|
Tuesday, 03 February 2009 10:15
|
 Florida Bar Will Support Gay Adoption
The Florida Bar is coming out in a big way — for gay adoption.
The Bar’s board of governors voted unanimously to file an amicus brief before the 3rd District Court of Appeal supporting a Miami-Dade circuit judge’s ruling that declared unconstitutional the state’s ban on gay adoptions.
“We thought it was appropriate to defend the judge’s decision,” said Nancy Gregoire, a family section member and a partner with Kirschbaum Birnbaum Lippman & Gregoire in Fort Lauderdale. “In my mind, speaking only for myself, it was the right thing to do and well past its time.”
Forty-two of 52 board members participated in the Friday vote. Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp’s chief of staff, Larry Ringers, filed the only recusal.
Bruce Rogow, a prominent Constitutional lawyer and professor at Nova Southeastern University’s law school, said an amicus brief from The Bar could provide a persuasive argument in favor of gay adoption.
“It would be influential. It will say to the court that the leadership of The Bar agrees with the concept, and in these kinds of cases, the law can be made to do what you want it to do,” he said. “This is more of a policy situation than a constitutional argument, but we always wrap policy around constitutional arguments.”
The family law sections five-page request to the board of governor’s offered an emotionally compelling argument in favor of adoption by the gay North Miami couple suing to overturn the ban.
They took in two brothers — named John and James Doe in court papers — one at age 4 years and the other at 4 months as foster children in 2004.
“John was wearing a dirty adult-sized T-shirt and sneakers four sizes too small. Both boys suffered from untreated scalp ringworm. James also had an untreated ear infection. John did not speak,” said the section’s written request to get involved. “The boys left a world of chronic neglect, emotional impoverishment and deprivation to enter a new world that was nurturing, safe, structured and stimulating. They have lived and thrived in that world ever since.”
The 3rd DCA is accepting briefs in the case.
The family section’s brief has not been drafted yet.
Monroe Circuit Judge David Audlin Jr. issued a similar ruling on the constitutionality of the state law banning gay adoption last September, but that case ended when the parent opted to become a permanent guardian, which is legal in Florida, rather than pursue adoption.
“We no longer had custody of the child and no longer had custody of the case,” said Neil Skene, special counsel to Department of Children and Families in Tallahassee. The difference in the cases is why the state appealed the Miami-Dade case but not the Monroe case.
“We need an appellate resolution to the case, and we don’t have any choice under the statute. The statute doesn’t give us any choice when the parent is gay,” Skene said. He declined to comment on other issues involving the Miami-Dade case.
Chief Deputy Solicitor General Louis Hubener, who represented the state in a part of the proceedings, declined to comment, saying he had not heard about The Bar’s vote.
The gay adoption ban has been on the books in Florida since 1977 when ultra-conservative Anita Bryant successfully led the charge to overturn a Dade County ordinance prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Florida is the only state with a complete ban on adoptions by gays.
In Florida, “no matter what, if the person is gay, they cannot adopt. And the judge has no leeway,” said Bar governor Ervin Gonzalez, a partner with Colson Hicks Eidson in Coral Gables who was a key supporter of filing the amicus brief.
Mississippi has a softer ban that gives a judge discretion in adoption rulings, and some states still have de facto bans limiting adoptions to married couples, he noted.
At the heart of the adoption issue is the question of whether a gay couple can enjoy the same rights and privileges as a straight couple — an issue that has drawn increasing national attention as states grapple with the question of gay marriage.
But Gonzalez said the issue shouldn’t be divisive.
“We’re supporting equal protection under the law, due process under the law and the right for the judge to make a decision of what’s in the best interest under the law,” he said. “You have to support constitutional freedoms.”
The Bar board vote is significant since it is part of a state agency that regulates the legal profession and is giving its tacit approval to a position defying the will of the state Legislature.
About five years ago, The Bar’s family section requested permission to approach the Legislature in opposition to the ban, but The Bar’s board of governors denied permission.
“This is different now. Now we have a judicial decision that we’re trying to defend,” Gregoire said.
Calls to the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing the couple, were not returned.
“We are very happy that the Board of Governors voted unanimously,” said Scott Rubin, chairman of The Bar’s family section. “It’s the right thing to do for the children of Florida.”
|
Advertisements
Home 
News 
