Laws

United States of America

CALIFORNIA

Limited information only available for these topics

Access to Children
Adoption of Children
Age of Consent
Anti-Vilification
Artifical Insemination
Assisted Reproduction
Benefits
Bullying
Business
Censorship, Free Speech
Civil Unions
Custody of Children
Discrimination
Estates, Wills
Fostering Children
Gender Identity
Harassment
Hate Crimes
Health, Medical
HIV/Aids
Homosexuality
Inheritance, Succession
In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF)
Marriage
Parenting
Partners
Privacy
Property
Social Security
Sodomy
Surrogacy
Taxation
Transgender, Transsexual
Violence
Wills, Estates
Wrongful Death

Please read the Disclaimer

Annuities, Death Benefits, Pensions, Retirement, Social Security, Superannuation Legislation/Cases/References
1.

Courts & Tribunals

On 04 January 2015, US District Judge Phyllis J Hamilton found that the second cause of action of Stacey Schuett, the widow of longtime FedEx employee Lesly Taboada-Hall, adequately alleged that FedEx had violated Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) by acting contrary to applicable federal law and failing to provide Schuett with a benefit mandated by ERISA, and that she is entitled to pursue equitable relief to remedy that violation, and denied the motion for judgment not being persuaded at this stage that there is any basis for denying retroactive application of the DOMA decision in Windsor [C1.4], [R1.3].

On 03 August 2015, US District Judge Percy Anderson dismissed the application of Hugh Held and others seeking to prevent the Social Security Administration from recouping overpayments resulting from the SSA's delay in recognizing same-sex marriages and amending entitlements to the lower rates for married benefit recipients, holding that the plaintiffs had not exhausted their administrative remedies [C1.2], [R1.1].

C1.4 Order: Stacey Schuett v. FedEx Corporation, et al. No. 15-cv0189-PJH PDF 256.32kb 04 JAN 15
R1.3 TheRecorder (Registration): Judge Rules Against FedEx in Same-Sex Benefits Fight 04 JAN 15
C1.2 Court Order: Hugh Held et al. v. Carolyn Colvin No. CV 15-1732 PA (JCx) PDF 50.46kb, 03 AUG 15
R1.1 WashingtonBlade: Judge tosses lawsuit on Social Security benefits for gay couples
Assisted Reproduction Technology
Artificial Insemination, In Vitro Fertilisation, Surrogacy
Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [PARENTING]
1.

State

On 07 October 2015, the Governor signed AB 960 (Parentage: assisted reproduction) into law effective 01 January 2016, under which sperm donors will not be legally considered a parent and unmarried people using assisted reproduction would have the same parental rights as married parents [R1.7].

On 08 October 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB460 into law commencing January, amending the Insurance Code to prohibit insurers from withholding coverage for most fertility treatments based on “age, ancestry, color, disability, domestic partner status, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, marital status, national origin, sex or sexual orientation” [R1.6].

Californian law recognises surrogacy births [R1.5].

Provided the mother waives all her rights as the biological mother, the rule of intent is applied and she would have little success in regaining custody if at some time in the future she decides she wants the child back.

If a surrogate mother cannot prove she intended to keep the child and raise it, then it should remain with the person who 'intellectually' planned to bring it into this world, in this case the biological father and his partner.


On 28 September 2012, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 2356 ensuring that single people and same-sex couples will have the same access to fertility services as those provided to opposite-sex couples, effective 01 January 2013 [R1.4].

On 23 September 2012, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 1217 into law, amending the Uniform Parentage Act and giving same sex couples conceiving children through surrogacy agreements the same parental rights and protections as other parents in the state [R1.3].

On 28 August 2012, the Senate voted 26–10 to approve Bill AB 2356 that ensures women in same-sex relationships – and single women – can access fertility services on the same terms as women in opposite-sex relationships. On 29 August 2012, the Assembly passed the amended Bill 53–27 and it now proceeds to the governor's desk [R1.2].

In 2007, the Los Angeles Fertility Institute launched the first dedicated program for gay men wanting to become parents [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

In September 2009, Guadalupe "Lupita" Benítez who was denied fertility treatments because of her sexual orientation reached a settlement with her former physicians [R2.5].

The California supreme court, ruled last year that Benítez was entitled to be treated like other patients with her same health problem, and that constitutional protections for religious liberty do not excuse unlawful discrimination [R2.3].


In February 2009, the Medical Board of California was investigating the ethics of multiple IVF implantations [R2.4].


In August 2008, a lesbian denied infertility treatment by her doctors on the grounds of their religious beliefs won the case against them in California's Supreme Court [R2.3].


In March 2003, the Court of Appeal panel in San Diego said the judge was wrong. Doctors who deny treatment because of bias can be sued under state civil rights laws, regardless of how their health care is funded, the court said [R2.2].


In February 2003, the court in San Diego dismissed the case in which a lesbian was refused infertility treatment because of her doctors' personal religious beliefs, ruling that a federal law regulating employee benefit plans bars a state civil rights claim against doctors whenever their services are covered through an employee-provided health plan [R2.1].

R1.7 BayAreaReporter: Brown signs LGBT, AIDS drug pricing bills 15 OCT 15
R1.6 Gay couples in California to receive same access to insurance for fertility treatments as straights 11 OCT 13
R1.5 Irish Independent: Meet The Gaybys 11 AUG 01
R1.4 The Advocate: Same-Sex Couples Will Have Equal Access to Fertility Services 28 SEP 12
R1.3 The Sacramento Bee: California Enacts Landmark Legislation Giving Same Sex Parents Via Surrogacy Equal Parenting Rights 17 OCT 12
R1.2 PinkNews: Bill to allow lesbian women equal access to fertility services passes California senate 31 AUG 12
R1.1 bnews: Gay Dads 22 MAR 07
R2.5 The Advocate: Lesbian Settles With Clinic Over Fertility Treatments 29 SEP 09
R2.4 MCV: Lesbians Win 'Two for One' Case 19 FEB 09
R2.3 PinkNews.co.uk: Court Victory Over Christian Doctors for Lesbian Mother 19 AUG 08
R2.2 San Francisco Chronicle: Lesbian Gets OK to Sue for Bias 05 MAR 03
R2.1 San Diego Union-Tribune: Lesbian appeals discrimination ruling 10 FEB 03
Business Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 08 October 2015, the Governor signed AB 865 (State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission: contracts, grants, and loans: diversity) into law, that requires recipients of California Energy Commission grants or loans to increase procurement from minority-owned business enterprises, including those run by LGBT individuals, effective 01 January 2016 [R1.3].

On 01 January 2015, the first-of-its-kind law AB 1678 came into effect requiring electrical, gas, water and telephone companies as well as wireless telecommunications service providers in California with annual revenues of more than US$25 million to report how much work they do with LGBT-owned businesses [L1.2], [R1.1].

R1.3 BayAreaReporter: Brown signs LGBT, AIDS drug pricing bills 15 OCT 15
L1.2 Bill: Assembly Bill No. 1678 (Accessed 03 JAN 14)
R1.1 GayStarNews: Los Angeles Times: New California law gives LGBT-owned businesses a boost
Censorship, Free Speech, Right of Assembly Legislation/Cases/References
1.

Courts & Tribunals

On 13 January 1958, US Supreme Court granted a petition of certiorari and reversed the judgment of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, citing Roth v. United States 354 US 476 (1957) [C1.2].

On 12 April 1957, the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the trial court judgment finding that the October, 1954 issue of One Magazine was obscene therefore unmailable [C1.1].

C1.2 US Supreme Court: One Inv v. O Olesen and Postmaster of the City of Los Angeles 355 US 371, 13 JAN 58
C1.1 US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion: One Inv v. O Olesen and Postmaster of the City of Los Angeles 241 F.2d 772, 12 APR 57
Children: Access, Custody, Visitation Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 20 September 2003, AB205 came into effect giving domestic partners the right to ask for child custody [R1.1].

See also:

Heath-Newton LLP:

R1.1 Los Angeles Times: Domestic Partners Law Expands Gay Rights
Civil Unions, Partners: Domestic, Registered Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 09 September 2011, the Domestic Partnership Equality Act (SB651) amending the Family Code was signed into law (effective 01 January 2012) allowing –

  1. same-sex couples married in California but living in states that do not recognize their marriage, to get divorced in California;
  2. couples to qualify as domestic partners without having to share a common residence;
  3. people under the age of 18 to become domestic partners, though they would need a court order and the consent of their parent or guardian; and
  4. domestic partners to enter into a confidential domestic partnership [R1.16].

On 06 September 2011, Governor Jerry Brown signed the Equal Benefits bill (SB117) into law requiring that state agency contracts over $100,000 only be awarded to companies who give gay employees the same benefits as straight workers [R1.15].

On 08 May 2011, the Senate passed SB117, a bill that will bar the State from entering into contracts in excess of $100,000 with businesses and other entities that deny equal benefits to the same-sex spouses of their employees. The bill moved to the Assembly [R1.14], where it passed 14 July 2011 and finally passed the State legislature on 23 August 2011.

See also: [R1.5], [R1.4] re: gay families.

Heath-Newton LLP [R1.13]:


On 30 September 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger signed the Unemployment Benefits Act (AB 2055), which ensures that same-sex couples in California have access to unemployment benefits [R1.12].

On 02 June 2010, the Assembly passed the Unemployment Benefits Act, which would if passed by the senate and signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, ensure that registered same-sex couples in the state have access to unemployment benefits [R1.11].

As at 25 October 2009, Declaration of Domestic Partnership forms are available at www.sos.ca.gov/dpregistry/forms.htm. Cost of registering is $33.


On 30 September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a landmark bill enabling California's registered domestic partners to file joint state income tax returns and have their earned income treated as community property for state tax purposes [R1.10].


On 20 September 2003, Governor Gray Davis signed AB205 into law Bill [R1.9] following approval by the Assembly 41–32 on 03 September 2003 [R1.8] and approval by the Senate 24–14 on 28 August 2003 [R1.7]

Scheduled to take effect from 01 January 2005 [R1.6], the bill would extend to domestic partners -

  • the right to ask for child custody, support and alimony after separation on the same terms as spouses
  • the same rights a spouses over a deceased partner's autopsy and to make funeral arrangements
  • the right to community property - half the income and property acquired by the other partner during the relationship
  • right to a family court proceeding, similar to divorce, for domestic partners who split up after at least five years of partnership or who have children or substantial property together. Other domestic partners would end their legal relationship by filing a statement with the secretary of state.
  • right to refuse to testify against the other partner in court
  • the responsibility of each partner for the other's debts to third parties.

On 12 October 2003, the Governor signed legislation prohibiting the State of California from doing business with companies which discriminate against gay families although the law will not take effect until 2007 [R1.5].

On 13 September 2003, the Bill was passed by the state Assembly [R1.4].


In January 2003, assembly bill AB 205 would if passed expand the state's existing domestic partnership program to ensure equal treatment of gay and lesbian couples in child custody, financial support, community property, debt assumption and other family matters [R1.3].


In September 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed a groundbreaking family leave bill providing paid leave to workers who need to care for a seriously ill domestic partner, spouse, or other family member [R1.2].


In October 2001, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation (AB25) providing about a dozen rights enjoyed by married couples to more than 16,000 registered gay, lesbian and domestic partners in California from 1 January 2002 [L1.1], [R1.1].

AB 25 adds about a dozen additional legal benefits for domestic partners, including the right to:

  • Sue for the wrongful death of a partner
  • Make medical decisions for a partner in the hospital
  • Adopt a partner's child using the stepparent adoption process
  • Use sick leave to care for an ill or incapacitated partner
  • Act as a conservator
  • Relocate with a partner without losing unemployment benefits [R1.1].
2.

County

On 23 July 2003, Governor Gray Davis signed into law an assembly bill AB 266 that will allow San Mateo County to begin rolling out retirement benefits to the domestic partners of county employees in the coming years [R2.3].


On 10 September 2002, Sacramento County supervisors voted to provide domestic-partnership benefits for county employees [R2.5].

On 06 September 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation that allows Marin County's Board of Supervisors to adopt resolutions that provide survivor benefits for domestic partners of county employees. The Marin County Board of Supervisors is expected to approve the resolution providing those benefits [R2.1].

On 15 January 2002, Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to extend health benefits to domestic partners of gay and lesbian county employees [R2.4].

In July 2001, San Diego County government quietly made medical benefits for domestic partners available to its employees July 2001 [R2.2].

3.

Cities & Towns

On 06 April 2004, the Sebastopol City Council voted 3–0 with two council members absent, to approve a new policy that recognizes same-sex unions and gives benefits to same-sex spouses of employees [R3.5].


In February 2003, Los Angeles Council members approved a measure that requires contractors doing business with the city to provide benefits to their employees' domestic partners under the city's Equal Benefits Ordinance [R3.4].

The ordinance, which goes into effect April 1, covers contracts of more than $5,000. It does not require companies to offer benefits they don't already offer [R3.4].


In October 2001 the Fremont City Council approved a resolution that would extend to police officers domestic partner health coverage available through the state's Public Employees' Retirement System [R3.3].


In September 2000, the cities of Ventura, Oxnard, West Hollywood and Santa Monica; and Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties reportedly all offered domestic partner health-care benefit insurance plans [R3.2].


