• MSN
  • Hotmail
  • More
    • Autos
    • My MSN
    • Video
    • Careers & Jobs
    • Personals
    • Weather
    • Delish
    • Quotes
    • White Pages
    • Games
    • Real Estate
    • Wonderwall
    • Horoscopes
    • Shopping
    • Yellow Pages
    • Local Edition
    • Traffic
    • Feedback
    • Maps & Directions
    • Travel
    • Full MSN Index
  • Bing
  • NBCNews.com
  • TODAY
  • Nightly News
  • Rock Center
  • Meet the Press
  • Dateline
  • msnbc
  • Breaking News
  • Newsvine
  • Home
  • US
  • World
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • Tech
  • Science
  • Travel
  • Local
  • Weather
Advertise | AdChoices
  • Recommended: Winning ticket for huge Powerball jackpot sold in Florida
  • Recommended: Texas grandfather accused in shooting deaths of son and grandson
  • Recommended: 60 injured, five critically, as trains collide in Connecticut
  • Recommended: Facebook shutters page that taunted lawmaker's push to curb military rape

NBC News reporters bring you compelling stories from across the nation. For more US news, follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

  • ↓ About this blog
  • ↓ Archives
    • Icons Email E-mail updates
    • Icons Twitter Follow on Twitter
    • Icons Feed Subscribe to RSS
  • 11
    Apr
    2013
    1:59pm, EDT

    Montana votes to strike down law criminalizing 'deviate' gay sex

    Matt Gouras / AP

    Republican Rep. Duane Ankney, left, of Colstrip, Mont., speaks on the House floor on April 9, in Helena, Mont. Ankney joined the chamber in voting to repeal an obsolete law that criminalizes gay sex.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Montana lawmakers have voted to get rid of a law that criminalizes gay sex and the governor is expected to sign it -- which would leave 11 states where such statutes remain on the books.

    The Supreme Court ruled these laws unconstitutional a decade ago, rendering them unenforceable, but gay rights advocates say they support their removal due to the stigmatizing language.

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    With a 65-34 vote on Wednesday, the bill was shuttled off to Gov. Steve Bullock, who is likely to sign it, his spokeswoman, Judy Beck, told NBC News. Montana's Supreme Court struck down the law in 1997, but a block of Republican lawmakers had stymied efforts to repeal it, the Billings Gazette reported.

    “It’s not about encouraging a lifestyle,” Rep. Bryce Bennett, D-Missoula, an openly gay Montana lawmaker, was quoted as saying Tuesday by the newspaper. “It’s simply about respecting privacy between two adults. … It’s just as simple as saying that all Montanans deserve dignity and respect.”

    The old law made “deviate sexual conduct,” or sexual relations between people of the same sex, a crime. Those convicted of it faced a prison term of up to ten years and/or a maximum $50,000 fine.

    The Supreme Court in 2003 ruled that a Texas state law criminalizing gay sex was unconstitutional, thereby striking down some 14 active anti-sodomy laws on the books in other states and Puerto Rico.

    "As a matter of law, sodomy laws, as they apply to same-sex couples and in some states different sex couples, were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in our 2003 lawsuit Lawrence v. Texas," Susam Sommer, director of constitutional litigation at Lambda Legal, said in a statement.


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    Nonetheless, Montana's repeal "goes a long way in building a supportive environment for LGBT people and their families," she added, noting that the ongoing presence elsewhere of "these unconstitutional laws in state penal codes implicitly stigmatizes gay people and puts them and many others at risk of unlawful prosecutions. It is time every state cleans up its books and cleans up its act."

    Eleven states still have laws on their books outlawing oral and anal sex between same-sex couples, while another nine have statutes outlawing oral and anal sex for everyone, according to Lambda Legal.

    The 2003 Supreme Court case has been cited by pro-gay marriage supporters in arguments before the high court on whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to wed. The court is expected to rule in those cases in June.

    1096 comments

    I would love it if all the religious zealots could just pick one single state (like Texas), move there, and secede. They could keep a watchful eye on each other, ensuring that nobody has dirty sex or abortions or anything else they disagree with and the rest of us could be free of the OCD sex-patrol …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: texas, laws, marriage, gay, sodomy, lawrence, same-sex, anti-sodomy
  • 24
    Mar
    2013
    11:01pm, EDT

    Same-sex couple wins $100,000 dream wedding

    Russell Caron Wedding Photograph

    Caroline Currie and Jenna Eagleton won the 2013 Real Maine Wedding of the Year contest. They are the first same-sex couple to win the competition, and will be awarded a $100,000 dream wedding.

    A magazine in Maine awarded a $100,000 wedding to a same sex couple on Sunday during its annual contest, making the pair the first gay couple to take home the highly sought after prize.

    Jenna Eagleton and Caroline Currie of Portland, Maine beat out three other couples to win the Real Maine Weddings competition.  Couples submited a video to the magazine's website explaining why they deserve a free dream wedding, and the public votes on their favorite.

    Eagleton and Currie were the first gay couple to enter the contest. A gay marriage referendum was approved in Maine last November, and same-sex marriage has been legal in the state since December. 

    "It really makes a statement, it really shows that yes, this is OK, this is right and this is the way things are," Eagleton told Bangor, Maine's WLBZ.

    The couple plans to wed in October in Kennebunkport, according to the RealMaineWeddings website.

    The prize will go towards weddings expenses like the bridal gown, tuxedos, rings and flowers. The public will have the chance to vote on many of the decisions that go into planning the wedding along the way.

    "Love is love, I mean, that's it," said Currie.

    Related:

    Gay marriage's big day in court: What's at stake?

    Timeline: Key dates in the struggle for gay rights

     

    363 comments

    Great for them. I hope they have a blast!

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, same-sex
  • 21
    Mar
    2013
    6:45pm, EDT

    Couples leading Prop. 8 fight: 'We are very excited to have the end in sight'

    Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

    SAN FRANCISCO, CA - DECEMBER 06: (L-R) Same sex couples and plaintiffs Sandy Stier, Kris Perry, Paul Katami and Jeffrey Zarrillo look on at a news conference following a hearing at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 6, 2010 in San Francisco, California.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Two gay California couples who are leading the legal fight to overturn the state's ban on same-sex marriage said Thursday on the eve of their landmark Supreme Court hearing that they were relieved to have "the end in sight" and believe the justices will step in "to right these wrongs."

    Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo, are the faces to the challenge to Proposition 8, a citizen's initiative denying gays and lesbians the right to wed that voters approved in a pitched multi-million dollar ballot battle in 2008. The court will hear arguments in the case on Tuesday.

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    “The right thing for the justices to do is to lead the country on including all of us in this institution and finding a way to equity and fairness that brings the country together rather than dividing us based on a characteristic that we cannot change,” Perry said on a call to reporters. 

    Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

    Plaintiffs Kris Perry (L) kisses her partner Sandy Stier during a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California.

    “There is an opportunity here for the court to send a message that who we love is important and we should be treated equally under the law," she added.

    The couples will be in Washington, DC, for the historic hearing, which comes one day before the justices hear arguments contesting the constitutionality of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), that bars recognition of same-sex marriage and thereby denies more than 1,100 benefits to gay and lesbian couples. 

    "We both are very relieved and excited by the prospect of the final chapter in this case happening in the next few months,” Perry said, adding that they have "been waiting a very long time to be married and to celebrate that with our children and our parents. … I know that we are both very excited to have the end in sight."

    The couples' journey began years earlier, when they decided to join the legal effort and testified before lower courts about the impact the ban has had on their lives. They further entered the public realm as advocates, doing interviews and television/online spots about their campaign.

    Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

    Lawyer Theodore Olson (L) and his clients Paul Katami (C) and his partner Jeff Zarrillo attend a rally to celebrate the ruling to overturn Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in West Hollywood, California. A federal judge overturned California's Proposition 8, a same-sex marriage ban, finding it unconstitutional.

    “All four of us have regular lives and we have jobs that we need to pay our bills and so we have to be able to plug in and unplug when that happens,” said Zarrillo, of Burbank. “But being a part of this case, and being so closely associated with it, it reminds us of the daily harm and that discrimination even more every day.”

    The legal struggle, he added, also “made us closer as a couple and has made us want access to that language even more, because the word 'marriage' and the word 'husband' and the word 'wife,' they have meaning” to society, family and children. 

    “It affirms the commitment that we have built and shared,” he said. “While some people say it's just a word, that word is so important. And if it wasn't so important, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."

    Stier, of Alameda, said being a part of the case has impacted their lives in a “dramatic way.” Two of the couple's four boys were headed to college when they joined the fight, but another two were just starting high school, and so that “experience has been happening in parallel with this case.”

    “For Kris and I, the focus of our lives has always has been and continues to be our family,” said Stier. “And that will continue to be the driving focus of our lives and it's really what helps us be inspired by the case – is that we want other families to have the greatest potential for success.”

    When the couples first joined the legal fight, the objective was to repeal Prop. 8, and lower courts sided with them. The latest court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, said that since same-sex marriage was allowed in California for a few months in 2008 before the vote, it could not be taken away.

    The Supreme Court justices could agree with that lower court decision — in a move that would limit their ruling to couples in California — or they could side with the backers of Prop. 8. Efforts to reach the backers, ProtectMarriage.com, for comment on Thursday were not immediately successful.

    The court also could broaden out their ruling to recognize same-sex marriage in all states, as the couples' attorneys have argued, saying that the more than 30 statewide bans on gays and lesbians getting married violate the U.S. Constitution. Nine state, plus the District of Columbia, allow same-sex marriage.

    “If we've learned anything through this journey, it's that when the minority rights are being oppressed by a majority the court is supposed to step in, and some times it's not always popular for them to do so,” Zarrillo said. “We would expect the court to step in and right these wrongs."

    As their legal battle seemingly winds down, Stier said the couples know that the journey they embarked upon is not their's alone but will affect many others, noting she felt they – and thousands more couples – were “on the cusp” of being able to finally legally wed.
     
    “We are ... struck by the importance not only of being married but of a shift happening in the country that will affect generations to come,” she said. “When we imagine the day, we're standing somewhere and taking our vows and deciding to be married, we will not only be committing to each other but will be overwhelmed, I'm sure, by the power of this decision, not only for ourselves but for the whole country.”

    Meanwhile, the opposition is gearing up for the fight — and is expecting a win. As Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage said in a statement:

    "We, too, are looking forward to the court hearing. It represents the opportunity to right the wrong that was imposed by federal judges in stripping over 7 million California voters of their right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, the same definition that has guided civilization for thousands of years. We are confident of our position."

    Related:

    GOP sea change on gay rights?
    Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage
    US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples

     

    302 comments

    I am a hetrosexual father of two. My wife and I have several gay and lesbian friends some of which are raising adopted children. They are decent, loving, intelligent, hard working people with a huge respect for life, culture and community.And their children are happy, well adjusted kids that mix ju …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, gay, court, 8, california, lesbian, supreme, same-sex, proposition, doma
  • 19
    Mar
    2013
    8:13pm, EDT

    Highlighting 'vague' law, Santa Fe mayor encourages gay marriage

    Steve Snowden / Getty Images, file

    Santa Fe Mayor David Coss speaks during a public appearance in October 6, 2009 in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    The Democratic mayor of Santa Fe is calling on New Mexico’s county clerks to begin issuing licenses to same-sex couples, saying it was time that everyone – including his lesbian daughter – should be treated equally under the law in a state that does not ban gay marriage.

    New Mexico is one of two states in the country that neither specifically allows nor explicitly bans gays and lesbians from getting married (the other is New Jersey).

    Nor does it offer civil unions or domestic partnerships to same-sex couples, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    The marriage statute, which does not specify gender, is “sufficiently vague” on the issue, said Phil Sisneros, a spokesman for New Mexico’s attorney general.

    Mayor David Coss and City Attorney Geno Zamora teamed up to examine that legal question and believe that nothing in the state constitution or statutes prevent county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Zamora issued a legal analysis of these findings, and the City Council is expected to vote on a resolution in support of Coss’ call on March 27.

    “People’s lives are short and when you’re waiting for your rights you know how long do you have to wait? I’m sorry we didn’t do it ten years ago. I don’t think we should wait another ten years before we push the issue,” Coss told NBC News. “Let’s start treating everybody equally under the law.”

