Now Reading
Romer v. Evans was just the beginning of LGBT rights

Romer v. Evans was just the beginning of LGBT rights

A groundbreaking judgeship, a state senator introduces a bill to establish civil unions and a nationwide path toward equality are just some of the byproducts of the landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Colorado’s Amendment 2.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court chambers.

The 6-3 decision, known as Romer v. Evans, was handed down 15 years ago: May 20, 1996. Since then, LGBT rights have been on the fast track, abet a few bumps in the road. And that journey started right here in Colorado.

 

Truth be told, the struggle began in 1992. A religious right organization based out of Colorado Springs, Colorado Family Values, authored and passed Amendment 2. The law made it illegal for any government – municipal, county, state – from creating statues protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination. Orchestrated by Will Perkins, the law was retaliatory. Denver, Aspen and Boulder all had LGBT inclusive non-discrimination laws on the books.

 

Leading up to the election, polls indicated the measure would fail. Not hedging their bets, a group of gay, lesbian and straight allied lawyers and activists met in secret, for months, preparing a lawsuit – just incase.

 

The group’s instincts were right: the voters lied and approved the amendment. Nine days later, an injunction was filed, followed by a full on lawsuit.

 

“There was this big race,” Colorado Sen. Pat Steadman said. Then, a lawyer working for the Equal Protection Ordinance Committee, continued, “We were trying to make sure Amendment 2 never took effect for one minute. Not one day.”

 

They were successful in their endeavors.

 

The group of lawyers would eventually become an official organization – the Colorado Legal Initiatives Project, or CLIP. Today, it’s better known as The GLBT Community Center’s Legal and Advocacy Program.

 

The Legal program has played a crucial role in lobbying for more rights for the LGBT community. In late-2000s, five laws were passed to establish a patchwork of rights including second parent adoption and designated beneficiaries.

 

A legal battle raged on for more than four years. First, Denver District Court. Then the Colorado Supreme Court. Both courts ruled Amendment 2 unconstitutional. And finally, the U.S. Supreme Court would weigh in.

 

The woman arguing Amendment 2 should be struck down was Jean Dubofsky.

 

“She was pedigree,” Judge Mary Celeste said.

 

Celeste was a co-founder and spokeswoman for CLIP. Now, she’s the presiding judge for Denver County overseeing the entire system. She’s the first out lesbian to hold that position. She’s also the first out lesbian to be president of the American Judges Association.

 

But back to Dubofsky. She had some firsts of her own, like, being the first woman to sit on the Colorado Supreme Court.

 

“They said I was too young, and I was a woman, they didn’t think I should have been named,” Dubofsky said.

 

Nevertheless, Dubofsky served the court and later became known as one of the best appeal lawyers in the nation. She was a natural for this case and agreed to take it.

 

Representing the state was Solicitor General Tim Tymkovich, Attorney General Gale Norton and Gov. Roy Romer.

 

Romer was opposed to the law, but he told Out Front Colorado he had to defend the law because of a long tradition of doing so. There was another reason too, he said.

 

“I had faith in the court system,” he said. “This was a bad law and I knew it would be struck down. It was important for the highest court to hear this case.”

 

Tymkovich, now a 10th Circuit judge appointed by President George W. Bush, was unable to comment for this article by deadline. And Norton was unable to be located for comment.

 

The case represented eight individuals and five governing bodies.

 

“Most are gone,” Steadman said.

 

Paul Brown, then a state employee, is still around.

 

Retired now, Brown said he never doubted for a minute whether he’d be a plaintiff.

 

“There’s a pain that my native state will be associated with this forever,” he said. “But on the flip side, these folks, they were going to eliminate any rights for queer people. But what they did was deal themselves a setback.”

 

When Dubofsky heard the ruling she was relieved. Disaster had been averted.

 

“If we lost the case, it wouldn’t have just been gay rights issues in trouble,” she said.

 

“All sorts of scenarios would have been possible. Almost anyone would have been able to write discrimination in a state’s constitution.”

 

Celeste echoes: “People’s rights would have been impacted all over the country. Every state would have had an ‘Amendment 2.’”

 

In the majority opinion Justice Kennedy wrote: “We must conclude that Amendment 2 classifies homosexuals not to further a proper legislative end but to make them unequal to everyone else … A state cannot so deem a class of persons a stranger in its laws.”

 

Both women believe Romer v. Evans will play a more significant role in gay rights issues to come.

 

“Romer may well become the key decision in gay marriage,” Dubofsky said.

 

Regardless what role Romer plays in the same-sex marriage debate, Steadman said the case was a turning point – the first victory for gays in the Supreme Court – and that should be remembered.

 

“It really changed everything.”

What's Your Reaction?
Excited
0
Happy
0
In Love
0
Not Sure
0
Silly
0
Scroll To Top