In 1997, San Francisco law required any employer under contract to the city to offer equal benefits to its employees' domestic partners. The number of companies complying with the law increased 25 percent, from 2,168 in July 1999 to 2,707 a year later.

In June 2001, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to San Francisco's law on the grounds that it was unconstitutional [R3.2]. The Court has also ruled that the city law does not conflict with a 1999 state law [R3.1].

4.

Corporate

As at September 2000, fifteen Fortune 500 employers in the Bay Area offer domestic partner health benefits:
Hewlett-Packard - Palo Alto, Chevron Corp. - San Francisco, Intel Corp. - Santa Clara, Wells Fargo & Co. - San Francisco, PG&E Corp. - San Francisco, Cisco Systems - San Jose, Sun Microsystems - Mountain View, Gap Inc. - San Francisco, Oracle Corp. - Redwood Shores, Apple Computer - Cupertino, Applied Materials - Santa Clara, Charles Schwab & Co. - San Francisco, Clorox Co. - Oakland, Knight Ridder Newspapers - San Jose [R4.1].

5.

Courts & Tribunals

On 16 November 2015, the US Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California held “that domestic partners cannot be considered “spouses” for bankruptcy purposes following the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in California and throughout the country” [C5.7], [R5.6].

On 23 July 2013, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal of a federal district court ruling in the case of Golinski v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling which struck down Section 3 of DOMA, and affirming that a federal court employee must be allowed to add her same-sex spouse to her employer's health insurance plan [C5.5], [R5.4].

See also: Laws - USA - Federal - Civil Unions, Partners


On 24 May 2012, in a lawsuit filed against the California Public Employees' Retirement System by same-sex couples whose spouses were barred from enrolling in the federally approved insurance programme, Claudia Wilken, a district court judge for the northern district of California, ruled that congress acted unconstitutionally in discriminating against gay couples in the 1996 Defence of Marriage Act (Doma) [R5.3].

On 18 January 2011, U.S. district judge Claudia Wilken ruled that three California gay couples may proceed with a lawsuit against the federal government over their exclusion from the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), a long-term health care benefits program [R5.2].

In July 2010, Clay Greene, 78, an elderly gay man who was prevented from seeing his dying partner in the hospital social workers, won a settlement of $600,000 against Sonoma County's Public Guardian program [R5.1].

R1.16 SF Gate: San Francisco Family Law Firm Outlines How the Domestic Partnership Equality Act Adds to Domestic Partnership Rights 28 DEC 11
R1.15 PinkNews: California governor signs equal benefits law 07 SEP 11
R1.14 San Diego Gay Lesbian News: California Senate passes bill to boost equal benefits law for LGBT workers 09 MAY 11
R1.13 PRWeb: Heath-Newton LLP Releases Domestic Partnership Guide 23 SEP 13
R1.12 365Gay.com: Schwarzenegger expands unemployment benefits for gay couples 01 OCT 10
R1.11 The Advocate: California OK's Unemployment Benefits for Gay Partners 03 JUN 1`0
R1.10 The Advocate: California domestic partners can file joint tax returns 03 OCT 06
R1.9 Los Angeles Times: Domestic Partners Law Expands Gay Rights 20 SEP 03
R1.8 Associated Press: Lawmakers OK Bill Giving Domestic Partners Many Marriage Rights 03 SEP 03
R1.7 San Francisco Chronical: Senate OKs domestic partners' benefits 29 AUG 03
R1.6 Associated Press: California Says Contractors Must Offer Domestic Partner Benefits 10 OCT 03
R1.5 Associated Press: Domestic Partner Benefits Required for State Contracts 13 SEP 03
365gay.com: Domestic Partner Bill Reintroduced In California 03 DEC 02
R1.4 Sacramento Bee: New legislation would expand rights of California gay couples 29 JAN 03
R1.3 365gay.com: California Enacts Paid Family Leave Bill 24 SEP 02
R1.2 Associated Press: California Governor Signs Gay Rights Bill 14 OCT 01
L1.1 California Law: Family Code, Section 297–297.5 (Accessed 25 OCT 09).
R1.1 Los Angeles Times: Bill Expanding Domestic Partners' Rights Signed 15 OCT 01
R2.5 Bay City News Service: Davis Signs Bill On Domestic Partner Benefits 06 SEP 02
R2.4 San Diego Union-Tribune: Benefits OK'd for County Workers' Domestic Partners 19 JUL 01
R2.3 Bay City News Service: Gov. signs bill for domestic partner benefits in San Mateo Co. 23 JUL 03
R2.2 The Desert Sun: County OKs Domestic Partner Benefits 16 JAN 02
R2.1 Sacramento Bee: Partner Benefits Approved for County Workers 11 SEP 02
R3.5 Associated Press: Sebastopol City Council Approves New Policy 07 APR 04
R3.4 Associated Press: LA to City Contractors: Provide Benefits to Domestic Partners 13 FEB 03
R3.3 The Argus: OKs Police Domestic Benefit Plan 25 OCT 01
R3.2 Ventura County Star: "Bill Expanding Domestic Partners' Rights Signed" 27 SEP 00
R3.1 Bay City News: Court Upholds SF Equal Benefits Law 29 JUL 03
Bay City News Wire: Appeals Court Upholds SF Domestic Partners Law 14 JUN 00
R4.1 Human Rights Campaign: State of the Workplace for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Americans PDF 352.69kb SEP 00
C5.7 Memorandum Decision: In re Elaine Anne Villaverde and Karen Susan Hight No. 6:15-bk-16988-SY PDF 261.16kb, 21 OCT 15
R5.6 TheLegalIntelligencer (Registration): 'Domestic Partner' Not 'Spouse' Under Bankruptcy Code 22 NOV 15
C5.5 Order: K Golinski v. United States Office of Personnel Management No. 12-15388 PDF 60.19kb, 23 JUL 13
R5.4 The Advocate: Ninth Circuit Dismisses Appeal in Golinski DOMA Case 24 JUL 13
R5.3 The Guardian: Doma ruled unconstitutional for denying benefits to same-sex couples 25 MAY 12
R5.2 The Advocate: Gay Couples Can Sue for Benefits 20 JAN 11
R5.1 The Advocate: Gay Man Prevented From Seeing Dying Partner Wins Settlement 24 JUL 10

See also:
SDGLN: Same-sex relationships: Pre and post-marital/RDP agreements 20 OCT 11
SDGLN: Legal Ease: Gay and lesbian divorce 23 AUG 11
Discrimination, Retaliation Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 28 July 2016, Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1146, mandating that private universities who discriminate against LGBT students must publicly disclose their policies on gender identity and sexual orientation, requiring colleges to openly acknowledge any Title IX exemptions granted to them [R1.9].

On 26 September 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed 'AB1678: Women, minority, disabled veteran, and LGBT business enterprise procurement' into law effective 01 January 2015, requiring the Public Utilities Commission to extend procurement contract opportunities to certified LGBT-owned business enterprises [L1.8], [R1.7].

On 14 August 2013, the Youth Equality Act (SB 323, introduced 19 Feb 13) passed both the Assembly Tax and Revenue Committee 6-3 and Judiciary Committee 6-3 and, if passed by the remaining committees, the legislature and signed into law, will eliminate a sales and corporate tax exemption for youth groups that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or religious affiliation [L1.6].

On 14 July 2011, Governor Jerry Brown signed the Fair, Accurate, Inclusive, and Respectful Education Act into law. The legislation requires that the contributions of gays and gay rights to be included in textbooks, and adds sexual orientation to the state's existing antidiscrimination protections that prohibit bias in school activities, instruction, and instructional materials [R1.5].

On 05 July 2011, the Fair, Accurate, Inclusive, and Respectful Education Act (SB48) passed the Assembly 49–25 and heads for the Governor Brown's desk. If signed into law, the Bill ensures that the historical contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are accurately and fairly portrayed in instructional materials [R1.4].


On 31 May 2011, the Senate passed SB757, the Insurance Nondiscrimination Act which would, if passed by the Assembly and signed into law, eliminate an exemption in state law that enables out-of-state insurance companies to discriminate against same-sex couples [R1.3].


As at September 2000, California was one of 11 states to outlaw job [and housing] discrimination based on sexual orientation [R1.2].


In February 2010, politician Bonnie Lowenthal called for the repeal of Section 8050 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, which dates back to the 1950s and requires mental health officials to seek a cure for homosexuality [R1.1].

See: HOMOSEXUALITY, SODOMY

2.

Counties

Alameda, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Sonoma counties prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation [R1.2].

3.

Cities & Towns

Alameda, Berkeley, Brisbane, Cupertino, Daly City, Mountain View, Oakland, Pacifica, Palo Alto, San Francisco, San Jose cities prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation [R1.2].

4.

Courts & Tribunals

On 19 June 2017, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury ruled in favor of James Pearl, ordering the city to fork over $17.4 million in damages and compensation for bullying, homophobic abuse, harassment and discrimination. James Pearl is heterosexual [R4.32].

On 15 December 2016, the California Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment for Watts Healthcare Corporation, who Sharon Hardy sued alleging sexual orientation discrimination and gender discrimination in violation of state law. Hardy alleged that Wendell Carmichael, the Corporation's vice president of human resources, treated gay men, men in general and lesbians more favorably than heterosexual women, including her. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings [C4.31], [R4.30].

On 02 November 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cleared US Customs and Border Protection agent Frank Burnett of alleged civil rights violation and discrimination against administrative law judge William Kocol and architect Timothy Gajewski by singling them out at Los Angeles Airport on their return from a trip to Mexico because they were a same-sex couple. The district court properly dismissed the first cause of action on the basis of qualified immunity because plaintiffs failed to allege that defendant Burnett violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the conduct in question [C4.29], [R4.28].

On 29 April 2016, Superior Court Judge Halim Dhanidina invalidated the arrest of Rory Moroney, 50, on charges of lewd conduct and indecent exposure ruling that gay sex stings carried out by Long Beach police vice unit are discriminatory and ''indicative of animus toward homosexuals'' [R4.27].

On 15 December 2015, US District Judge Dean D Pregreson ruled 'that sexual orientation discrimination is not a category distinct from sex or gender discrimination. Thus, claims of discrimination based on sexual orientation are covered by Title VII and IX'. The Court found that Pepperdine University discriminated against dating same-sex basketball team members Haley Videckis and Layana White when the team coach Ryan Weisenberg and members of the coaching staff harassed and discriminated against Plaintiffs in an effort to force Plaintiffs to quit the team. The matter will proceed to trial [C4.26], [R4.25].

On 14 December 2015, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal upheld a determination by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Luis Lavin that the Los Angeles Unified School District's Commission on Professional Competence erred when it found a gay elementary school teacher who had been arrested in a park sting was “unfit to teach” and authorized termination of his employment [C4.24], [R4.23].

On 24 June 2014, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals the panel filed an order rejecting a sua sponte en banc call that failed to received a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges necessary to rehear the SmithKline Beecham v. Abbott Laboratories case, leaving in place the earlier judgment that in jury selection equal protection prohibits peremptory strikes based on sexual orientation [C4.22], [R4.21].

On 20 January 2014, the the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that striking someone from a jury pool because he or she is gay constitutes unlawful discrimination [C4.20], [R4.19].

On 20 December 2012, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that it was not unconstitutional or in violation of equal protection rights for the Boy Scouts of America to lease public land from the City of San Diego despite them banning gay people from being members or leaders [C4.18], [R4.17].

On 21 November 2012, the Judicial Council of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered San Francisco's federal court to pay employee Christopher Nathan's costs for insurance coverage for his husband Thomas Alexander, citing an increasing number of rulings that have declared Congress' ban on same-sex spousal benefits unconstitutional [C4.16], [R4.15].

On 03 April 2012, Chief US District Judge James Ware, acting as the administrator of the court's employee dispute-resolution program, ruled the denial of insurance coverage to Thomas Alexander, the same-sex spouse of Christopher Nathan, a federal court employee in San Francisco, was an act of discrimination, and ordered the chief clerk of the San Francisco federal court to reimburse Christopher Nathan for the past and future costs of buying insurance for his husband [R4.14].

On 19 March 2012, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal, letting stand a US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling filed 02 August 2011 (Case No. 09-55299) that the San Diego State university's denial of funding and recognition to student groups that discriminate on the basis of religion and sexual orientation did not violate the US Constitution [C4.13], [R4.12].

On 04 August 2011, in the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena defense attorneys argued that trial lawyers should be barred from dismissing potential jurors because of their sexual orientation. If successful such a ruling could extend constitutional protection from discrimination to homosexuality along with race, creed and gender – USA v. Daniel Osazuwa, Jr. Case 10-50109 [R4.11].

On 19 May 2011, before Judge George H. King in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, openly gay police Sgt. Ronald Crump who said he was subjected to derogatory remarks by his supervisor and commanding officer Lt. John Romero, and complained of retaliatory action, was awarded $1.1 million by a jury [C4.10], [R4.9].

On 14 October 2010, the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a verdict that awarded $34,300 in damages to four San Diego firefighters who claim they were required by their superiors to participate in the city's 2007 gay pride parade [R4.8].

In July 2010, Clay Greene, 78, an elderly gay man who was prevented from seeing his dying partner in hospital by social workers, won a settlement of $600,000 against Sonoma County's Public Guardian program [R4.7].


On 01 June 2009, Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne Chang ruled that California schools cannot discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity [R4.6].