    Though the resolution does not carry legal weight, Zamora, who has a gay brother, said they wanted to send a message to the Supreme Court before it hears landmark cases next week challenging a federal law (Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA) that bars recognition of same-sex couples and California’s Proposition 8, which prohibits gays and lesbians from getting married in the Golden State.

    “The decision was made … we cannot wait any longer to protect the rights of our brothers and sisters, our colleagues and our community members,” he said. “It’s very important for cities and city attorney’s offices to enter this debate recognizing equal rights for their citizens.”


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    In 2004, a clerk for Sandoval county issued same-sex marriage licenses for one day before the state attorney general ordered her to stop, saying the 64 licenses were not valid, according to The Santa Fe New Mexican.

    Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar told the newspaper on Tuesday that she wasn’t going to issue licenses to gay and lesbian couples, even though she’d like to, because she felt she couldn’t under the law.

    “I would love to be able to issue marriage licenses (to same sex couples) but under the current law, I feel I’m not free and clear to do so. The Legislature creates the laws and the judges interpret the laws and I as a county clerk do not create or interpret laws,” she said. “And I feel that my oath of office does not allow to me act counter to the laws of New Mexico.”

    Sisneros, of the attorney general’s office, said that the issue was unclear and felt nothing was likely to happen until a county clerk attempted to grant a license to a same-sex couple. At that point, an anti-gay marriage group may file a lawsuit or the attorney general could be asked to weigh in, among other possible scenarios.

    “This seems more properly characterized as an expression of the city’s position on same-sex marriages since it does not carry the force of law,” Sisneros said of the Santa Fe mayor’s resolution. “Our office, though, has not had the opportunity yet to weigh in on the specific question of whether same sex marriages are legal under New Mexico law."

    Previous state bills to ban or approve same-sex marriage have been rejected by New Mexico's lawmakers.

    Thomas Peters, a spokesman for the National Organization for Marriage which opposes same-sex marriage, said New Mexicans should be able to decide the issue for themselves. 

    "Allow the debate to continue and the people to decide, not activists mayors and judges," he said in a statement.

    502 comments

    Come on NM, GET REAL Its the right thing to do!

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, gay, new-mexico, santa-fe, same-sex, lgbt
  • 15
    Mar
    2013
    3:16pm, EDT

    American Indian tribe OKs same-sex marriage, lets gay couple wed

    John Flesher / AP

    Tim LaCroix, left, and Gene Barfield recite their nuptial vows in the governmental building of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Friday, March 15, 2013, in Harbor Springs, Mich. Tribal Chairman Dexter McNamara, center, officiated during the wedding after signing a measure approved by the tribal council that allows same-sex marriages on the reservation.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    The head of an American Indian tribe in Michigan signed a law approving same-sex marriage on Friday, joining at least two other tribes nationwide in doing so, then immediately wed a gay couple who had been together for 30 years but never thought they would see this day come.

    Dexter McNamara, chairman of the 4,600-member Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians in northern Michigan, and a member of the tribe wed Tim LaCroix, 53, and Gene Barfield, 60, of Boyne City. McNamara read the couple's vows and led the ceremony in English, and the tribe member conducted a traditional tribal ceremony in their language before dozens of wellwishers.

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    “I’m proud of my tribe for doing this and I love my husband,” LaCroix said. Barfield, who is not a tribe member, chimed in:"How could the world be better? … I'm just ... full of joy and happiness and I love my husband."


    A maple sapling, bent into a hoop with cedar, sage, tobacco and sweetgrass tied to it, was used in the tribal ceremony. The sweetgrass was lit, and the hoop was waved up and down over the couple to ward off evil spirits and bring in good spirits.

    “To have Tim’s tribal community, which are an ancient people, welcome me into their midst and …that we are welcome as a married couple in a community, I’m just flabbergasted at how good this makes me feel,” Barfield said, chuckling as he later added, “This goes to prove that the great American author Mark Twain was right: all things come to him who waits and doesn’t die in the meantime."

    It was not certain the tribe would recognize same-sex marriage: In 2012, the tribal council voted down a resolution, 5-4, to allow gays and lesbians to wed, but on March 3, the balance shifted and it was approved, 5-4. The resolution, which requires one member of the marrying couples to be a tribe member, then went to the desk of McNamara, who figured that if he vetoed it, the legislation would be unlikely to get the seven votes needed for an override.

    While he was mulling his decision, McNamara said LaCroix called and asked him what he was going to do. They and Barfield had once worked together for the tribe.

    “I started thinking about it, and that’s when I decided that, you know, we all deserve to be happy," he said, "and everybody is happy in different ways, they show their love in different ways, and I decided to sign it.”

    The newlyweds said that after McNamara signed the legislation, he received a standing ovation.

    "I’ve always felt that there’s two ways to do things and look at things … you believe in equal rights or you want to discriminate," McNamara said Thursday, noting he'd received mainly positive feedback in response to the decision.

    Courtesy of Annette VanDeCar, Li

    Tim LaCroix holds a feather while hugging Gene Barfield after their marriage ceremony on Friday. Both are part of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians.

    Two other tribes -- the Coquille in Oregon and the Suquamish in Washington state -- have in recent years approved same-sex marriage. Other tribes -- perhaps from five to 10, though there could be more -- have open ordinances that don't define marriage as between a man and a woman, said Matthew Fletcher, a law professor at Michigan State University College of Law and director of the Indigenous Law and Policy Center.

    "It's pretty remarkable," Fletcher, a member of the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, said of the tribe's action. "I mean Indian Country is mostly rural and insular and pretty conservative, so it's unusual for a rural community like this to sort of stick their necks out like this, but it gives you a sense of where I think we are as a nation in terms of being much more open toward same-sex marriage in a fairly short period of time."

    However, large tribes, such as the Cherokee Nation and Navajo Nation, ban same-sex marriage. The Cherokee Nation took action when a lesbian couple sought the right to marry in tribal court. The pair was ultimately successful in 2006 though the ban was imposed, scholars said.

