ACLU Files Lawsuit, Seeks Freedom to Marry for Nebraskans
Affiliate:
ACLU of Nebraska
November 17, 2014 12:00 am
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org
OMAHA, Neb. – The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Nebraska and the law firm of Koenig | Dunne filed a lawsuit in federal court today on behalf of seven couples seeking recognition of their out-of-state marriages or seeking the freedom to marry in Nebraska.
"The couples we represent in this historic case seek nothing more and nothing less than the freedom to marry who they love, and to be granted the dignity that full marriage recognition provides," said Danielle Conrad, executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska, "these families are tax-paying citizens who are active in their communities and contributing positively to our economy. Nebraska has waited long enough – it is time for the Cornhusker state to extend the freedom to marry to all its citizens."
The plaintiffs include Susan and Sally Waters of Omaha who have been together for seventeen years. In January 2013, Sally was diagnosed with breast cancer which has progressed to stage four and is considered terminal.
"We have said publicly before God, our family and our friends that we love each other and are committed to one another and our children," said Sally Waters, "At this moment, I want to spend time loving my children and my wife while knowing that should I die, they will be cared for. By not recognizing my family, Nebraska is making a difficult situation much more difficult emotionally and financially."
Other plaintiffs include:
- Nick Kramer & Jason Cadek: The couple resides in Omaha with their three year old daughter Alice. They are both employed, own their home, have been in a relationship for ten years and were legally married in 2013.
- Jessica and Kathleen Källström-Schreckengost: The couple resides in Omaha with their infant Sebastian. They are respectively a lawyer and a therapist. The couple has been in a relationship for almost ten years as they began dating in college. They were legally married in 2010.
- Crystal Von Kampen & Carla Morris-Von Kampen: The couple resides in their hometown of Norfolk. Crystal is a disabled Veteran and Carla is an advocate for families that have disabled children. The couple has been together for five years and celebrated the first anniversary of their marriage in November 2014. The couple has two adult children.
- Greg Tubach & Bil Roby: The couple resides in Lincoln and has been together for twenty eight years. Both are employed and they own homes in Nebraska. The couple is not married but seeks the freedom to marry in Nebraska.
- Marj Plumb & Tracy Weitz: The couple resides in Omaha with their two dogs and has been together for over ten years. The couple was legally married in 2008. Both are successful professionals and came to Nebraska for a job opportunity in 2014.
- Dr. Tom Maddox & Randy Clark: Tom is a native Nebraskan who graduated from the University of Nebraska and the University of Nebraska Medical Center. After graduation he pursed his medical residency in Missouri where he met Randy. Randy is a CPA. They couple has been together for over 30 years and were married in 2008. They currently reside in La Jolla California. They visit family in Nebraska regularly and own commercial property in Nebraska.
"These families simply want the security and recognition that only marriage provides," said Amy Miller, legal director of the ACLU of Nebraska. "It is wrong for the state to treat these loving and committed couples as second-class citizens. When a family has roots in Nebraska or wants to call Nebraska home, they should be able to do so without being treated as legal strangers."
The lawsuit will be filed in the U.S. District Court. The plaintiffs allege that the state’s constitutional marriage ban unlawfully discriminates against lesbians, gay men, and their children. Due to Sally Waters’ medical condition, the attorneys will be filing a separate motion for emergency relief.
Polls indicate that a majority of Americans support the freedom to marry for all citizens. Currently 33 jurisdictions in the United States grant or recognize the freedom to marry for same sex couples.
For client bios and a copy of the lawsuit visit:
Court Case
Sep 2015
LGBTQ Rights
Waters v. Ricketts - Freedom to Marry in Nebraska
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Nebraska and the law firm of Koenig | Dunne have filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of seven couples who seek state recognition of their marriages or who seek the freedom to marry in Nebraska.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2015
LGBTQ Rights
Waters v. Ricketts - Freedom to Marry in Nebraska
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Nebraska and the law firm of Koenig | Dunne have filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of seven couples who seek state recognition of their marriages or who seek the freedom to marry in Nebraska.
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.