep in mind that your vote may also be disqualified. The signature on file for your ballot may change over time when you send in new signed ballots, say from injury, or it simply begins to change from age-related causes, well some clerk from a precinct that votes overwhelmongly conservative may just start winnowing out ballots. This has been reported by some volunteer vote countes but Sec. of State Bradbury has not started a comprehensive investigation. Simply put people, the left does not want you to vote on this issue, what are they afraid of? Democracy is the answer folks, democracy! Note: Appears feldman does not like Mormons, or is it just Gentiles in particular. What does relgion have to do with it goron?! The issue is about having a transparent process! The hearing will go forwaed!

Albert Marnell December 29, 2007 5:40 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson, Why not spend more time fighting the New World Order which are the same people as the Old World Order. Read about the Trans-Texas Corridor or the Bilderberg. You are fighting with the wrong people.

Neal Feldman December 29, 2007 1:24 am (Pacific time)

Figures these out of state wingnuts would dig up some pro-religious (in this case Mormon)Shrub appointee (appointed in 2003) to give some payback for all the vores the religious reich delivered in 2000 and 2004. The laws be damned.. they are taking Lemons (v Bradbury) and desperately trying to make lemonade. Interesting the federal court considering the federal govt has no referendum.... one would have thought the Oregon Supreme Court would have been the highest... but I guess Shrub didn't stack there like he has stacked the federal courts. Ah well...

Jefferson December 28, 2007 11:50 pm (Pacific time)

Put it on the ballot for 11/2008, or better yet, hold a special election and do it right away. We are talking about tax money being allocated as future benefits, suffice, this in an issue the voter's need to decide on. Not the union controlled democratic legislator's who have simply spit on the voter's!

[Return to Top]