On 29 April 2009, California's Supreme Court confirmed a lower-court ruling that said a private religious high school could expel gay students [R4.5].

In January 2009, the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled a Christian high school in California could expel or exclude students based on their sexual orientation [R4.4].


In July 2008, police officer Adam Bereki, 29, reached a settlement with the city of Huntington Beach, California, ending an antigay discrimination lawsuit in which he alleged that his peers harassed him by placing a gay escort ad in his locker, suggesting he was HIV-positive, and insinuating that he handled only gay sex crimes [R4.3].


In December 2005, a lesbian teen who was repeatedly disciplined by her school principal for displaying affection with her girlfriend won a key ruling in her lawsuit against an Orange County, Calif., school district. A federal judge ruled that School officials did not have a right to reveal the student's sexual orientation to her parents without her permission [R4.2].


In August 2005, California's highest court ruled that country clubs must offer gay members who are registered as domestic partners the same discounts given to married members - a decision that could apply to other businesses such as insurance companies and mortgage lenders [R4.1].

5.

Hospitals

In December 2009, Fresno’s Community Regional Medical Center agreed to revise its visitation policy after hospital staff refused to allow a woman to see her female partner [R5.1].

R1.9 TheAdvocate: California Passes Law Preventing Colleges From Discriminating Against LGBT Students 04 OCT 16
L1.8 AB-1678: Women, minority, disabled veteran, and LGBT business enterprise procurement 26 SEP 14
R1.7 HRC Blog: California Governor Signs Historic Bill for LGBT Business Owners into Law 30 SEP 14
L1.6 LegiScan: California Senate Bill 323 (Accessed 17 AUG 13)
R1.5 The Advocate: California Governor Signs Gay Education Bill 14 JUL 11
R1.4 The Advocate: California Legislature Passes Gay Education Bill 05 JUL 11
R1.3 SDGLN: California bill requires insurers to comply with state nondiscrimination law 01 JUN 11
R1.2 Human Rights Campaign: State of the Workplace for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Americans PDF 352.69kb SEP 00
R1.1 PinkPaper.com: Politician calls for anti-gay law to be thrown out 26 FEB 10
4. Courts & Tribunals
R4.32 Queerty: Straight dude ''in tears'' after winning $17.4 million in homophobic discrimination lawsuit 19 JUL 17
C4.31 Opinion: Hardy v. Watts Healthcare Corp. Cal. Ct. App., B267161 PDF 164.54kb 15 DEC 16
R4.30 SHRM: Reverse Sexual Orientation Discrimination Claim Gets Trial 03 JAN 17
C4.29 Memorandum: William G Kocol, Timothy A Gajewski v. The USA, Frank Burnett No. 14-56149 PDF 367.39kb 02 NOV 16
R4.28 CourthouseNewsService: Customs Agent Cleared in Snafu With Gay Couple 03 NOV 16
R4.27 TowelRoad: Judge Rules Gay Sex Stings Carried Out by Long Beach Police Are Discriminatory 29 APR 16
C4.26 Amended Order: Haley Videckis and Layana White v. Pepperdine University No. CV 15-00298 DDP (JCx) PDF 76.65kb, 15 DEC 15
R4.25 TheLosAngelesTimes: Judge rules sexual orientation discrimination falls under purview of landmark Title IX law 22 DEC 15
C4.24 Opinion: Rodriguez v. Commission on Professional Competence N258035 PDF 214.81kb 14 DEC 15
R4.23 ArtLeonardObservation: California Appeals Court Rules for Gay Teacher in Morality Discharge Dispute 01 JAN 15
C4.22 Order: Smithkline Beecham Corporation v. Abbott Laboratories Nos. 11-17357, 11-17373 PDF 93.66kb, 24 JUN 14
R4.21 SanJoseMercuryNews: Major gay rights ruling left intact 24 JUN 14
C4.20 Opinion: Smithkline Beecham Corporation v. Abbott Laboratories Nos. 11-17357, 11-17373 PDF 183.25kb, 21 JAN 14
R4.19 Court: Gay Juror was Taken Off Panel Improperly 21 JAN 14
C4.18 Opinion: Mitchell Barnes-Wallace v. City of San Diego and Boy Scouts of America 04-55732 PDF 189.22kb, 20 DEC 12
R4.17 PinkNews: Court rules that Boy Scouts can lease public land despite banning gay members and leaders 20 DEC 12
C4.16 Order: In the Matter of Christopher Nathan EDR No. 12-003 PDF 92.00kb, 21 NOV 12
R4.15 SFGate: Same-sex case ruling favors gay employee 24 NOV 12
R4.14 SFGate: Same-sex benefits denial is ruled discriminatory 05 APR 12
C4.13 Alpha Delta Chi-Delta Chapter, a Sorority at San Diego State University, et al., Petitioners v. Charles B. Reed, in His Official Capacity as Chancellor of the California State University, et al. No. 11-744
R4.12 The Advocate: Supreme Court: Antidiscrimination Ruling Will Stand 20 MAR 12
R4.11 Los Angeles Times: Potential jurors shouldn't be dismissed for being gay, court told 05 AUG 11
C4.10 United States District Court: Ronald Crump v. City of Los Angeles Case No. BC428491, 19 MAY 11
R4.9 365Gay.com: Gay Los Angeles officer awarded more than $1M 20 MAY 11
R4.8 The Advocate: Court Upholds Firefighters' Gay Pride Verdict 17 OCT 10
R4.7 The Advocate: Gay Man Prevented From Seeing Dying Partner Wins Settlement 24 JUL 10
R4.6 The Advocate: Court Upholds LGBT Protections for Students 02 JUN 09
R4.5 PinkNews.co.uk: California Supreme Court rules school can expel students for being gay 30 APR 09
R4.4 PinkNews.co.uk: US Christian School Wins Right to Expel Lesbian Pupils 28 JAN 09
R4.3 The Advocate: 'Cop Settles in Antigay Discrimination Suit 02 JUL 08
R4.2 The Advocate: Judge: Schools Can't Out Students to Their Parents 03 DEC 05
R4.1 The Advocate: High Court: Businesses Can't Deny Discounts to Gay Domestic Partners 03 AUG 05
R5.1 The Advocate: California Hospital to Change Antigay Visitation Rules 17 DEC 09
Estates, Inheritance, Property, Succession, Wills Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [PARTNERS] [TAXATION]
1.

State

In August 2002, the Legislature approved a bill granting inheritance rights to domestic partners registered with the Secretary of State [R1.3].

The bill allows registered domestic partners the same inheritance rights as married couples in cases where one partner dies without a will, trust or other estate plan.

The bill was signed into state law by Gov. Gray Davis and the measure came into effect 01 July 2003 [R1.2].


On 14 October 2001, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation allowing partners who register with the secretary of state's office to administer a partner's estate [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 18 September 2013, Superior Court of California Sonoma County Judge Nancy Case Shaffer approved a tentative ruling granting legal recognition to the marriage of Stacey Schuett and her late wife, Lesly Taboada-Hall, who were hastily married in a home ceremony 19 June, before the US Supreme Court restored the right of same-sex couples to wed in California. Schuett may now access pension and Social Security survivor's benefits [C2.7], [R2.6].

On 13 December 2012, First District Court of Appeal Justice James Lambden ruled that Antipas Konou who waived any interest in his partner's future property, prior to their marrying during the brief period that same-sex marriage was legal in California, could not claim to be a pretermitted spouse [C2.5], [R2.4].

On 03 May 2012, the California Court of Appeal established an important new legal protection for unmarried partners who are wrongfully prevented from inheriting property from each other when one partner dies, recognizing a new legal claim for intentional interference with an expected inheritance [C2.3], [R2.2].

On October 28, 2011, 2nd Circuit Judge Denny Chin, formerly on the US District Court for the Southern Division of New York, ruled in United States v. Peterson, 2011 WL 5110246 (S.D.N.Y.), that the longtime lover of a gay man convicted of wire fraud was entitled to half the interest in the couple's home under principles of California's community property law [R2.1].

R1.3 Bay City News: Domestic Partner Inheritance Bill Goes to Gov. for Signature 23 AUG 02
R1.2 Santa Cruz Sentinel: Law grants inheritance to domestic partners 12 SEP 02
R1.1 Associated Press: California Governor Signs Gay Rights Bill 14 OCT 01
C2.7 Superiod Court of California: Matter of Stacey Schuett and Lesly Taboada-Hall SPR-85880
R2.6 ThePressDemocrat: Judge grants legal recognition to Sebastopol women's marriage after legal battle 18 SEP 13
C2.5 Opinion: Estate of Philip Timothy Wilson A133972 (San Francisco City and County Super. Ct. No. PES-09-292102 PDF 179.82kb, 13 DEC 12
R2.4 Metropolitan News: Court of Appeal Says Estate Waiver Survived Same-Sex Marriage 17 DEC 12
C2.3 4th Appellate District, Division Three: Brent Beckwith v. Susan Dahl G044479, 03 MAY 12
R2.2 The Paramusport Post: California Court of Appeal Rules for Same-Sex Partner in Inheritance 05 MAY 12
R2.1 Lesbian / Gay Law Notes: Federal Court Rules Favorably on Community Property Claim of California Same-Sex Partner In Forfeiture Case PDF 423.20kb, 02 DEC 11 at 248
Gender Identity, Intersex,
Transgender, Transexual

[?]
Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [HEALTH MEDICAL] [PARENTING]>
1.

State

On 05 January 2017, m2f transgender Shiloh Quine underwent gender-reassignment surgery paid for by the state in what is believed to be the first such case in the United States, following a 07 August 2015 agreement to settle her Federal lawsuit. Quine, is serving a term of life without the possibility of parole after convictions in 1981 for murder, kidnapping and robbery. Under guidelines adopted in 2015 after the state's settlement with Quine, prisoners seeking to change their biological sex would need to be evaluated by medical and mental health professionals, and present their cases to a six-member committee of doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists [R1.22].

On 29 September 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill No. 1732 into law beginning 01 March. California is the first state in the nation to adopt legislation requiring that all single-occupancy restrooms in California businesses, government buildings, and other places of public accommodation be open to all genders [R1.21].

On 07 October 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law SB 703, that prohibits state agencies from entering into a contract in the amount of $100,000 or more with companies that fail to offer transgender employees the same health care coverage and benefits they provide all other workers. SB 703 takes effect on 01 January 2016 [R1.20].

On 26 September 2014, Governor Jerry Brown announced that he had signed AB1577, the "Respect After Death Act" that comes into effect in 01 July 2015. The act establishes the right of the deceased to have their gender identity properly recognized on death certificates [R1.19].

On 28 August 2014, the Assembly passed 67-4 Bill AB1577 that will when signed into law by Governor Brown, require an official filling out a death certificate to have regard to evidence that the deceased person had changed gender identity, including health records showing treatment for gender transition, court approval for a name change, an advanced healthcare directive or other documents [R1.18].

On 10 November 2013, a group calling itself “Privacy for All Students” appears to have acquired 620,000 signatures, more than the 500,000 signatures required to have AB1266, the law that protects the rights of transgender students, placed on the ballot in November 2014 [R1.17].

On 12 September 2013, Governor Jerry Brown reportedly signed into law Assembly Bill 1121 to make it safer and easier for transgender people to access legal name changes and identity documents that reflect their gender identity [R1.16].

On 06 September 2013, Senate amendments to Assembly Bill 1121 passed the legislature in a 58-20 vote. The Bill will provide transgender Californians with a more streamlined process for changing their names and gender markers on birth certificates [R1.15].


On 12 August 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1266 into law, taking effect 01 January 2014 [R1.14].

On 03 July 2013, the Senate passed 21-9 Assembly Bill 1266. The Bill now goes to the Governor [R1.13].

On 09 May 2013, Assembly Bill 1266 (introduced 22 February 2013) was passed 46-25. The Bill, which now goes to the Senate, would provide transgender students equal access to facilities and programs based on their gender identity [L1.12], [R1.11].


On 16 April 2013, the Assembly Committee on Judiciary passed AB 1121 (introduced 22 February 2013) that will, if it becomes law, help ensure that transgender people have access to identity documents that accurately reflect the name and gender that correspond to their gender identity. The bill will next go to the Assembly Appropriations Committee [R1.10].


On 09 April 2013, Department of Managed Health Care issued guidelines to expressly prohibit discrimination against transgender people in health insurance coverage, confirming that insurance providers in the state must provide coverage for medically necessary transition-related treatment for transgender patients [R1.9].


In September 2012, regulators directed health insurance companies regulated by the Department of Insurance to pay for a transgender person's hormone therapy, breast reduction, cancer screening or any other procedure deemed medically necessary if they cover it for patients who aren't transgender [R1.8].


On 09 October 2011, the Governor signed the Vital Statistics Modernisation Act (AB 433) into law making it easier for transgender people to get a revised birth certificate upon presentation of a medical certification from a doctor stating that they have undergone "clinically appropriate treatment". Also signed into law was Assembly Bill 887, also known as the Gender Nondiscrimination Act which bulks up employment, housing and other civil rights protections for all Californians, but especially for trans people [R1.7].

Previously:

On 30 August 2011, the Senate passed the Gender Nondiscrimination Act (AB 887) on a 25–13 vote, to strengthen existing protections against discrimination based on gender identity and expression. The Bill now goes Governor Jerry Brown for his signature [R1.6].