    In smaller tribes, such as the Coquille and Suquamish, people know one another and so legally excluding same-sex couples has a more significant impact socially and politically rather than with a large tribe like the Cherokee, who have a big bureaucracy and are aiming to behave more like a nation-state, said Brian Joseph Gilley, a professor of anthropology and head of the First Nations Educational and Cultural Center at Indiana University, Bloomington.

    The impact of the Little Traverse Bay decision was unclear, though Fletcher said he thought it would carry weight with other tribes. Little Traverse Bay was an influential, average-sized tribe that has been, along with some other Michigan tribes, "very much in the forefront of some good progressive tribal governance measures in the last couple decades."


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    "I do think it’s going to be influential," he said of the decision, "and it’s sort of a groundswell building in Indian Country that’s a little bit slower than the rest of the country, but it’s definitely building."

    McNamara, who said it was an "historic" day for the tribe, agreed, saying he thought other tribes in the state might take their lead.

    “We’ve been a role model, I think, for the federally recognized tribes of Michigan and it seems like we’re out in front -- and not taking anything away from the other federally recognized tribes -- but, you know, it seems like we kind of opened the door for other tribes and I think other tribes will follow," he said.

    Nine states plus the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriage, while more than 30 ban it, including Michigan -- where that law will apply outside the reservation. The Supreme Court in less than two weeks will hear cases challenging California's same-sex marriage ban, known as Proposition 8, and the federal law (Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA) barring recognition of same-sex couples.

    The federal law applies to tribes, too, said Melissa Tatum, director of the Indigenous Peoples Law & Policy Program at the University of Arizona. It is up to each tribe -- there are nearly 570 -- to decide where they fall on this issue, she said.

    "Some tribes have a culture and a history of accepting same-sex relationships and they don’t view it as anything unusual or different and some tribes have, like many states … they don’t have a culture of accepting it," she said. "Just like within the state populations you’re going to get the whole spectrum of attitudes in favor and against it in tribal governments."

    Whether a tribal government accepted such marriages was "not just based on changing social opinions but based on tribal culture," she added. "Tribes who take control of their own laws, who make culturally appropriate decisions about what their government policies are going to be, have far and away more successful, more stable tribal government."

    Related:

    GOP sea change on gay rights?

    Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage

    US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples

     

    521 comments

    congratulations to the newly wedded couple :)

    Show more
    Explore related topics: indians, marriage, american, michigan, gays, indian, little, bay, featured, lesbians, same-sex, bands, traverse, odawa
  • 12
    Mar
    2013
    6:37pm, EDT

    Colorado: Gays and lesbians can enter civil unions

    Ed Andrieski / AP

    Rep. Pete Lee, D-Colorado Springs, left, and Rep. Tony Exum, D-Colorado Springs, confer as the civil unions bill is debated in the House Chamber at the Capitol on Monday, March 11, 2013.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Colorado lawmakers on Tuesday approved legislation allowing same-sex couples to enter civil unions, two weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments over whether gays and lesbians can wed.

    The state House of Representatives voted 39-26 to pass the “Colorado Civil Union Act,” about one month after the Senate approved the bill. Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper, who said he will sign the legislation, tweeted: “#CivilUnions passes! Today, every Coloradan has equal rights.”

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    Some House Republicans said that the bill, which goes into effect May 1, will be challenged because it doesn’t offer religious exemptions. "We won't get to debate this again here, but we will debate this in a court of law," Republican Rep. Lori Saine told The Denver Post.

    Five other states allow civil unions, providing state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples, while nine other states, plus the District of Columbia, grant same-sex marriage, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    Same-sex marriage is not allowed in Colorado, where voters passed a constitutional amendment in 2006 defining marriage as between a man and a woman. The civil-unions legislation passed on its third try, according to Lambda Legal.

    Though lawmakers and others applauded Tuesday’s vote, some said it did not go far enough.

    "Of course civil unions and domestic partnerships, no matter how complete the package of protections, are not marriage,” Jennifer Pizer, Lambda Legal's law and policy project director, said in a statement. “True equality is the freedom to marry the one you love and be included under the same laws as your neighbors. It is time to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage, and Lambda Legal and many others will continue to fight for that goal."

    The Supreme Court will hear two cases related to same-sex marriage at the end of March: The justices will hear arguments over the constitutionality of Proposition 8, a California law banning same-sex marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, federal legislation barring recognition of same-sex marriage.

    265 comments

    Separate but equal does not fly.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, gay, court, civil, california, colorado, lesbian, unions, supreme, same-sex, doma, prop-8
  • 28
    Feb
    2013
    10:46pm, EST

    Obama's Supreme Court brief on same-sex marriage will have little impact: experts

    Beck Diefenbach / Reuters file

    Gay marriage supporters cheer during a rally moments before hearing that Proposition 8 had been overturned outside the Ninth Circuit Courthouse in San Francisco, Calif., on Feb. 7, 2012. A federal court later declined an appeal to revisit California's gay marriage ban in June, clearing the way for the Supreme Court to consider whether the ban violates the U.S. Constitution.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Gay rights groups cheered the Obama administration’s weighing in on a landmark Supreme Court case to allow same-sex marriage, while opponents decried the move as “war.”

    But ultimately, constitutional and Supreme Court scholars say the government’s action of filing a legal brief on Thursday in support of repealing California’s Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage, will have little impact on the outcome of the case though it would carry some symbolic meaning.

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    Previous administrations have weighed in on cases brought to the nation’s highest court in which they were not directly involved -- such as the Truman and Eisenhower presidencies over the desegregation of schools, and the Reagan administration urging the justices to overrule the legalization of abortion, said Michael Klarman, a Harvard Law School professor and author of “From the Closet to the Altar: Courts, Backlash, and the Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage.”

    “I don’t think that the government’s brief (on Prop. 8) would be that influential and I don’t say that because I think in general that’s the case, but I think everybody already knew what the administration’s position was,” he told NBC News.

    “The president has made this such a salient issue and has been so clear about his position that I don’t think the brief really adds anything that we didn’t know,” he added, referring to Obama’s calls since last May for same-sex couples to have the right to marry, including his reference to the issue in his 2013 inaugural address.

    Obama administration steps into gay marriage battle

    The justices will hear oral arguments on Prop. 8 on March 26, with a decision expected in June.

