The California Assembly held a hearing today on resolution ARJ 15 which urges Congress and the President to pass the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), which would allow gays and lesbians to sponsor their foreign-born partners, providing a legal path to citizenship. The bill, authored Assembly Member Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles), in part says:

This resolution urges Congress to support the removal of legal barriers to immigration that affect permanent same-sex partners in binational relationships. Specifically, the resolution calls on Congress either to include the Reuniting Families Act, which incorporates the Uniting American Families Act, in comprehensive immigration reform, or to pass the Uniting American Families Act on its own as stand-alone legislation. In support of the measure, the author writes:

The federal Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to add same-sex “permanent partners” to the list of family members that a U.S. citizen or legal resident could sponsor for immigration.

Since current law does not allow gay and lesbian Americans and permanent residents to sponsor their foreign-born partners for legal residency, they cannot access the family immigration system for green cards and immigrant visas. Because of this inequity, thousands of lesbian and gay bi-national couples are kept apart, torn apart, or forced to stay together illegally, with one partner living in constant fear of deportation.

ARJ 15 is co-sponsored by Equality California (EQCA) and Asian Americans for Civil Rights and Equality (AACRE). Melanie Nathan, human rights attorney, Amos Lim, co-founder of Out4Immigration, Gina Caprio who is unable to sponsor her British partner, and representatives from EQCA and AACRE will be providing testimony.

The bill is opposed by Capital Resource Family Impact, which believes UAFA undermines the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

In a New York Times Magazine interview over the weekend Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano fielded a few questions about the lesbian rumors that have followed her and other women in politics.

Men don’t know what to make of women who choose to be single. Rumors of lesbianism have dogged women in politics like you,Condoleezza Rice and Ann Richards.
Right. I think the more people get to know a person, the less that becomes an issue. It’s interesting. In Arizona when I first ran for public office, that’s when the rumors were going around, and of course I’m sure they go around now.

In 2002, during your gubernatorial campaign, you publicly denied rumors that you were a lesbian.
I just happen not to be married.

Are you seeing anybody now?
Yes, my staff.

Some food for thought…

Back in 2006, Napolitano was asked why she opposed Prop 107, an amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage in Arizona. The governor responded “Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is the law, and I believe that’s our tradition. I think Prop 107 goes way beyond that.”

When asked if her view was hypocritical because most people believed she was a closeted lesbian.

“No. No, and I’m offended by that question.”

Senator Claire McCaskill suggested yesterday if a concealed weapons law she had voted against had actually passed, it could have set a precedent for forcing states, like her home state of Missouri, to recognize another state’s gay marriage laws.

Sen. McCaskill says she was not against letting people carry concealed weapons. But she is against requiring one state to accept another state’s laws that might differ from its own. She says it would be a foot in the door that could allow Vermont’s laws on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri, which has a constitutional provision against gay marriage.

McCaskill says many of the supporters of the proposal are advocates for states’ rights, but they want to override states’ rights on carrying concealed weapons.

McCaskill audio available here:

[audio:http://www.missourinet.com/podcast/feed/a6afff9d-c09f-1e1c-6be13276f8998390/article/a39175b5-5056-b82a-37fd2022b5878c0c/audio/a451587c-5056-b82a-37678da2082718e8/macgun.mp3]

Senator McCaskill has since attempted to clarify her position via email.
(via Pam’s House Blend)

“In talking about my recent vote against the gun provision offered in the Senate, I wasn’t clear when I stated that my vote against that provision was because it came down to a states’ rights. I was expressing my frustration in that some who argue that states shouldn’t respect the laws, certificates, or permits from other states when it’s convenient, like with gay marriage, but then argue that they should when it’s convenient on another issue, like gun rights. They can’t have it both ways,” McCaskill said.

While it is true that Republicans are demonstrating hypocrisy with regards to state’s rights on this issue, based on McCaskill’s original statement, it really sounds like she thinks DOMA is a “good” idea.

PROMO, The Missouri LGBT advocacy group has responded to McCaskill’s comments today:

In a statement defending her opposition to this bill, she [McCaskill] stated: “This is a foot in the door that would require, for example, the laws in Vermont on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri.”

This is a problem. A state’s rights argument is valid in this situation, however it is inconceivable that an ally can support Hate Crimes legislation- which recognizes the LGBT community is a target of increased abuse, intolerance and aggressive force- but uses a touchstone issue for the community as a shield rather than stand alone on an anti-gun sentiment.

In a time when we have seen incredible strides on a state by state basis, we have turned a corner and will not tolerate being used as a shield. Please reach out to Sen. McCaskill’s office and let her know while she is an ally, you won’t tolerate being used as a shield. The numbers listed are below for local and DC offices.

Gay Republicans have also expressed particular outrage over McCaskill’s comments, an outrage likely fueled more by the fact that McCaskill is a Democrat and their strong support of the concealed weapons law, than anything about gay marriage.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) serve up more of the same lies and half truth’s in the Family Research Council video below. Watch:

For the record, the bill does not curb free speech; it only applies to people who commit physical acts of violence against other people. This is just more fear-mongering.

It appears the hate crimes bill will be voted on in the Senate later today, but is encountering resistance from the usual suspects, the measure being called “highly explosive!”