On 16 May 2011, the House passed the Gender Nondiscrimination Act (AB 887) on a 54–24 vote. If it passes the Senate and becomes law, it will strengthen employment, housing, and other civil rights protections for all people who face discrimination based on gender identity and expression [R1.5].


As at August 2001, a Californian who had undergone a sex change operation could obtain a new birth certificate by filing a petition for a new certificate with the court in his or her county of residence [R1.4].

The new certificates reflected gender and name changes.


On 02 August 2003, Governor Gray Davis signed AB 196, the bill amending the California Fair Employment and Housing Act [R1.3]. The measure comes into effect 01 January 2004

On 24 July 2003, the Senate voted 23–11 to add "gender identity or expression" to the dozen characteristics already protected under the state's Fair Employment and Housing Act [R1.2], the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the measure 4–2 on 03 July 2001 [R1.1].

2.

Cities & Towns

On 12 April 2012, Capt. Dave Lindsay, commander of the department's jail division announced that the Los Angeles Police Department will begin housing arrested transgender men and women in a women's jail by the end of the month, making it what administrators believe is the first police department in the country to do so [R2.4].

On 04 May 2010, Oakland Council voted to repeal an 1879 law banning people from dressing "in the attire of a person of the opposite sex". A second vote is necessary to complete the repeal process [R2.3].

In July 2003, San Diego City Council voted unanimously to add gender identity to the city's Human Dignity Ordinance, which prohibits discrimination in employment [R2.2].

In November 2002, San Jose City Council voted unanimously to add transgender people to the list of groups protected under the city's anti-discrimination policy [R2.1].

3.

Courts & Tribunals

On 28 April 2017, US District Judge Jon Tigar issued an order in a case brought by transgender inmate Shiloh Heavenly Quine requiring prison officials provide free undergarments that flatten the chest of transgender inmates at women's prisons and give transgender inmates at men's prisons access to bracelets, earrings, hair brushes and hair clips [R3.15].

On 26 September 2016, Superior Court Judge Robert B Atack granted the application of intersex Sara M Keenan to lawfully change her designated gender from female to ''non-binary'', becoming the second US citizen to do so after Oregonian Jamie Shupe on 10 June. The Court ordered the name of Sara M Keenan be changed to Kelly S Keenan [C3.14], [R3.13].

On 05 October 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed as moot an appeal of a federal judge's order requiring California prison officials to provide sex reassignment surgery to a transgender inmate Michelle-Lael Norsworthy, since she was recently released [C3.12], [R3.11].

On 07 August 2015, the State of California conceded that Shiloh Quine, who entered the California prison system in 1980 as Rodney, suffers severe gender dysphoria that can be treated only by physically conforming her body to her psychological gender and agreed to pay for a transgender inmate's sex reassignment operation in settlement of her Federal lawsuit (Quine v. Beard) [C3.10], [R3.9].

On 04 May 2015, an appeal in the m2f transgender Michelle-Lael Norsworthy case, against US District Judge Jon Tigar's denial of a request from the Attorney General for a stay, was filed in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [R3.8].

On 27 April 2015, US District Judge Jon Tigar denied a request from California Attorney General Kamala Harris to place a hold on an order requiring the Golden State to offer gender reassignment surgery to 51-year-old m2f transgender Michelle-Lael Norsworthy inmate convicted of second-degree murder [C3.7].

On 02 April 2015, US District Judge Jon Tigar ruled that in denying sex reassignment surgery to 51-year-old m2f transgender Michelle-Lael Norsworthy (birth name Jeffrey Bryan Norsworthy) the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation violated her constitutional rights. The Court ordered the department to provide her with sex change surgery [C3.6], [R3.5].

On 24 July 2013, the Department of Justice agreed with the Arcadia, California, School District that the district will support and assist in creating a safe, nondiscriminatory learning environment for students who are transgender or do not conform to gender stereotypes, amend policies and procedures and train administrators and faculty on preventing gender-based discrimination [R3.4].

On 21 September 2011, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco ruled that Lyralisa Stevens, a transgender inmate serving 50 years to life for murder at an all-male facility, is not entitled to a state-funded gender-reassignment surgery [C3.3], [R3.2].

In April 2009, the Court of Appeal ruled that trans people with California birth certificates who live in other states could change their birth certificates to reflect their real gender [R3.1].

R1.22 ReutersUS: California pays for inmate's gender reassignment surgery 06 JAN 16
R1.21 TheAdvocate: California Adopts Groundbreaking All-Gender Restroom Access Law 29 SEP 16
R1.20 O-blog-dee-o-blog-da: California Governor Signs Bill Ensuring Equal Benefits for Transgender Employees 07 OCT 15
R1.19 LGBTQ Nation: California governor signs bill allowing transgender status on death certificates 26 SEP 14
R1.18 Reuters US: California governor considers allowing gender identity on death certificates 28 AUG 14
R1.17 DailyQueerNews: Anti-LGBT groups acquire enough signatures to repeal California law protecting transgender students 11 NOV 13
R1.16 DailyQueerNews: Victory in California: Transgender Birth Certificate Bill Signed into Law 12 SEP 13
R1.15 The Advocate: California Legislature Passes Trans Birth Certificate Bill 07 SEP 13
R1.14 California Legislative Information: AB-1266 Pupil rights: sex-segregated school programs and activities (Accessed 13 AUG 13)
R1.13 GayStarNews: California passes transgender school participation bill 05 JUL 13
L1.12 Assembly Bill No. 1266 (Accessed 11 MAY 13)
R1.11 Huffington Post: Rights Bill Clears State Assembly 09 MAY 13
R1.10 SDGLN: Transgender identity bill passed by California Assembly panel 16 APR 13
R1.9 The Advocate: California Bans Health Insurance Discrimination Against Trans Patients 10 APR 13
R1.8 abcNEWS: Oregon, California Require Transgender Health Coverage 12 JAN 13
R1.7 PinkNews: California Transgender Bills Signed Into Law By Governor Jerry Brown 11 OCT 11
R1.6 The Advocate: California Senate Passes Increased Protections for Gender Identity and Expression 31 AUG 11
R1.5 PinkNews: California's transgender protection bill makes progress 19 MAY 11
R1.4 Sacremento Bee: Birth Record Bill is Vetoed 09 AUG 01
R1.3 Transgender Law and Policy Institute: California Becomes Fourth State to Enact Anti-Discrimination Protections for Transgender People 03 AUG 03
R1.2 Associated Press: Senate Bill Outlaws Transgender Bias 25 JUL 03
R1.1 San Francisco Chronicle: State Panel OKs Gender Protections 04 JUL 01
R2.4 Los Angeles Times: LAPD to house transgender arrestees in separate section 12 APR 12
R2.3 365Gay.com: 130-year-old cross-dressing ban repealed 07 MAY 10
R2.2 GenderPAC National News: "San Diego Passes Gender Rights" 01 AUG 03
R2.1 San Jose Mercury News: City council members unanimously approve anti-bias protections for transgender people 27 NOV 02
3. Courts & Tribunals
R3.15 MyrtleBeachOnline: Judge: California must allow transgender inmates' earrings 28 APR 17
C3.14 Decree Changing Name and Gender: Sara M Keenan No. 16 CV 02024 PDF 386.42kb 26 SEP 16
R3.13 NBCnews: Californian Becomes Second US Citizen Granted 'Non-Binary' Gender Status 26 SEP 16
C3.12 Opinion: Michelle-Lael B Norsworthy v. Jeffrey Beard, et al. No. 15-15712 PDF 72.46kb 05 OCT 15
R3.11 CourthouseNewsService: Appeal Over Transgender Inmate's Surgery Ends 05 OCT 15
C3.10 Joint Notice of Settlement Agreement: Shiloh Heavenly Quine v. Beard et al. No. C 14-02726 JST PDF 1.02MB 07 AUG 15
R3.9 LosAngelesTimes: In a first, California agrees to pay for transgender inmate's sex reassignment 10 AUG 15
R3.8 EdgeMediaNetwork: California Seeks Court Stay of Inmate's Sex Reassignment Surgery 05 MAY 15
C3.7 Order: Michelle-Lael B Norsworthy v. Jeffrey Beard, et al. No. 14-cv-00695-JST PDF 145.65kb, 27 APR 15
C3.6 Order Granting Motion: Michelle-Lael B Norsworthy v. Jeffrey Beard, et al. No. 14-cv-00695-JST PDF 235.28kb, 02 APR 15
R3.5 DailyNews: Judge orders California to pay for inmate’s sex change 02 APR 15
R3.4 Department of Justice: United States Reaches Agreement with Arcadia, California, School District to Resolve Sex Discrimination Allegations 24 JUL 13
C3.3 California Appellate Courts: In re Lyralisa Lavena Stevens A126466, 21 SEP 11
R3.2 The Advocate: 22 SEP 11
R3.1 PinkNews.co.uk: California allows trans people living in other states to amend birth certificates 15 APR 09
Hate Crimes Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [VIOLENCE]
1.

State

On 27 September 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed the “Voluntary Manslaughter” (Bill AB 2501) into Californian law, prohibiting the use of “gay panic” and “transgender panic” defenses to reduce murder charges to manslaughter in criminal trials, becoming the first State to do so [R1.3].

On 27 August 2014, the Assembly passed Bill AB2501 50-10 that will, when signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown, prevent defendants escaping murder charges by claiming they panicked when they discovered someone was gay or transgender [R1.2].

On 24 June 2014, the Assembly passed 50-18 the Voluntary Manslaughter Bill (AB-2501) that would eliminate the so-called “gay panic” and “trans panic” defenses, tactics used by defendants who claim their violent acts were triggered by the victim's sexual orientation or gender identity. The Bill has further stages to pass before being sent to the Governor [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 02 August 2012, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled that the plaintiff Michigan Christian ministers had not established standing to challenge the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which offers harsher punishments for individuals who commit violent acts on individuals due to their sexual orientation, upholding a previous ruling that found the law constitutional [C2.3], [R2.2].

On 08 June 2000, US District Judge Sandra Brown Armstrong ruled that a resolution of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors that condemned the "hateful rhetoric'' of an ad campaign of a group of Christian organisations, directed at persuading gay men and lesbians to change their lives, did not trespass on their First Amendment rights [R2.1]

R1.3 theWilliamsInstitute: California Governor Brown Signs Bill to Ban Use of "Transgender Panic" Defenses in Criminal Trials 27 SEP 14
R1.2 LGBTQ Nation: California Assembly approves ban on ‘gay panic’ defense, bill heads to governor 27 AUG 14
R1.1 HuffingtonPost: End the Gay-Transgender Panic Defense AB-2501 02 JUL 14
C2.3 Opinion: Gary Glenn & Ors v. Eric H Holder 10-2273 PDF 42.95kb, 02 AUG 12
R2.2 TPM: Appeals Court: Hate Crimes Act Doesn’t Suppress Anti-Gay Speech 02 AUG 12
R2.1 San Francisco Chronicle: Condemnation of Ad Supported by Court 09 JUN 00
Health, Health Insurance, Medical Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 05 January 2017, m2f transgender Shiloh Quine underwent gender-reassignment surgery paid for by the state in what is believed to be the first such case in the United States, following a 07 August 2015 agreement to settle her Federal lawsuit. Quine, is serving a term of life without the possibility of parole after convictions in 1981 for murder, kidnapping and robbery. Under guidelines adopted in 2015 after the state's settlement with Quine, prisoners seeking to change their biological sex would need to be evaluated by medical and mental health professionals, and present their cases to a six-member committee of doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists [R1.8].

On 08 October 2015, the Governor signed AB 374 (Health care coverage: prescription drugs) into law capping the amount an individual pays out-of-pocket at $250 for a single 30-day prescription with effect from 01 January 2017 [R1.7].

On 01 October 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 329 (Pupil instruction: Sexual health education) into law requiring sex education for students in grades seven to 12 to provide medically accurate and age-appropriate instruction on LGBT youth and families, and the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, HIV, and pregnancy [R1.7].

On 26 September 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill AB 496 into law, requiring health care providers across the state receive expanded training to better understand and accommodate the needs of LGBT residents [R1.6].

On 08 October 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB460 into law commencing January, amending the Insurance Code to prohibit insurers from withholding coverage for most fertility treatments based on “age, ancestry, color, disability, domestic partner status, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, marital status, national origin, sex or sexual orientation” [R1.5].

On 09 April 2013, Department of Managed Health Care issued guidelines to expressly prohibit discrimination against transgender people in health insurance coverage, confirming that insurance providers in the state must provide coverage for medically necessary transition-related treatment for transgender patients [R1.4].

On 30 September 2012, Governor Jerry Brown signed the Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Bill (SB 1172) into law effective 01 January 2013 (but see Courts & Tribunals), making it unlawful for any “mental health provider” to provide minors with therapy intended to change their sexual orientation, including efforts to “change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex” [R1.3].

On 28 and 30 August 2012, the Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Bill (SB 1172) was passed by the Assembly and the Senate respectively. Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign the legislation before the 30 September deadline. The bill prevents licensed psychologists and therapists from attempting to change the sexual orientation of anyone under the age of 18 [R1.2].

On 18 August 2012, both houses of the California legislature were reportedly working out the final language of the gay cure law. The Sexual Orientation Change Efforts, also known as SOCE (SB 1172) is expected to arrive on Governor Jerry Brown’s desk in September [R1.1].

