Thursday, July 9, 2015
Ohio Judges, Attorneys Discuss Next Steps for Marriage Equality
Ohio judges have their work cut out for them moving forward in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's historic ruling that legalized same-sex marriage across the country. After last months 5-4 decision, the court struck down same-sex marriage bans in Ohio and other states. The decision came in response to five court cases, including two Ohio cases: Obergefell v. Hodges and Henry v. Hodges. The split decision still leaves plenty of unanswered questions to be hammered out by Ohio courts and lawmakers
For example, who is to be considered the biological parent in the case of the artificial insemination of a same-sex spouse, the judges pondered - the same-sex spouse who was not inseminated or the potentially anonymous biological father who donated? And at which date is a same-sex marriage conducted in another state considered to have begun - is it the official wedding date in that other state, the date of the court ruling, or the date of the couple's commitment ceremony if there was one?
"We're left, as judges, in a bit of a vacuum," said Delaware County Probate/Juvenile Court Judge David Hejmanowski. "We have statutes we know have been declared unconstitutional.... Until the legislature takes that action, the judiciary is in a bit of a quandary over how to move forward."
Judge Long said the group has already discussed how to best rectify a judge or court worker's personal religious beliefs with the new ruling. In a county with only one judge, the pair said, a judge's personal objection to same-sex marriage could be problematic. "There were a couple different thoughts," Judge Long said. "One is we're an elected official ... therefore we as elected officials must (officiate that wedding). Those that are working for us are also duty-bound as well." He said the best practice the group has recommended is for a judge to consider any employee's religious objection and relocate that worker to another job if necessary. Failure to do so could not only invite a lawsuit from prospective spouses, but from court employees who feel they're being forced to violate their religious beliefs by officiating the wedding. When asked whether non-profit, tax-exempt entities would be permitted to refuse performing same-sex weddings, Ms. Branch said they likely would. She cited Justice Elena Kagan's oral argument question in which the justice gave the example of a rabbi refusing to perform an interfaith marriage between a Jewish person and a Christian. "They are allowed to do that," Ms. Branch said. "There's no law in Ohio that says the officiant, that rabbi, must perform that marriage. So I think the analysis would apply here and I don't think that's going to be a real problem in Ohio." She added that same-sex couples would likely be hesitant to do business with a business or officiant once they knew the person's adverse thoughts toward same-sex marriages.
"http://www.courtnewsohio.gov/happening/2015/marriageEquality_070715.asp#.VZ6E6_lViko
For example, who is to be considered the biological parent in the case of the artificial insemination of a same-sex spouse, the judges pondered - the same-sex spouse who was not inseminated or the potentially anonymous biological father who donated? And at which date is a same-sex marriage conducted in another state considered to have begun - is it the official wedding date in that other state, the date of the court ruling, or the date of the couple's commitment ceremony if there was one?
"We're left, as judges, in a bit of a vacuum," said Delaware County Probate/Juvenile Court Judge David Hejmanowski. "We have statutes we know have been declared unconstitutional.... Until the legislature takes that action, the judiciary is in a bit of a quandary over how to move forward."
Judge Long said the group has already discussed how to best rectify a judge or court worker's personal religious beliefs with the new ruling. In a county with only one judge, the pair said, a judge's personal objection to same-sex marriage could be problematic. "There were a couple different thoughts," Judge Long said. "One is we're an elected official ... therefore we as elected officials must (officiate that wedding). Those that are working for us are also duty-bound as well." He said the best practice the group has recommended is for a judge to consider any employee's religious objection and relocate that worker to another job if necessary. Failure to do so could not only invite a lawsuit from prospective spouses, but from court employees who feel they're being forced to violate their religious beliefs by officiating the wedding. When asked whether non-profit, tax-exempt entities would be permitted to refuse performing same-sex weddings, Ms. Branch said they likely would. She cited Justice Elena Kagan's oral argument question in which the justice gave the example of a rabbi refusing to perform an interfaith marriage between a Jewish person and a Christian. "They are allowed to do that," Ms. Branch said. "There's no law in Ohio that says the officiant, that rabbi, must perform that marriage. So I think the analysis would apply here and I don't think that's going to be a real problem in Ohio." She added that same-sex couples would likely be hesitant to do business with a business or officiant once they knew the person's adverse thoughts toward same-sex marriages.
"http://www.courtnewsohio.gov/happening/2015/marriageEquality_070715.asp#.VZ6E6_lViko
Friday, July 3, 2015
OSBA | Living Wills and Health Care Powers of Attorney
We often get questions regarding Living Wills. Here is some information regarding setting up living wills and the purpose of health care powers of attorney.
OSBA | Living Wills and Health Care Powers of Attorney
OSBA | Living Wills and Health Care Powers of Attorney
OSBA | Child Support
Some great information on Child Support and Calculating Amounts from the Ohio State Bar Association.
OSBA | Child Support
OSBA | Child Support
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)