Welcome to your Tuesday open thread. Try not to hurt someone.
Gov. Chris Christie today made it illegal for state laws or rules to identify anyone with a developmental or intellectual disability as “mentally retarded” by signing legislation sought by people who have felt belittled by the term.
…
Christie said he regretted people had to wait so long to get the bill passed, and said he was proud to have signed it. “This is making sure each citizen in our state is treated with the respect they deserve … It’s their government, too,’’ he said.
The 81-page bill includes the citations in state law and regulations that have to be changed, including: “mentally retarded,” “physically handicapped,” “feeble-minded,’’ and “physically or mentally defective.” The law also applies to language involving people with mental illness, such as “the insane,” the “mentally deficient,” and “the mentally ill.”“Words matter – it’s that simple,’’ said Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), one of the bill’s sponsors and the father of a daughter with a developmental disability. “We have a community of productive, hard-working citizens…The ‘R’ word should mean respect.”
The legislation (S1982) passed in June.
This is a bill that’s long past due as far as I’m concerned. This is one issue where I agree with Sarah Palin (before she undermined herself by not criticizing Rush Limbaugh’s use of the word as “satire” anyway) – let’s not belittle developmentally disabled people.
Yesterday the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of the Prop 8 decision in California pending an expedited appeal (until at least December 6). Significantly, cited in the court orders was that the appellants must show they have standing to ask for appeal of the decision:
Three things:
First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December.
Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants’ opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it’s a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn’t want it to linger.
Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. Here’s a discussion of the standing issue. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing. Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don’t know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone.
Unfortunately that means some couples in California will still have to wait. You can go to the Prop 8 Trial Tracker for up to the minute information on the case.