    In the legal filing, the Justice Department went further than the California case and suggested it was unconstitutional to block gay couples from getting married in at least seven other states where civil unions are offered instead. Those states, the department said, violate the Constitution if they offer civil unions to gay couples but deny them the right to marry.

    While the administration takes no position in its brief beyond those states, its reasoning would have even broader implications. If the administration's legal theory were ultimately accepted, no state could, under constitutional guarantees against discrimination, deny same sex couples the right to marry.

    But the administration is technically not a litigant to the Prop. 8 case, like it is in the other case that the justices will hear in late March over the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law barring recognition of same-sex couples.

    G. Edward White, author of "The American Judicial Tradition: Profiles of Leading American Judges” and a Supreme Court scholar at the University of Virginia School of Law, said he thought the legal impact of the administration’s move in Prop. 8 would be “virtually zero.”


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    “I really don’t think one should attach any legal significance to this particular intervention,” he said before the brief was released.

    Noting that Obama “been quite late to alter his view on same-sex marriage” -- he did so last May, announcing he supported it -- White thought this was a way to remind everybody that the administration “has now officially changed its mind on the issue.”

    “My takeaway is really that this is a symbolic act on the part of the administration,” he said. “They’re doing it for political currency purposes. The justices are going to understand that’s what it is.”

    William Eskridge, a professor at Yale Law School and a constitutional law expert who has authored many works on legal issues facing same-sex couples, said he didn’t think the brief would “necessarily change any minds” or be “as important for the outcome of the case” as the separate filings this week by about 130 notable Republicans as well as large businesses in support of same-sex marriage.

    Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage

    Klarman, of Harvard, agreed, saying he thought the brief by the Republicans could influence Justice Anthony Kennedy, whom he considers the swing vote on gay marriage.

    “I think someone like Justice Kennedy … is interested among other things in how much political backlash there would be to a ruling in favor of gay marriage. The fact that there's so many Republicans now committing to support it is highly relevant,” he said.

    “I think it matters that Obama was re-elected," he also noted. "If there were a President Romney who would be committed to opposing the decision then I think, you know, a swing justice might be more hesitant. I think it matters that Obama is president and I think it matters that Obama already came out in favor of this, but I don’t think the brief really adds much information.”

    Though the experts don’t expect the legal briefs to carry much weight among the justices, parties on both sides of the issue were roused by the move.

    ProtectMarriage.com, which brought the legal challenge to keep Prop. 8 on the books after the state of California decided not to defend it, decried the effort, calling it a “frontal assault” on the law by the Solicitor General in an email to supporters.

    The group also said the bid was “a stunning declaration of war against the longstanding meaning of marriage and its obvious ties to society’s interesting in both mothers and fathers raising the next generation.”

    Meanwhile, the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the sole sponsor of the challenge to Prop. 8 that also organized the brief by moderate and conservative Republicans as well as Libertarians, welcomed the government to its side.

    “The brief filed by the Solicitor General is a powerful statement that Proposition 8 cannot be squared with the principles of equality upon which this nation was founded,” the group said in a statement. “AFER looks forward to having Solicitor General (Donald) Verrilli and the federal government by our side as we make the case for marriage equality for all before the Supreme Court.”

    Related:

    Once 'inconceivable,' Republican leaders sign pro-gay marriage brief
    Widow to Supreme Court: Same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional
    US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples

    405 comments

    Thank you to the LGBT community of American citizens who are blazing the trail for remaining discriminated demographics to follow in. Freethinkers! Take a page from the LGBT successes and Come Out, Stand Out, Speak Out! There is safety in numbers! I support marriage for same sex couples.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, 8, california, gays, lesbians, same-sex, proposition, doma
  • 28
    Feb
    2013
    10:50am, EST

    Clint Eastwood to Supreme Court: Drop California's ban on same-sex marriage

    /

    Actor and producer Clint Eastwood is seen in September 2012 in Westwood, Calif.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    Clint Eastwood has joined about 130 self-described moderate and conservative Republicans in signing a brief to the Supreme Court arguing against California’s Proposition 8, which bans marriage for same-sex couples.

    Former Bush administration officials, including Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of Defense, and Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania governor and Secretary of Homeland Security, also were among those who signed the brief, which argued that the Constitution prohibits denying same-sex couples access to the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage, according to a copy of the brief released Thursday by the American Foundation for Equal Rights.

    Breitbart.com, which first reported that Eastwood had signed the brief, said he was a "long-time Republican with strong libertarian leanings," who had "become increasingly vocal politically." Eastwood's conversation with an empty chair representing President Barack Obama on the final day of the Republican convention briefly became a major topic on the campaign last fall.

    The nation’s high court will hear arguments in the case on March 26. Thursday is the last day for briefs to be filed in the case, and officials told NBC's Pete Williams that the Justice Department will urge the court to approve gay marriage in California.

    Six other former governors, including Jon Huntsman of Utah and Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, and ten former and two current members of Congress signed the brief, which was organized by AFER. Members of the George W. Bush, Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain presidential campaigns also signed.

    In the brief, the group said it was better for children to grow up with married parents, and that legalizing same-sex marriage would ease couples’ access to benefits and rights afforded to heterosexual couples but would pose “no credible threat to religious freedom or to the institution of religious marriage.”

    Follow @mimileitsinger

    They noted that many of those adding their names did not previously support same-sex marriage. But since a number of states have allowed gays and lesbians to wed, they, "like many Americans, have reexamined the evidence and their own positions and have concluded that there is no legitimate, fact-based reason for denying same-sex couples the same recognition in law that is available to opposite-sex couples."

    Rather, they “concluded that marriage is strengthened, not undermined, and its benefits and importance to society as well as the support and stability it gives to children and families promoted, not undercut, by providing access to civil marriage for same-sex couples,” the brief continued.

    Some on the list included who have had a change of heart on the issue include Meg Whitman, the Republican candidate for California governor in 2010, and David Frum, a special assistant to Bush from 2001 to 2002.

    Once 'inconceivable,' Republican leaders sign pro-gay marriage brief


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    Numerous briefs have been filed in support of Prop. 8 by 20 states, religious groups, academics and legal scholars, as well as many against by businesses, labor unions, veterans, California plus thirteen states as well as the District of Columbia, and gay rights and religious groups.