See below Courts & Tribunals

2.

Cities & Towns

On 06 November 2012, the San Francisco Health Commission voted to provide equal health care to transgender patients covered by Healthy SF. The change was expected to be implemented in a few months [R2.1].

3.

Courts & Tribunals

On 01 May 2017, the US Supreme Court denied Christian Minister Donald Welch's challenge to the 2012 Californian law banning ''gay conversion'' therapy aimed at turning youths under age 18 away from homosexuality [C3.16], [R3.15].

On 07 August 2015, the State of California conceded that Shiloh Quine, who entered the California prison system in 1980 as Rodney, suffers severe gender dysphoria that can be treated only by physically conforming her body to her psychological gender and agreed to pay for a transgender inmate's sex reassignment operation in settlement of her Federal lawsuit (Quine v. Beard) [C3.14], [R3.13].

On 30 June 2014, the US Supreme Court declined to take up the appeals in the reparative therapy cases “Pickup v. Brown” and “Welch v. Brown”, leaving the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the law banning reparative therapy is a permissible regulation of the medical profession [C3.12], [R3.11].

On 29 January 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is letting stand a California law (SB 1171 - Sexual Orientation Change Efforts) that makes it illegal for LGBTI youth in the state to be forced into conversion therapies [C3.10], [R3.9].

On 29 August 2013, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld (3-0) the Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Bill (SB1172) that prohibits licensed mental health therapists from trying to change the sexual orientation of minors, saying the law does not violate the free speech rights of patients or professionals, or the fundamental rights of parents and the state has the right to prohibit treatment it deems harmful [C3.8], [R3.7].

On 21 December 2012, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order that the Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Bill signed in September by Governor Jerry Brown will not be allowed to go into effect before a hearing on whether it is legal. The parties have until mid-February to file written briefs on the case [C3.6], [R3.5].

On 21 November 2012, the Judicial Council of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered San Francisco's federal court to pay employee Christopher Nathan's costs for health insurance coverage for his husband Thomas Alexander, citing an increasing number of rulings that have declared Congress' ban on same-sex spousal benefits unconstitutional [C3.4], [R3.3].

On 04 December 2012, US District Judge Kimberly Mueller refused to block the Sexual Orientation Change Efforts law after concluding that opponents suing to overturn it were unlikely to prove the ban on "conversion" therapy unfairly tramples on their civil rights [R3.2].

On 03 December 2012 however, in a similar but separate lawsuit, US District Judge William Shubb found the First Amendment issues presented by the ban to be compelling, ordering the State to temporarily exempt the three plaintiffs named in the case before him [R3.2].

On 01 October 2012, the Pacific Justice Institute, a Christian legal group, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Sexual Orientation Change Effort Bill, alleging it violates the provisions of the US Constitution, including the right to privacy, freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion and seeking an injunction against the law coming into effect 01 January. [R3.1].

R1.8 ReutersUS: California pays for inmate's gender reassignment surgery 06 JAN 16
R1.7 BayAreaReporter: Brown signs LGBT, AIDS drug pricing bills 15 OCT 15
R1.6 WashingtonBlade: Sensitivity training required in California 09 OCT 14
R1.5 Gay couples in California to receive same access to insurance for fertility treatments as straights 11 OCT 13
R1.4 The Advocate: California Bans Health Insurance Discrimination Against Trans Patients 10 APR 13
R1.3 The New York Times: California Is First State to Ban Gay 'Cure' for Minors 30 SEP 12
R1.2 The Advocate: California: Conversion Therapy Ban Passes, Heads to Gov. Brown 31 AUG 12
R1.1 The Inquisitr: Gay Cure Law Headed To California Governor's Desk 18 AUG 12
R2.1 Huffington Post: San Francisco Offers Transgender Health Care As Part Of City's Universal Health Care Plan 08 NOV 12
3. Courts & Tribunals
C3.16 Certiorari Denied: 16-845 Welch, Donald, et al. v. Brown, Gov. of CA, et al. Order List: 581 U.S. PDF 65.36kb 01 MAY 17 at page 2
R3.15 HuffingtonPost: Supreme Court Keeps California's 'Gay Conversion' Therapy Ban In Place 01 MAY 17
C3.14 Joint Notice of Settlement Agreement: No. C 14-02726 JST PDF 1.02MB 07 AUG 15
R3.13 LosAngelesTimes: In a first, California agrees to pay for transgender inmate's sex reassignment 10 AUG 15
C3.12 Order List: 573 U.S.: Certiorari - Summary Dispositions Nos. 13-949, 13-1282 PDF 146.20kb, 30 JUN 14
R3.11 EqualityOnTrial: Supreme Court declines to hear challenges to California’s ban on LGBT 'conversion therapy' 30 JUN 14
C3.10 Order and Amended Opinion: David H Pickup & Ors v. Edmund G Brown & Ors. No. 12-17681 PDF 274.73kb, 29 JAN 14
R3.9 GayStarNews: Federal Appeal Court upholds California law banning gay conversion therapies for minors 29 JAN 14
C3.8 Opinion: David H Pickup et. al. v. Edmund G Brown et. al. No. 12-17681 PDF 170.29kb, 29 AUG 13
R3.7 Los Angeles Times: Court upholds law banning therapy to change sexual orientation 29 AUG 13
C3.6 Ninth Circuit: Pickup v. Brown, 12-17681 and Welch v. Brown, 13-15023
R3.5 SFGate: Court puts hold on gay conversion law 21 DEC 12
C3.4 Order: In the Matter of Christopher Nathan EDR No. 12-003 PDF 92.00kb, 21 NOV 12
R3.3 SFGate: Same-sex case ruling favors gay employee 24 NOV 12
R3.2 MercuryNews: California gay therapy ban sparks competing rulings 04 DEC 12
R3.1 Chicago Tribune: Lawsuit challenges California ban on gay conversion therapy for youth 02 OCT 12
HIV Aids Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [Health, Medical]
1.

State

In 2005, California passed a law that prevents insurers from denying organ transplants to members based on their HIV status [R1.5].


In September 2003, a new law to take effect in mid January 2003 requires all health maintenance organizations that operate in the state to refer HIV-positive patients to HIV/AIDS specialists [R1.4].


On 18 September 2002, subject to approval by federal officials, Californian law expanded the state's Medi-Cal coverage to include people with HIV infection that has not progressed to full-blown AIDS however, the law will not cover prescription drug costs [R1.3].


As at March 2002, knowingly infecting another person with HIV is a felony in California [R1.2].


From 1998, Californian law requires prosecutors to prove that anyone charged with exposing others to HIV acted with the deliberate intent of infecting sex partners, a condition some prosecutors say is nearly impossible to prove [R1.1].

2.

Cities & Towns

On 17 January 2012, the Los Angeles City Council passed an Ordinance requiring porn actors to wear condoms while performing [R2.2].

The ordinance will come into effect in 90 days and be enforced by police spot checks, the cost of which will be borne by pornographers [R2.1].

3.

Courts & Tribunals

In March 2002, a San Francisco superior court judge ordered former city health commissioner Ronald Hill to pay his ex-lover $5 million in damages for knowingly exposing him to HIV, which resulted in the man's acquiring the AIDS virus [R1.2].

R1.5 The Advocate: Woman With HIV Can't Be Denied Lifesaving Transplant 01 NOV 05
R1.4 The Advocate: California Law Requires HMOs to Offer Referrals to HIV Specialists 31 DEC 02
R1.3 The Advocate: California Governor Signs Bill Expanding Medi-Cal AIDS Coverage 20 SEP 02
R1.2 The Advocate: Former Health Commissioner Ordered to Pay Ex-lover for Exposing Him to HIV 29 MAR 02
R1.1 The Advocate: California Prosecutors Say HIV Law is Too Narrow 11 SEP 03
R2.2 GayStarNews: Los Angeles porn stars must wear condoms 18 JAN 12
R2.1 Pink News: LA to require condoms at porn shoots 18 JAN 12
Homosexuality, Sodomy Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 29 September 2010, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill to repeal a rarely enforced, 60–year–old antigay law requiring state officials to seek a cure for homosexuality [R1.4].

Previously:

On 23 August 2010, the Senate passed Bill AB 2199 Repeal of Discriminatory Code 36–0 to repeal a section of the Welfare and Institutions code (dating from the 1950s) that instructs the State Department of Mental Health to conduct research into the "causes and cures of homosexuality". The Bill now returns to the Assembly for a concurrence vote and will then go to the governor's desk [R1.3].

On 26 April 2010, the State Assembly approved 62–0 a bill to modify a decades-old law that classifies gays as sexual deviants, by removing all references to homosexuals in the provision that calls for research [R1.2].

In February 2010, politician Bonnie Lowenthal called for the repeal of Section 8050 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, which dates back to the 1950s and requires mental health officials to seek a cure for homosexuality [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 29 April 2016, Superior Court Judge Halim Dhanidina invalidated the arrest of Rory Moroney, 50, on charges of lewd conduct and indecent exposure ruling that gay sex stings carried out by Long Beach police vice unit are discriminatory and ''indicative of animus toward homosexuals'' [R2.5].

On 14 December 2015, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal upheld a determination by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Luis Lavin that the Los Angeles Unified School District's Commission on Professional Competence erred when it found a gay elementary school teacher who had been arrested in a park sting was “unfit to teach” and authorized termination of his employment [C2.4], [R2.3].

On 29 January 2015, on a 5-2 vote, the California Supreme Court overturned a 2006 ruling which held that all adults who have sex with minors 16 or 17 are “similarly situated” and therefore there is no reason to deny judges discretion as to whether to order registration of the offender in all such instances. Now, in cases involving 16, 17-year-olds, judges can waive ordering registration of the offender on the sex offender register when vaginal intercourse is involved, but not in the case of sodomy or oral sex [C2.2], [R2.1].

R1.4 The Advocate: Schwarzenegger Repeals Antigay Law 29 SEP 10
R1.3 365Gay.com: California legislature approves removing gay 'cure' language 23 AUG 10
R1.2 365Gay.com: California Assembly modifies law seeking to cure gays 27 APR 10
R1.1 PinkPaper.com: Politician calls for anti-gay law to be thrown out 26 FEB 10
2. Courts & Tribunals
R2.5 TowelRoad: Judge Rules Gay Sex Stings Carried Out by Long Beach Police Are Discriminatory 29 APR 16
C2.4 Opinion: Rodriguez v. Commission on Professional Competence N258035 PDF 214.81kb 14 DEC 15
R2.3 ArtLeonardObservation: California Appeals Court Rules for Gay Teacher in Morality Discharge Dispute 01 JAN 15
C2.2 Opinion: James Richard Johnson v. Department of Justice S209167 PDF 407.46kb, 29 JAN 15
R2.1 GayCityNews: California Supreme Court Revives Differential Sex Offender Registry Rules 05 FEB 15
Marriage Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 01 July 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 1005. The Bill will alter the legalese of multiple California code sections to more gender-neutral language. Words like 'husband' and 'wife' will be changed to 'spouse' [R1.15].

On 04 July 2014, Governor Gerry Brown signed Bill SB1306 effective 01 January 2015. The law replaces family code references to husband and wife with the word spouse and also removes limits on recognizing same-sex marriages performed out of state [R1.14].

On 30 August 2013, following the US Supreme Court same-sex marriage decision, director of the adult institutions division for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations Michael Stainer issued a memo stating that gay or bisexual inmates will only be allowed to marry same-sex partners who are not incarcerated and only during prison ceremonies [R1.13].

On 28 June 2013, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the stay in the Kristin Perry, et al v. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., et al matter is dissolved effective immediately thus allowing the immediate resumption of same-sex marriages [C2.57], [R2.56].

See also:

Heath-Newton LLP:

On 26 June 2013, the US Supreme Court released a 5-4 decision dismissing the Prop 8 same-sex marriage case ruling the proponents do not have standing, allowing resumption of same-sex marriages in California if proponents do not seek a re-hearing within 25 days, after which the 9th Circuit Court must issue a dismissal order and lift the stay on the Walker ruling [C2.55], [R2.54].

On 09 October 2011, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB651 into law (effective January 2012) authorizess a judgment for dissolution, nullity, or legal separation of a marriage between persons of the same sex to be entered if the marriage was entered in California and neither party to the marriage resides in a jurisdiction that will dissolve the marriage [L1.12], [R1.11].

On 06 May 2010, the State Assembly passed the Separation Equity Act (AB 2700) in a 44–21 vote. The bill would, if signed into law, create a consolidated form and procedure to dissolve both a civil marriage and domestic partnership [R1.10].

On 01 January 2010, legislation came into force ensuring 18000 Californian marriages and all same-sex marriages which took place in other states before 5 November 2008, retain their legal status. The bill also clarifies that couples who marry in other states in future will be able to benefit from the same advantages and protections that California provides to heterosexual married couples [R1.9].

In October 2009, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger approved a measure recognizing legal same-sex marriages performed outside the jurisdiction however, couples would only be legally recognized in the same manner as California domestic partners [R1.8].

On 26 May 2009, in a 6–1 decision, the Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 which amended the state constitution limiting marriage to opposite sex couples [C2.10], [R1.7].

The 18,000 gay and lesbian couples that wed after the Supreme Court's original decision in May 2008, which established equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, will be allowed to stay married [R1.7].

Previously:

It was unclear whether those gay couples who married in Canada or Massachusetts before the 04 November 2008 passage of Prop 8 are still married under California law.


