|
Rochester, New York: The New York Appellate Division in Rochester (4th Division) has unanimously overturned a Livingston County judge's decision and affirmed New York's same sex marriage act, rejecting a challenge under the New York Open Meetings Law. The challenge was filed by the New Yorkers For Constitutional Freedoms, who claimed that the rapid fire meetings leading up to the law between congressional Republicans and Governor Andrew Cuomo violated the state open meetings law. New York is one of a few states that requires the state legislature to comply with the open meetings law, which requires that meetings be open to the public and include at least 72 hours of notice. The law does have an exemption that permits single party caucuses to meet privately, including their chosen guests. New Yorkers For Constitutional Freedoms claimed that the inclusion of Cuomo, a Democrat, at the Republican caucuses eliminated the exemption. The appeals court disagreed and held that the single party requirement only applied to members of the group and not their invited guests. In it's brief, the court stated:
| “
|
Had the Legislature intended to constrict the meaning of 'guest' as plaintiffs suggest, it could have done so. Eligible caucuses include only those comprised of 'adherents of the same political party' ... and there is no such limitation on the scope of eligible guests.[1]
|
”
|
Jason McGuire, executive director of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms disagreed with the ruling stating:
| “
|
The truth is, even liberal-leaning good government groups have had to admit that the process by which same-sex 'marriage' became law was a bad one. If we can't trust elected leaders to play by the rules when they seek to pass legislation, then anything can pass against the will of the people -- whether it be same-sex 'marriage' or a national healthcare initiative.[1]
|
”
|
While the issue centers on a transparency challenge, others have highlighted the political nature of the challenge. Cuomo himself commented on the ruling, stating:
| “
|
"The court's decision affirms that in our state, there is marriage equality for all, and with this decision, New York continues to stand as a progressive leader for the nation." [1]
|
”
|
[2]
See also
External links