    National Football League players, Chris Kluwe, a punter for the Minnesota Vikings, and Bredon Ayanbadejo, a linebacker for the Baltimore Ravens, also filed a separate brief in the case that was released Thursday afternoon. The pair has been outspoken supporters of gay rights.

    The California Supreme Court said in 2008 that the state had to allow same-sex marriage, and for a short period, some 18,000 same-sex couples wed in the Golden State. But with the passage of Prop. 8 later that same year, gays and lesbians were later prohibited from marrying. Various lower courts said the law was unconstitutional, with the most recent one determining such a fundamental right like marriage, that gays and lesbians had once enjoyed, could not be taken away.

    The Supreme Court will also hear arguments in late March on Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The Obama administration has encouraged the justices to strike down Section 3. In its argument, the administration noted that Proposition 8 and similar measures in other states were evidence that anti-gay discrimination remained a major problem.

    Related:

    Widow to Supreme Court: Same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional
    US asks Supreme Court to strike down law denying benefits to same-sex couples
    Supreme Court to take up same-sex marriage issue

     

    1340 comments

    Just when you thought Clint Eastwood couldn't be any more awesome and amazing.

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, court, 8, gays, eastwood, supreme, lesbians, same-sex, proposition, prop, clint, doma
  • 14
    Feb
    2013
    1:22pm, EST

    Marriage counselor accused of sex with client, while pushing for divorce

    View more videos at: http://nbcdfw.com.

    By Chris Van Horne, NBC Dallas-Fort Worth

    A marriage counselor charged with sexual assault is on trial in Texas accused of using her position of authority to have sex with a patient.

    Sheila Loven counseled a couple in 2009 and allegedly used her counseling influence to encourage the wife to file for divorce, then had an affair with her husband.



    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    Assistant District Attorneys Betty Arvin and Sean Colston are prosecuting the case.

    The wife took the stand at the Tarrant County courthouse on Thursday and testified about her relationship with Loven, which she described as "visiting her best friend once a week to talk."

    The wife said Loven spoke unfavorably about her husband for months and encouraged the two to divorce.

    "It wasn't marriage counseling, it was divorce counseling," the wife said in court.

    In Sept. 2009, after the wife filed for divorce, she met Loven at Flip's in Grapevine, Texas. Throughout lunch she disclosed to Loven suspicions she had about her husband seeing someone. She testified that after a possible girlfriend was mentioned, Loven admitted her involvement.

    "It's me, it's me," the wife said Loven told her. "She had developed an interest in my husband and wanted to seek a relationship with him," she said in court.

    The wife added that she was numb after the conversation with Loven and eventually got up and left the restaurant.

    The Fort Worth Star Telegram reports that Loven and the husband had an affair for two months in 2009 before the couple reconciled after realizing that Loven had been deceiving them during their separate counseling sessions.

    "I thought she was my friend, I thought she cared," the wife testified.

    After the couple’s reconciliation, they started receiving sexually graphic, threatening and insulting text messages in Jan. 2010, allegedly from Loven.

    The defense argued in court that the messages could not be authenticated. Judge Ruben Gonzalez over ruled the objections.

    Prosecutor Betty Arvin quoted in court a text message to the husband that read: "When are you going to figure out that you are nothing without me? I made you a man."

    A text sent to the wife read: "I want you to suffer."

    The couple is now divorced.

    Loven could face two to 20 years in prison if convicted. If convicted, as a first-time offender, she could get probation.

    The trial is expected to resume on Thursday.

    72 comments

    She couldn't take what wasn't given to her by the so called husband however - seing as she accepted these peoples money and convinced them to be apart while they were obviously still in love and trying to work it out (hence their agreement to go to counceling to begin with) I think the woman deserve …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, divorce, sexual-assault, relationships, counselling, nbcdfw
  • 25
    Jan
    2013
    2:33pm, EST

    Facebook restores wedding photo of gay couple; man decries harassment

    Bishop Erik Swope-Wise

    Bishop Erik Swope-Wise, right, and his husband Kelsey Swope-Wise stand before a unity candle on their wedding day on April 28, 2012. The photo was inadvertently removed from Facebook by the site after a complaint was made about the image.

    By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

    A gay man whose wedding photo was pulled from Facebook after an anonymous complaint believes the social network’s reporting policy allows for a "subversive" type of harassment.

    The photo of Pastor Kelsey Swope-Wise, 37, and his husband, Bishop Erik Swope-Wise, 49, of Elgin, Ill., was taken down from the Gay Marriage USA Facebook page on Monday after someone lodged a complaint with Facebook. The administrator of the page, Murray Lipp, said Facebook informed him on Monday that the image of the biracial couple standing together at their April 28, 2012, wedding "violates policies and community standards."


    Follow @mimileitsinger

    "It’s subversive, the type of harassment, meaning that you can do it anonymously," Erik Swope-Wise, who founded a local chapter of The Affirming Pentecostal Church International, told NBC News on Tuesday. “So you can throw the rock and hide your hand. There’s no accountability for somebody’s actions. So somebody could make that accusation, ‘Well this picture’s offensive.’ Well we don’t know who said that, so how can we even go back to them and say, ‘Why is this offensive? Tell me why it’s offensive.’”

    Facebook restored the photo on Tuesday and apologized to Lipp, who told NBC News that the social networking site had initially blocked his ability to post for one week in addition to taking down the photo. This wasn’t the first time he has had problems with posts being reported.

    “Sadly, Facebook's reporting system is so flawed that it allows people against equality to attack & target pages like mine and Facebook almost ALWAYS sides with those who complain. I was given no opportunity to respond or say anything … ,” he wrote in an e-mail.

    Erik Swope-Wise said Lipp asked to post the image last weekend. He initially was pleasantly surprised by the outpouring of support in comments and likes, but then the messages turned “hateful” and “condescending.” Some who made comments were upset because the men are Pentacostal, which traditionally rejects same-sex marriage, though their church does not.

    Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes told NBC News in an email that the photo did not violate their “policies or community standards and was removed in error. The image has been restored and we apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused." A team reviews hundreds of thousands of reports every week, and occasionally mistakes are made, he said.