On 04 November 2008, voters agreed to Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage [R1.6].

Jerry Brown, the California Attorney General, is reported as saying: "I believe that marriages that have been entered into subsequent to the May 15th Supreme Court opinion will be recognised by the California Supreme Court [R1.6].

The validity of the ban was challenged in the California Supreme Court. See [R2.1] et seq.

Unlike the law in Massachusetts, California's law did not limit marriages to state residents.

On 04 August 2010, Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional.

See: 2. Courts & Tribunals


In September 2007, for the second time in three years, the Californian Legislature has carried a bill allowing same-sex unions. Governor Arnold Schwarzeneger, however, vetoed a similar bill in 2005, citing a 2000 poll indicating that voters wanted marriage limited to a man and a woman, and is expected to do so again [R1.5].


In September 2005, the California Legislature became the first legislative body in the US to approve same-sex marriages, overcoming two earlier defeats in the Assembly with a 41–35 vote [R1.4]. However, when the bill (AB849) was sent to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger he refused to sign it, his press secretary asserting that the Governor believed that the courts are the venue for this decision to be made.


In April 2004, Bill AB1967 would amend the state Family Code to define marriage as between "two persons," instead of between a man and a woman and legalize gay marriage. The Bill cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee, its first test [R1.3].


In 2001, a measure to establish civil unions in California, AB 1338, was introduced by Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood), but did not get official scrutiny in the state house until January [R1.2].

Anticipating an uproar, Koretz convened a series of informational hearings to explain the concept to the public and fellow lawmakers.


In March 2000, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 22, the California Defense of Marriage Act, written by Sen. Pete Knight, R-Palmdale. The 14-word act reads: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California" [R1.1].


See also: 2. Courts & Tribunals

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 06 August 2014, Judge Dianna Gould-Saltman in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles denied Elayne Miller's request to find the 2003 Louisiana marriage between her and f2m transgender Jake Miller (aka Buck Angel) void or voidable (so as to avoid a claim for spousal maintenance) [C2.71], [R2.70].

On 18 September 2013, Superior Court of California Sonoma County Judge Nancy Case Shaffer approved a tentative ruling granting legal recognition to the marriage of Stacey Schuett and her late wife, Lesly Taboada-Hall, who were hastily married in a home ceremony 19 June, before the US Supreme Court restored the right of same-sex couples to wed in California. Schuett may now access pension and Social Security survivor's benefits [C2.69], [R2.68].

On 14 August 2013, the California Supreme Court again rejected a legal challenge by Proposition 8's proponents to stop same-sex couples' weddings who argued that only an appellate court should be able to overturn a statewide law [R2.67].

On 23 July 2013, the Supreme Court en banc denied a request by San Diego County Clerk Ernest Dronenburg Jr. to immediately halt same-sex marriages in the state [C2.66], [R2.65].

On 19 July 2013, San Diego County Clerk Ernest Dronenburg Jr. filed a petition asking the California Supreme Court to halt same-sex marriages in the state insisting that they are still illegal. The Court on 15 July denied a separate request by backers of Proposition 8 [C2.64], [R2.63].

On 15 July 2013, the California Supreme Court rejected a request by ProtectMarriage, the sponsors of the 2008 ballot measure, to stop the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples while considering the group's contention that a federal judge's injunction against the marriage ban did not apply statewide. The court is not expected to rule on the group's petition until August, at the earliest [R2.62].

On 11 July 2013, the ProtectMarriage group filed a petition in the Supreme Court of California seeking an immediate stay on the issuance of marriage licenses [C2.61], [R2.60].

On 30 June 2013, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy denied a request from Proposition 8 supporters to halt the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses in California without providing any reasons [R2.59].

On 29 June 2013, opponents of gay marriage petitioned the Supreme Court to immediately reinstate a 5-year-old ban on same-sex matrimony in California, saying a federal appeals court had acted prematurely in removing the prohibition on gay nuptials. The 9th Circuit acted under its own "broad discretion" to issue its stay in the first place and it is believed there is no prohibition against lifting the stay [R2.58].

On 28 June 2013, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the stay in the Kristin Perry, et al v. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., et al matter dissolved effective immediately thus allowing the immediate resumption of same-sex marriages [C2.57], [R2.56].

On 26 June 2013, the US Supreme Court released a 5-4 decision dismissing the Prop 8 same-sex marriage case ruling the proponents do not have standing, allowing resumption of same-sex marriages in California if proponents do not seek a re-hearing within 25 days, after which the 9th Circuit Court must issue a dismissal order and lift the stay on the Walker ruling [C2.55], [R2.54].

On 28 February 2013, the Administration filed a brief in Hollingsworth v. Perry that rebuts “… the central argument that Proposition 8 advances an interest in responsible procreation and child-rearing because only heterosexual couples can produce “unintended pregnancies” and because the “overriging purpose” of marriage is to address that reality by affording a stable institution for procreation and child-rearing …” [C2.53], [R2.52].

On 07 January 2013, the US Supreme Court set the Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al. matter down for argument on 26 March 2013 [C2.50]. A decision is expected in June 2013.

On 07 December 2012, the Supreme Court indicated that it will hear the challenge to the California marriage ban, called Proposition 8 (Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al.), and another by an elderly lesbian widow, Edith Windsor, against the Defense of Marriage Act. A hearing is expected in March and a decision in June 2013 [C2.50], [R2.51].

On 24 September 2012, the US Supreme Court distributed the case of Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al. for a conference of the justices meeting privately that will decide whether the full Court will review the case [C2.50], [R2.49].

On 27 August 2012, Judge James Ware issued an order under which same-sex couples will be allowed to marry in California – but the Supreme Court needs to decide whether it will hear an appeal of the case before the order will go into effect [C2.48], [R2.47].

On 02 August 2012, consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in the case of Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al., in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondents Perry, Stier, Katami, and Zarillo [C2.46].

On 30 July 2012, a Petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al. was filed. (Response due August 31, 2012) [C2.46].

On 05 June 2012, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced that an 11-judge panel would not hear an appeal of a decision that struck down California's ban on gay marriage. The Proposition 8 proponents have 90 days to consider whether to appeal the case to the US Supreme Court. In the meantime the decision is stayed, or on hold, during this time [C2.45], [R2.44].

On 21 February 2012, Attorneys defending California's same-sex marriage ban filed a petition, seeking full 9th Circuit review of an appeals panel ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional [C2.43], [R2.42]. Imperial County Clerk Chuck Storey filed a Motion to Intervene as Defendant-Appellant [C2.41].

On 07 February 2012, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld 2–1 the judgment of former Chief US Judge Vaughn Walker, in the matter of Perry v. Brown, case numbers 10-16696 and 11-16577 that Proposition 8 approved by voters in November 2008 and banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. The Court denied the motion to vacate the lower court ruling [C2.40], [R2.39].

On 17 November 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that Proposition 8 proponents had standing to defend the matter on appeal [C2.38], [R2.37].

On 08 November 2011, an Amici Curiae brief was filed in the Ninth Circuit Court opposing the appeal in Kristin M Perry et al v. Edmund G Brown et al on the grounds that District Court Chief Judge James Ware's ruling that invalidated Proposition 8 was itself invalid as he was gay, and in a long-term relationship [C2.36], [R2.35].

On 06 September 2011, the State Supreme Court heard arguments pro and con as to whether sponsors of ballot initiatives have the right to defend them in court. Commentators suggest the Court may rule that they do. A ruling is expected within 90 days [R2.34].

On 28 July 2011, the California Supreme Court had reportedly scheduled a 06 September hearing to consider whether ballot initiative sponsors have authority to fight court rulings on their measures if the governor and attorney general refuse to appeal [R2.33].

On 24 June 2011, a Notice of Appeal against Judge James Ware's denial of the motion to vacate the judgment of Judge Vaughn Walker was filed [C2.32], [R2.31].

On 14 June 2011, Judge James Ware in the US District Court for the Northern District of California denied the defendant-intervenors' motion to vacate the judgment of Judge Vaughn Walker that found Proposition 8 unconstitutional [C2.30], [R2.29].

On 23 March 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco denied a motion to lift the stay on same-sex marriages in California pending an appeal of a federal decision that reversed Proposition 8, the state's 2008 voter-approved marriage equality ban [C2.28], [R2.27].

On 17 March 2011, the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) and its legal team filed a reply brief supporting a motion in the Ninth Circuit asking that the Court immediately lift an order preventing gay and lesbian couples from marrying in California [R2.26], [C2.25].

On 01 March 2011, California's supreme court refused to expedite a hearing crucial to the marriage ban being lifted [R2.24].

On 01 March 2011, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris asked the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to dismiss its order prohibiting same-sex marriages until the appeal case is resolved, arguing that as long as same-sex couples are being denied the right to marry, "the due process and equal protection rights of same-sex couples will continue to be violated, perpetuating unconstitutional discrimination" [R2.23].

On 04 January 2011, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sought guidance from the Supreme Court as to whether antigay groups have standing to appeal a federal judge's decision that struck down Proposition 8 [C2.22], [R2.21].

On 15 November 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit announced that oral arguments in the Proposition 8 lawsuit were set to be heard on 06 December [R2.20].

On 24 September 2010, the States of Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming filed amicus brief opposing gay marriage in the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals [R2.19].

On 16 August 2010, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit comprising Judges Edward Leavy, Michael Daly Hawkins and Sidney R. Thomas, extended a stay on same-sex marriages until it decides whether a ban on such unions is constitutional [R2.18].

On 13 August 2010, Attorney General Jerry Brown filed papers with the 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals saying same-sex marriages in the state should begin again as quickly as possible [R2.17].

On 05 August 2010, a formal appeal against Judge Vaughn Walker's decision striking down Prop. 8 and formally filed [R2.16].

On 04 August 2010, US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker found Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional. Attorneys arguing on behalf of Proposition 8 said they would appeal the decision and have already petitioned for a stay to prevent a window of legal gay marriage in California [C2.15], [R2.14].

On 11 January 2010, San Francisco federal district court Judge Vaughn Walker was expected to commence hearing the case that will determine whether the US constitution allows states to ban gay marriage [C2.13], [R2.12].

On 26 May 2009, in a 6–1 decision, the Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 which amended the state constitution limiting marriage to opposite sex couples [C2.11].

In January 2009, forty bar associations and legal groups across the US called on the California Supreme Court to invalidate Proposition 8 [R2.10].

In January 2009, Google filed an amicus brief in challenge to California Proposition 8 [R2.9].

In December 2008, California Attorney General Jerry Brown in a surprise move, filed a last-minute brief with the California Supreme Court, offering a novel argument for overturning the controversial law Prop 8 [R2.8].

Previously

In November 2008, the Supreme Court agreed to hear three challenges to the ban on same-sex marriage that passed into law on 04 November. The Court's decision is expected in January [R2.7].


In July 2008, the California supreme court refused to hear a case seeking to keep an initiative that would ban gay marriage off the November ballot. The justices' decision not to take up the case means Proposition 8 will stay on the ballot barring further legal action [R2.6].

On 17 June 2008, in a brief ruling issued as gay marriages began in full swing around the state, the three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal in San Francisco refused the request of the Florida-based "traditional values" group Liberty Counsel to block same-sex weddings until voters could decide the issue on the November ballot [R2.5].

In May 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that a ban on gay marriage was unlawful , effectively leaving same-sex couples in America's most populous state free to tie the knot in a landmark ruling [R2.4].

Previously:

On 08 April 2008, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge James Warren declined to allow gay marriage opponents The Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Educational Fund and Alliance Defense Fund to intervene and argue against gay marriage in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of a California law defining marriage between a man and woman [R2.3].

Judge James Warren said the groups would not be harmed however the litigation ends.

In March 2008, the Supreme Court heard arguments over whether to allow same-sex couples to marry. It was the third time the matter was brought before the courts since 2004 (when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom issued 4,037 gay marriage licenses between February 12 - March 11, before the courts ordered a stay on further licenses being issued) [R2.2].

On 15 March 2008, Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ruled that state laws limiting marriage as an exclusive union between a man and a woman violated a constitutional right to equal treatment for citizens, including gays and lesbians [R2.1].

3.

Prisons

In September 2008, the Californian Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was looking at guidelines which would allow inmates to marry non-inmates [R3.1].