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    “I accept that … we’re all subject to human error,” Erik Swope-Wise said. “However the process by which Facebook uses to make those determinations is probably a little too mechanical. When a person puts an opposition to a post … it’s a list of choices that you choose to describe why this is offensive or inappropriate but there gives no validation, you know, as to what that really is.”

    What might be offensive to one group may not be to another, and the term “offensive” was also “too general,” he added. “I think the scrutiny of it needs to be a little more clear before they take such harsh action.”

    Rich Ferraro, a spokesman for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), said he has seen this happen before but that Facebook has always taken quick action.

    “More often than not reporting tools on sites like Facebook are used positively to report anti-LGBT bullying or hate speech. Unfortunately, anti-LGBT users have also used these tools to target LGBT community members -- but when GLAAD has brought incidents like this to Facebook, they have always immediately restored the content,” he wrote to NBC News in an email.

    Issues can arise when social networking sites wade into heated debates.

    "This is involving a lot of judgment calls right, like what is hate speech and what is a political statement. It's extraordinary difficult some times," said Rebecca Jeschke, a spokeswoman for the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation, which advocates for the public’s digital rights.

    She said best practices would be to have a “really clear procedure for contesting any kind of take down and for that to be followed consistently.”

    "Lots of activists use these forums for their activism and so if you censor their activity through Facebook then you're functionally censoring their speech activity on the Internet,” she said. “Facebook isn’t like a state government. It can restrict speech in any way it wants, but sometimes the ramifications are the same."

    229 comments

    Interracial and gay! Some ultra conservative religious zealot just had his head pop!

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, illinois, gay, lesbian, wedding, electronic, photo, freedom, foundation, facebook, same-sex, lgbt, glaad
  • 22
    Dec
    2012
    3:20am, EST

    48 years later, California couple learns marriage wasn't legal

    View more videos at: http://nbclosangeles.com.

    By Jacob Rascon and Julie Brayton, NBCLosAngeles.com

    In 1964 Norma and Bob Clark had a wonderful wedding in Northern California. Everything was perfect.

    Nearly five decades later, the happily married couple, now in their seventies, live in Redlands.


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    But while getting paperwork in order in case one of them passed away, they made a somewhat disturbing discovery -- they were never legally married, because they had no marriage license.

    "I couldn't find it, and couldn't find it for a reason, because it wasn't there," Norma Clark said.

    When couples get a marriage license, the person who then marries them must return the license to their county record office, where it becomes a marriage certificate.

    Read more from NBCLosAngeles.com

    The pastor who married the Clark's apparently never did that.

    Bob Clark went to the San Bernardino County Hall of Records to try to fix everything. The couple first told the story to the Redlands Daily Facts.

    "I just went in there thinking I could just do it, and she said, 'No, no, you have to have witnesses,'" Clark said.

    "Well, you know most people at our wedding are dead. If we had waited a couple more years, we would have been in trouble,” he added.

    'You Can Be Right' investigates modern love and marriage 

    Luckily, the Clarks had their old maid of honor and junior usher in town for the holidays. The four of them, among others, finally made it official.

    The Clarks' son, Alex, got to attend the second marriage.

    “My sister and I, we just kind of joked that we didn't have to throw them a 50th anniversary party anymore," he said.

    Norma Clark said their friends in Redlands had teased them, wanting to know when the reception would be.

    And they have some advice: Check your marriage license.

    155 comments

    It's Obamas fault. He started this whole trend of not having proper documentation. And I know this for a fact...Donny Trump told me so. (I apologize for injecting politics into this boring article...at least I didn't inject religion so that all of the athiest snobs could pretend that they are enligh …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: marriage, wedding, clark, license, bob, featured, san-bernardino, norma, nbclosangeles
  • 7
    Dec
    2012
    8:03pm, EST

    For some same-sex couples, US visas hinge on court's marriage decision

    Allison Joyce / Reuters

    Same-sex married couple Santiago Ortiz, an American, left, and Pablo Garcia from Venezuela, pose for a photograph in their home in Queens, New York on Monday. In the United States there are at least 28,500 bi-national same-sex couples in which one partner is a U.S. citizen and one is not. Many live with the threat that one of them could be deported.

    By Edith Honan, Reuters

    Santiago Ortiz was deeply in love and, he believed, near death when he asked Pablo Garcia to leave his native Venezuela and join him in New York. There was no time to bother with a visa. Ortiz was HIV positive and he wanted Garcia with him.

    That was 26 years ago. Ortiz, an American, is still alive. He and Garcia were married in Connecticut last year. And Garcia still does not have a visa. The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, blocks federal recognition of same-sex relationships.

    "I told him, 'I might die tomorrow, I might die in a month,'" recalled Ortiz, soon to be 57, about that romantic moment in Caracas 26 years ago. "I said, 'Don't wait. Come now.'"


    The medical treatment of HIV has advanced markedly since the 1980s. Full legal acceptance of gay marriage still has a ways to go.

     


    Follow @NBCNewsUS

    Their best hope for getting the same visa a heterosexual couple would be eligible for rests with the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to hear a challenge to DOMA this year in what could be a breakthrough for gay rights in America.

    Although the two men were married in Connecticut, one of nine states that allows same-sex marriage, Garcia was denied his application for permanent residence — which is routine for foreign nationals in heterosexual marriages with Americans, even when the foreigner has overstayed his or her visa.

    Garcia, 52, a playwright and a doctoral student in Spanish literature, remains in the United States illegally.

    "He swept me off my feet," Ortiz, a retired school psychologist, said as he sipped coffee in the couple's colorful apartment in Queens. "For me, it's been easy. I can go wherever I want, I can travel, and Pablo has been there for me. Pablo doesn't have his papers and it's unfair."

    There are at least 28,500 same-sex couples in the United States in which one partner is a U.S. citizen and the other is not, and 11,500 same-sex couples where neither partner is a U.S. citizen, according to the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles.

    This year, Barack Obama became the first U.S. president to endorse same-sex marriage, and in September his administration issued a policy that lesbian and gay couples be eligible for delays in deportation.

    Even so, the wait has been excruciating for bi-national couples living with the threat that one partner could be deported.

    "If you are hours from being put on a plane and being deported, there is relief (legal recourse)," said Rachel Tiven of Immigration Equality, a Washington-based group that is representing Ortiz and Garcia. "There is still no access to green cards or any other affirmative immigration benefit."

    The Supreme Court was expected to decide whether it will hear a legal challenge to DOMA this session, and could make an announcement as soon as Friday.

    'Baby Whisperer'
    It took a decade of friendship for Maria del Mar Verdugo, a citizen of Spain, and Heather Morgan, an American living in New York, to realize they were in love and wanted to spend their lives together. They were married in 2011 and now share a sunny one-bedroom apartment near Columbia University in Manhattan.

    Relaxing in their pajamas on a recent Sunday, they talked about living with the worry that Verdugo, who is 43, could lose her marketing job — and with it her employer's sponsorship of her work visa. Her current visa expires in 2013.

    They long to have children, but say they are putting that off for now. Their preferred parenting roles — where Morgan, who works for a Jewish charity, would continue to work full-time and Verdugo would work part-time but stay home — is impossible as long as Verdugo's immigration status is attached to her job.

    "I certainly always knew I wanted to be a mom. And Mar, if you see her with kids, she's like the baby whisperer," said Morgan, who is 36. "I guess more than anything we'd like to have the choice of when and how to raise children."

    Still, they consider themselves fortunate because even the worst case scenario — Verdugo losing her work visa, and the couple having to relocate to Spain — would be tolerable. Spain is one of 11 countries that has legalized same-sex marriage and the couple has a network of friends and family in the country.

    Another 14 countries also recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes, but not the United States because of DOMA.

    For Richard Dennis and Jair Izquierdo, who have been together for six years, Obama's 2011 directive came too late. Izquierdo, a 35-year-old makeup artist from Peru, came to New York in 2001 on a tourist visa and stayed on.

    Two years ago, Izquierdo arrived at what he thought was a bridal job, but it turned out to be a sting operation and he was arrested. Several months later, in late 2010, Izquierdo was deported and given a 10-year ban on returning to the country.

    The two speak or text several times a day, but Dennis, who is 49, says the home they bought together in Jersey City feels empty. Dennis said he has considered joining Izquierdo in Peru, but said he is reluctant in part because his own command of Spanish is poor.

    "It hasn't split us up," Dennis said. "Physically it has, but not emotionally."

    More content from NBCNews.com:

    • US Supreme Court to take up same-sex marriage issue
    • Obama seeking $60.4 billion for post-Sandy recovery
    • Advocates on both sides hope for Supreme Court clarity on same-sex marriage
    • Woman survives six days in snow eating tomatoes
    • 'My puppy saved my life': SUV rams into man's jewelry store, which he had just left
    • Shark bait? Rotting whale on Malibu beach raises fear
    • Mormon church website: 'Sexuality is not a choice'

    Follow US news from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

    Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.

    15 comments

    Why don't they go and live in Venezuala if the New York man is close to death? The jury will be out for a long time on this issue while our borders get overun with those who have no connection in the U.S. We give these illegals schools, welfare and free room and board at the local prisons at taxpaye …

    Show more
    Explore related topics: laws, marriage, citizenship, featured, same-sex-marriage, lgbt, nationality, doma
Older posts

Browse

  • featured,
  • crime,
  • military,
  • weather,
  • california,
  • florida,
  • updated,
  • environment,
  • us-news,
  • new-york,
  • shooting,
  • texas,
  • education,
  • chicago,
  • police,
  • gulf-oil-spill,
  • kari-huus,
  • nbcnewyork,
  • los-angeles,
  • murder,
  • new-jersey,
  • guns,
  • afghanistan,
  • obama,
  • colorado,
  • sandy,
  • nbclosangeles,
  • trayvon-martin,
  • barack-obama,
  • crime-and-courts,
  • politics,
  • gay,
  • veterans,
  • connecticut,
  • fire,
  • religion,
  • boston-marathon-tragedy,
  • crime-courts,
  • snow
Also
Advertise | AdChoices

Miranda Leitsinger

Archives

  • 2013
    • May (275)
    • April (608)
    • March (548)
    • February (510)
    • January (563)
  • 2012
    • December (457)
    • November (460)
    • October (477)
    • September (432)
    • August (525)
    • July (519)
    • June (508)
    • May (566)
    • April (538)
    • March (576)
    • February (471)
    • January (417)
  • 2011
    • December (455)
    • November (190)
    • October (9)
    • September (3)
    • August (51)
    • July (8)
    • June (3)
    • May (12)
    • April (5)
    • March (3)
    • February (1)
    • January (8)
  • 2010
    • December (5)
    • November (1)
    • October (2)
    • September (28)
    • August (40)
    • July (35)
    • June (177)
    • May (50)
    • April (9)
    • March (2)
    • February (2)
    • January (4)
  • 2009
    • December (5)
    • November (5)
    • October (2)
    • September (11)
    • August (4)
    • July (12)
    • June (1)
    • May (1)
    • April (1)
    • March (3)
    • February (3)
    • January (2)
  • 2008
    • December (3)
    • November (2)
    • October (6)
    • September (30)
    • August (26)
    • July (10)
    • June (4)
    • May (8)
    • April (13)
    • March (9)
    • February (7)
    • January (6)
  • 2007
    • December (10)
    • November (6)
    • October (22)
    • September (11)

Most Commented

  • Obama calls IRS flap 'inexcusable,' announces resignation of acting IRS chief (3681)
  • At least 19 injured in New Orleans Mother's Day shooting (2758)
  • NTSB recommends lowering blood alcohol level that constitutes drunken driving (1579)
  • Benghazi, IRS, AP: A guide to the 3 storms confronting the White House (2517)
  • 5 unanswered questions about the IRS targeting of conservative groups (1961)
  • Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell convicted of first-degree murder (1648)
  • Fired lesbian teacher: Catholic educators union won't back me (2024)

Other blogs

  • The Body Odd
  • Cosmic Log
  • Red Tape Chronicles
  • PhotoBlog
  • Open Channel

NBCNews.com top stories

3147,10
© 2013 NBCNews.com
  • US news on NBCNews.com
  • About us
  • Contact
  • Help
  • Site map
  • Careers
  • Closed captioning
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Advertise