1. State
R1.15 SantaBarbara Independent: Brown Signs Bill to Recognize Marriage Equality in Language 15 JUL 16
R1.14 SFGate: Governor signs bill recognizing legal gay marriage 07 JUL 14
R1.13 San Jose Mercury News: California clears same-sex weddings for prison inmates 04 SEP 13
L1.12 Legislature: SB651: An act to amend … the Family Code, relating to family law
R1.11 Huffington Post: Gay Divorce: SB651 Opens California Divorce Courts To Non-Residents 12 OCT 11
R1.10 Equality California: Assembly Passes Bill Eliminating Barriers to Dissolve Marriages, Domestic Partnerships 06 MAY 10
R1.9 PinkNews.co.uk: Senator succeeds in validating gay marriages before Proposition 8 31 DE 09
R1.8 The Advocate: Governor OK's Out of State "Marriage" Bill 12 OCT 09
R1.7 The Age: Gay marriage ban upheld 28 MAY 09
R1.6 PinkNews.co.uk: California's Same-sex Couples Assured Their Marriages Are Still Legal 06 NOV 08
R1.5 MCV: Governor Targets Gay Marriage 13 SEP 07
R1.4 The Age: California Approves Gay Marriage Bill 07 SEP 05
The Advocate: Schwarzenegger Vetoes Same-sex Marriage Bill 30 SEP 05
R1.3 San Jose Mercury News: Assembly Committee Backs Gay Marriage 20 APR 04
R1.2 Los Angeles Times: Bill Expanding Domestic Partners' Rights Signed 15 OCT 01
R1.1 Sacremento Bee: Same-sex Unions OK, Expert Says: A bill Affecting Gay and Lesbian Couples Would Not Violate the Knight Act, He Says 25 OCT 01
2. Courts & Tribunals
C2.71 Opinion: Jake Millar v. Elayne Angel No. GD 053180 PDF 1.74MB, 06 AUG 14
R2.70 TransgenderLawCenter: Marriages of Transgender People Ruled Valid by Courts in Arizona and California 13 AUG 14
C2.69 Superiod Court of California: Matter of Stacey Schuett and Lesly Taboada-Hall SPR-85880
R2.68 ThePressDemocrat: Judge grants legal recognition to Sebastopol women's marriage after legal battle 18 SEP 13
R2.67 The Advocate: Prop 8 Proponents Fail To Halt Marriage ­ Again 14 AUG 13
C2.66 Order: Ernest J Dronenburg v. Edmund G Brown No. S212172 PDF 25.94kb, 23 JUL 13
R2.65 GayStarNews: For the second time in nine days, California Supreme Court refuses to halt gay marriages 24 JUL 13
C2.64 Petition: Ernest J Dronenburg v. Edmund G Brown No. S212172 PDF 2.67MB, 19 JUL 13
R2.63 GayStarNews: San Diego County Clerk asks California Supreme Court to halt gay marriages 20 JUL 13
R2.62 Los Angeles Times: Prop. 8: California Supreme Court refuses to stop gay weddings 15 JUL 13
C2.61 Petition: Petition: Hollingsworth v. O'Connell and Brown PDF 498.52kb, 11 JUL 13
R2.60 GayStarNews: Proposition 8 sponsors asking court to halt gay marriages in California 13 JUL 13
R2.59 The Advocate: Justice Kennedy Shuts Down Prop. 8 Backers 30 JUN 13
R2.58 Chicago Tribune: Supreme Court petitioned to reimpose California gay marriage ban 29 JUN 13
C2.57 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: Kristin Perry, et al v. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., et al No. 10-16696 PDF 57.96kb, 28 JUN 13
R2.56 Bloomberg: California Same-Sex Marriages Resume as Court Lifts Ban 29 JUN 13
C2.55 Opinion: Dennis Hollingsworth et al v. Kristin M Perry et al No. 12-144 Word 169.09kb, 25 JUN 13
R2.54 The Advocate: Doma Unconstitutional; California Ban on Marriage Dead 26 JUN 13
C2.53 Brief: Brief for the United States as amicus curiae supporting respondents PDF 182.78kb, 28 FEB 13
R2.52 Yahoo! News - The Ticket: Argument against gay marriage in California hinges on accidental pregnancies 04 MAR 13
R2.51 The Advocate: Supreme Court to Hear Prop 8, DOMA Cases 07 DEC 12
C2.50 US Supreme Court: Dennis Hollingsworth et al. v. Kristin M. Perry, et al. (Accessed 08 SEP 12)
R2.49 Prop8 Trial Tracker: Prop 8, DOMA cases have been distributed for September 24 conference at the Supreme Court 05 SEP 12
C2.48 Order Closing Case: Kristin M Perry v. Arnold Schwarznegger C 09-02292 JW PDF 38.84kb, 27 AUG 12
R2.47 BuzzFeed: Trial Judge Orders Prop 8 Case Closed, Outcome Hinges On Supreme Court Decision 27 AUG 12
C2.46 US Supreme Court: Dennis Hollingsworth, et al., Petitioners v. Kristin M. Perry, et al. No 12-144 (Accessed 08 AUG 12
C2.45 Order: Kirsten M Perry & Ors v. Edmund G Brown 10-16696 PDF 93.74kb, 03 JUN 12
R2.44 GayLawNet: Ninth Circuit Order: Denial of Petition for Rehearing En Banc in Prop. 8 case 06 JUN 12
C2.43 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: Applicants' Petition for Rehearing En Banc PDF 200.65kb, 21 FEB 12
R2.42 KeenNewsService: Prop 8 appeal heading to full circuit 21 FEB 12
C2.41 9 Circuit Court of Appeals: Motion to Intervene as Defendant-Appellant PDF 125.42kb, 21 FEB 12
C2.40 Opinion: Perry & Ors v. Brown & Ors PDF 481.97kb, 07 FEB 12
R2.39 GayLawNet: Proposition 8 unconstitutional. Same-sex Couple have a right to get married 08 FEB 12
C2.38 Opinion: Kristin M Perry et al v. Edmund G Brown et al PDF 342.30kb, 17 NOV 11
R2.37 GayLawNet: Propostion 8 supporters have standing to defend the initiative US (CA) 18 NOV 11
C2.36 Amici Curiae brief: Kristin M Perry et al v. Edmund G Brown et al 08 NOV 11
R2.35 SDGLN: LGBT equality groups urge Ninth Circuit to reject attack on Proposition 8 trial judge 08 NOV 11
R2.34 Los Angeles Times: State justices seem to favor allowing proponents to defend Prop. 8 06 SEP 11
R2.33 MercuryNews: California gay marriage ban case to be heard Sept. 6 28 JUL 11
C2.32 US District Court: Notice of Appeal PDF 384.66kb, 23 JUN 11
R2.31 The Advocate: Prop. 8 Supporters Appeal Ruling on Walker 27 JUN 11
C2.30 US District Court: Order Denying Defendant Intervenors' Motion to Vacate Judgment PDF 77.46kb, 14 JUN 11
R2.29 The Sacremento Bee: Gay judge's same-sex marriage ruling upheld 14 JUN 11
C2.28 US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Order Denying Motion to Vacate Stay Pending Appeal PDF 35.86kb, 23 MAR 11
R2.27 The Advocate: Stay on California Gay Marriages Remains 23 MAY 11
R2.26 LGBTQ Nation: Attorneys file final brief asking appeals court to lift stay on Prop 8 ruling 19 MAR 11
C2.25 American Foundation for Equal Rights: Reply in support of motion to vacate stay pending appeal of plaintiff-Appellees Kristin M Perry et al PDF 143.43kb, 17 MAR 11
R2.24 The Advocate: Court: No Expedited Prop. 8 Hearing 01 MAR 11
R2.23 LAist: Attorney General Asks Court to Allow Same Sex Marriages to Resume 01 MAR 11
C2.22 US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Order Certifying a Question to the Supreme Court of California PDF 113.05kb, 04 JAN 11
R2.21 The Advocate: 9th Circuit Wants Help With Prop. 8 04 JAN 11
R2.20 The Advocate: Court Sets Schedule for Prop. 8 Oral Arguments 16 NOV 10
R2.19 The Advocate: Gay Marriage Opposition Brief Filed 25 SEP 10
R2.18 The New York Times: California Gay Marriage on Hold as Case Is Appealed 16 AUG 10
R2.17 The Advocate: Attorney General Brown: Allow Marriages to Resume 13 AUG 10
R2.16 The Advocate: Formal Prop. 8 Appeal Filed 05 AUG 10
C2.15 US District Court: Perry v. Schwarzenegger PDF342.64kb 04 AUG 10
R2.14 365Gay.com: Prop 8 unconstitutional: Ballot measure overturned 04 AUG 10
C2.13 United States District Court for the Northern District of California: Hollingsworth, Dennis, et al -v- Perry, Kristin M., et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-02292
R2.12 PinkNews.co.uk: Court case on California marriage ban to be heard next week 05 JAN 10
C2.11 Supreme Court of California: Strauss v. Horton, Tyler v. State of California and City & County of SF v. Horton PDF 484kb 26 MAY 09
R2.10 MCV: US Lawyers Fight Prop 8 29 JAN 09
R2.9 Lawyers Weekly: Google Supports Gay Marriage 30 JAN 09
R2.8 Realjock.com: California Attorney General Challenges Prop 8 in Court 23 DEC 08
R2.7 MCV: Court to Rule on Prop 8 27 NOV 08
R2.6 The Advocate: Court Rejects Suit Challenging California Marriage Amendment 17 JUL 08
R2.5 The Advocate: Appeals Court Refuses to Stop Gay Weddings 18 JUN 08
R2.4 AFP: California Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban 16 MAY 08
R2.3 Associated Press: Judge Declines Outside Intervention in Gay Marriage Lawsuits 08 APR 04
R2.2 MCV: Final chance for Queer Weddings 13 MAR 08
R2.1 Agence France-Presse: Judge Rules in Favour of Gay Marriage 15 MAR 05
R3.1 MCV: Prisoners' Wedding Bells 04 SEP 08

See also SDGLN: Legal Ease: Gay and lesbian divorce 23 AUG 11
Parenting, Adoption, Fostering Legislation/Cases/Documents/References
1.

State

On 10 October 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 731 into law with effect from 01 January 2016. SB731 ensures that all foster youth, including those who identify as transgender, are placed in appropriate homes where they feel safe and accepted. It requires caregivers tasked with placing foster youth in homes to take a young person's gender identity into consideration when making this critical decision [R1.17].

On 20 August 2014, the legislature approved AB 1951, a bill that will, when signed by Governor Jerry Brown, amend the Health and Safety Code and modernize birth certificates to more accurately reflect families in which parents are of the same gender by allowing parents to identify themselves as father, mother or parent when a child is born - effective 01 January 2016 [R1.16].

On 08 May 2014, the Assembly passed AB1951(51-13) that updates birth certificates to allow parents to identify as a mother, father or parent. The Bill has yet to pass the Senate before the Governor signs it into law [R1.15].

On 04 October 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 274 into law allowing the state to recognize more than two legal parents for children and enabling same-sex couples (who will have primary guardianship) to choose to keep a third opposite-sex biological parent in their child's life [R1.14].

Previously:

On 30 September 2012, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 1476 that would have provided protections for children with more than two parents, explaining he was sympathetic to the families where this applies but needed more time to consider the issue [D1.13], [R1.12].

On 27 August 2012, in a 51–26 vote, lawmakers approved SB1476 which, if signed into law, would allow judges to legally recognize multiple parents when it is in a child's best interest to have more than two parental relationships. To qualify as a parent, adults would have to raise the child as their own. Stepparents and parents' boyfriends or girlfriends would not qualify [R1.11].


On 05 August 2010, Governor Jerry Brown signed the Protection of Parent-Child Relationships Act (AB 1349) into law, strengthening the legal rights of non-biological parents allowing courts leeway in cases where there is both a non-biological parent who has an established relationship with a child and a man who has signed a voluntary declaration of paternity [R1.10].


On 14 October 2001, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation allowing partners who register with the secretary of state's office to adopt a partner's child from 1 January 2002 [L1.8], [R1.9].

California Family Code, Division 13. Adoption, Part 2. Adoption of Unmarried Minors [L1.8]

Chapter 5. Stepparent Adoption

§ 9000. (a) A stepparent desiring to adopt a child of the stepparent' s spouse may for that purpose file a petition in the county in which the petitioner resides.

(b) A domestic partner, as defined in Section 297, desiring to adopt a child of his or her domestic partner may for that purpose file a petition in the county in which the petitioner resides.


As at July 2001, the state's adoption law allows gay couples to jointly adopt using the same process as married couples [L1.6], [R1.7].

California Family Code, Division 13. Adoption, Part 2. Adoption of Unmarried Minors [L1.6]

Chapter 1. General Provisions

§ 8600. An unmarried minor may be adopted by an adult as provided in this part.

§ 8601. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b), a prospective adoptive parent or parents shall be at least 10 years older than the child.

(b) If the court is satisfied that the adoption of a child by a stepparent, or by a sister, brother, aunt, uncle, or first cousin and, if that person is married, by that person and that person's spouse, is in the best interest of the parties and is in the public interest, it may approve the adoption without regard to the ages of the child and the prospective adoptive parent or parents.


In August 2003, the Assembly passed AB 458 which expands the Foster Child Bill of Rights to prohibit discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or HIV status, among other things [R1.5].

The measure passed the Assembly by a vote of 46-28 and Gov. Gray Davis has signed the bill into law [R1.4].


In March 2003, officials with the Community Care Licensing Division of the California Department of Social Services issued a first-of-its-kind order giving the private, nonprofit Olive Crest Foster Family and Adoption Agency until the end of March to come up with a new recruitment policy that treats homosexuals the same as others who want to adopt children [R1.3].


On 19 August 2002, the California Assembly passed a bill to establish gay and lesbian sensitivity training for foster parents [R1.2].

The measure, AB 2651 required the state Department of Social Services to expand its foster parent education program to include sexual orientation sensitivity training.

The bill also mandated that the Department of Social Services recruit gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender adults to become foster parents to children with similar sexual orientations.

The Assembly passed the bill along party lines, 41 to 28, and it already had cleared the state Senate.

In October 2002, Gov. Gray Davis' vetoed the Bill [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 19 January 2012, the Third Court of Appeal ruled that in order to establish presumed parent status EC, the non-biological partner, was required to show that she received the minor into her home, and that she held the child out to be her own. If those requirements were met, then EC is presumed to be the second legal parent, and the burden would be on the defendant LV to show that granting parental rights would be detrimental to the child [C2.12], [R2.11].


On 06 May 2011, the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, remanded the ruling in In re M.C that the child of a same-sex couple had three legally presumed parents, for the juvenile court to decide which two of them can be the child's lawful parents [C2.10], [R2.9].


On 02 May 2011, the US Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights v. City and County of San Francisco, California (Docket No. 10-1034), 624 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir., Oct. 22, 2010) [R2.8].

Previously:

On 22 October 2010, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco denied requests by a Catholic organization and two local residents to order the city to repeal the supervisors' 2006 resolution condemning the Vatican for prohibiting Catholic Charities from placing children with gay and lesbian couples for adoption [R2.7].


In 2005, the California Supreme Court ruled that gay and lesbian couples who raise children are lawful parents and must provide for their children if they break up [R2.6].

The state's custody and child support laws that hold absent fathers accountable also apply to estranged gay and lesbian couples who used reproductive science to conceive.

Previously:

In 2004, the California Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that allowed a birth mother to try to prevent her former lesbian partner from adopting a child the two women had planned to raise together [R2.5].


In October 2001, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District in San Diego ruled 2–1 that California law does not authorize second-parent adoptions however, over the preceding 15 years thousands of same-sex couples in California have adopted children through a state-approved procedure called second-parent adoption, in which a biological parent's unmarried partner gains parental rights [R2.4].

Legislation to protect existing second-parent adoptions has been mooted in response to the Court ruling [R2.3].

The Court subsequently deleted some of the language in its ruling that suggested all past second-parent adoptions – estimated by gay-rights organizations at 10,000 to 20,000 – were illegal [R2.2].


In 2004, the state appeal court ruled that a woman whose eggs were implanted in her lesbian lover for the birth of twins had no parental rights, even though she was the biological mother [R2.1].

State
R1.17 LGBTweekly: Protections for transgender foster youth signed into law 12 OCT 15
R1.16 LGBTQ Nation: California legislature OKs bill allowing birth certificates to reflect same-sex parents 21 AUG 14
R1.15 SFGate: Assembly passes bill revamping birth certificates 08 MAY 14
R1.14 ThinkProgress: New California Law Will Allow Children More Than Two Legal Parents 07 OCT 13
D1.13 Veto Message: Bill No SB 1476 30 SEP 12
R1.12 The Advocate: US (CA) 01 OCT 12
R1.11 SFGate: Assembly approves bill to allow multiple parents 27 AUG 12
R1.10 The Examiner: Bill Strengthening Rights of Non-Biological Parents Signed into Law 07 AUG 11
R1.9 Associated Press: California Governor Signs Gay Rights Bill 14 OCT 01
L1.8 California Law: Family Code Section 9000–9007 (Accessed 25 OCT 09)
R1.7 Washington Post: Gay Couples and Adoption 24 JUL 01
L1.6 California Law: Family Code Section 8600–8622 (Accessed 25 OCT 09)
R1.5 Sacramento Bee: Assembly OKs Bill on Foster Children 22 AUG 03
R1.4 365Gay.com: Davis Signs California Gay Foster Care Bill 09 SEP 03
R1.3 Orange County Register: Adoption Agency's Gay Bias Ruled Out 04 MAR 03
R1.2 Los Angeles Times: Assembly OKs Classes on Gay Foster Children 22 AUG 02
R1.1 Gender Public Advocacy Coalition: California Governor Gray Davis Fails to Uphold Current Gender Rights Legislation 05 OCT 02
Courts & Tribunals
C2.12 Opinion: E.C. v. L.V. C 064745 PDF 166.46kb, 19 JAN 12
R2.11 Metropolitan News-Enterprise: Appeals Panel Revives Same-Sex Partner’s Bid for Parental Status 20 JAN 12
C2.10 Court of Appeal: In re M.C., 11 S.O.S. 2368 PDF 209.02kb, 06 MAY 11
R2.9 Metropolitan News Company: California Sends ‘Three-Parent' Dependency Case Back to Superior Court 09 MAY 11
R2.8 Lesbian/Gay Law Notes: Supreme Court Denies Review In Case Involving San Francisco's Resolution Criticizing Cardinal Levada PDF 433.08kb, MAY 11 at page 110
R2.7 The Advocate: Court Rejects Catholic Suit Against San Francisco 25 OCT 10
R2.6 The Advocate: California Court Protects Kids of Gay Couples 24 AUG 05
R2.5 Associated Press: California Supreme Court Bolsters Second-parent Adoptions 04 AUG 03
San Francisco Chronicle: San Francisco Backing in Co-Parent Court Fight 04 JUL 02
R2.4 San Francisco Chronicle: Same-sex Adoption Procedure Nullified 27 OCT 01
R2.3 San Francisco Chronicle: Migden to Offer Gay-adoption Bill 30 OCT 01
R2.2 San Francisco Chronicle: Court Clarifies Decision on Adoptions 22 NOV 01
R2.1 Associated Press: Lesbian Egg Donor Denied Rights 12 MAY 04
Privacy Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 07 October 2015, the Governor signed AB 959 (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Disparities Reduction Act) into law, requiring collection of demographic data on gender identity and sexual orientation starting 01 July 2018 [R1.2].

In January 2012, the Academic Senate recommended that all students accepting a place from a University of California school should be asked to identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender. The decision is ultimately down to Provost and Executive Vice President of Academic Affairs Lawrence H. Pitts. If approved, it would mean that students would be revealing yet more sensitive details about themselves, along with information about race and income. [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 20 May 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to exempt backers of California's former ban on same-sex marriage from the state's campaign disclosure laws (Political Reform Act 1974), which publicly identify all contributors of $100 or more. The Plaintiffs-Appellants sought to require the state to remove the names from its website and exempt them from the law in any future campaigns on related issues [C2.4], [R2.3].

On 02 February 2011, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled 3–1 that the Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act do not apply to sharing of living units and a roommate-finding site can ask users to disclose their sexual orientation [C2.2].

Previously:

On 10 April 2008, Judge Alex Kozinski ruled that the roommate-finding Roommates.com, cannot ask users to disclose their sexual orientation [R2.1].

R1.2 BayAreaReporter: Brown signs LGBT, AIDS drug pricing bills 15 OCT 15
R1.1 Daily Mail: Students could be asked their sexual preferences on university application forms 12 MAR 12
C2.4 Opinion: Protect Marriage.com - Yes on 8 & Ors. v. Debra Bowen & Ors. No. 11-17884 PDF 232.96kb, 20 MAY 14
R2.3 SFGate: Prop. 8 donor IDs remain public, appeals court rules 20 MAY 14
C2.2 Opinion: Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley & Ors v. Roommate.com LLC No. 09-55969 PDF 100.13kb, 02 FEB 11
R2.1 MCV: Don't Ask, Don't Tell 10 APR 08
Taxation Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

In June 2010, the IRS ruled that members of California domestic partnerships, 95 percent of which are same-sex couples, must report income on their federal tax returns in the same way as do straight married couples [R1.2].

In July 2003, registered domestic partners became entitled to the same tax benefits as married couples who transfer property, under tax rule changes adopted by the California Board of Equalization [R1.1].

2.

Cities & Towns

On 03 June 2003, Alameda City Council voted 3–2 to exempt legally registered domestic partners, including same-sex couples, from the city's property transfer tax [R2.3].


On 10 October 2003, San Francisco Assessor Doris Ward ruled that couples who register as domestic partners with the state or city receive the same property tax exemptions as married couples [R2.2].

The ruling states that domestic partners should be granted the same exemption as married couples under the state equal protection laws that protect gay men and lesbians from discrimination [R2.2].


In June 2003, San Francisco City Assessor Mabel Teng announced an extension of domestic partners rights in San Francisco by setting a policy that excludes transfers between same-sex partners from a change-in-ownership tax reassessment [R2.1].

R1.2 Frontiers Web: IRS Recognizes Calif. Domestic Partnerships 16 JUN 10
R1.1 Associated Press: Domestic Partners Get Property Tax Parity 09 JUL 03
R2.3 Oakland Tribune: Gay Rights Makes Strides with Alameda Tax Waiver 05 JUN 03
R2.2 San Francisco Chronicle: S.F. Assessor Grants Gays Same Tax Break as Married Couples 11 OCT 02
R2.1 San Francisco Chronicle: City Assessor Announces Extension of Domestic Partnership Rights Policy 27 JUN 03
Violence, Bullying, domestic Violence, Harassment, Vilification Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [HATE CRIMES]
1.

State

On 07 October 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 827 (Safe schools: Safe Place to Learn Act) into law. The legislation calls for the creation of a training program to help teachers combat bullying and support LGBT youth who are coming out of the closet or being targeted by other students [R1.4].

On 10 October 2011, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law [AB 9 Pupil Rights: bullying] an anti-bullying measure named after gay student Seth Walsh [R1.3].

Previously:

On 02 September 2011, the Senate passed Seth's Law (AB9) in a 20–4 vote. When signed by the Governor, the Bill will ensure that every school implements updated anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies and programs that include actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity and expression [R1.2].


On 30 September 2010, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the Mental Health Services for At-Risk Youth Act allowing minors ages 12 to 17 to access mental health services without parental consent, provided a mental health professional deems the individual to be "mature enough to participate intelligently in the services or when the youth would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to self or others without the services." The Bill will impact on the lives of vulnerable gay youths [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 19 June 2017, a Los Angeles Superior Court jury ruled in favor of James Pearl, ordering the city to fork over $17.4 million in damages and compensation for bullying, homophobic abuse, harassment and discrimination. James Pearl is heterosexual [R2.5].

On 08 June 2011, Second District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services v. R.G. 2011 WL 2206846 (Cal. App. Dist. Ct. June 8, 2011), held that "failure to protect" evidence was not sufficient to sustain a violation under the "physical harm" provision of the Welfare and Institutions Code [R2.4].

In May 2009, a lesbian student who claimed she was the victim of anti-gay harassment and discrimination at a California school received $25,000 (£15,950) in a settlement [R2.3].


In October 2008, the California Court of Appeal upheld a jury decision awarding two former high school students $300,000 (£172,550) damages after they were subjected to relentless harassment for being gay [R2.2].


In July 2003, a jury awarded nearly $2 million to a juvenile detention center cook who maintained he suffered years of discrimination and verbal harassment on the job because he was gay [R2.1].

R1.4 BayAreaReporter: Brown signs LGBT, AIDS drug pricing bills 15 OCT 15
R1.3 OnTop Magazine: Jerry Brown Signs Anti-Gay Bullying Bill Named After Seth Walsh 10 OCT 11
R1.2 Huffington Post: Seth's Law, Measure Designed To Curb Anti-Gay Bullying, Passes California State Senate 02 SEP 11
R1.1 The Advocate: Schwarzenegger Signs Bill Aiding Gay Youths 01 OCT 10
R2.5 Queerty: Straight dude ''in tears'' after winning $17.4 million in homophobic discrimination lawsuit 19 JUL 17
R2.4 Lesbian/Gay Law Notes: California Appeals Court Rejects Argument That Mother's Failure to Protect Gay Teen From Abusive Father Could Subject Mother to Liability for "Physical Harm" to Her Son PDF 652.99kb, US (CA) 08 JUN
R2.3 PinkNews.co.uk: Lesbian student wins $25,000 payout over homophobic harassment 20 MAY 09
R2.2 PinkNews.co.uk: Students Win Compensation From School Board for Gay Bullying13 OCT 08
R2.1 Associated Press: Cook Awarded $1.97 Million in Discrimination Lawsuit 25 JUL 03
Wrongful Death Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 14 October 2001, Governor Gray Davis signed legislation providing about a dozen rights enjoyed by married couples to more than 16,000 registered gay, lesbian and domestic partners in California, including the right to sue for wrongful death from 1January 2002 [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

In April 2011, the California Eastern District federal court ruled that a person who can prove a marriage-like relationship to another person is entitled to sue police officers, under federal civil rights laws, for killing a domestic partner, even if unmarried and not registered as a domestic partner. This federal right supersedes a state statute that requires domestic partner registration as a prerequisite to a state wrongful death action [C2.4], [R2.3].

In July 2001, the lesbian partner of a woman mauled to death by dogs in San Francisco has been granted legal standing and her suit allowed to proceed to trial in a wrongful death claim even though she is not a "surviving spouse'' under the law [C2.2], [R2.1].

Superior Court Judge A. James Robertson II said that because state law does not allow gay couples to marry, the surviving-spouse rule should not apply to same-sex couples. The judge agreed with Smith's attorney that the rule violates the equal protection clause of the California Constitution [R2.1].

R1.1 Associated Press: California Governor Signs Gay Rights Bill 14 OCT 01
C2.4 Estate of Mendoza-Saravia v. Fresno County Sheriff ’s Dep't, 2011 WL 720061 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011)
R2.3 Lesbian/Gay Law Notes: Unregistered Domestic Partner Can Seek Compensation for Negligent Killing of Partner by Police PDF 446.78kb, 04 APR 11
C2.2 Sharon Smith -v- Robert Noel & Majorie Knoller
R2.1 Associated Press: San Francisco Woman Can Sue Over Dog Mauling US (CA) 27 JUL 01