NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Press Releases

National Organization for Marriage Says Louisiana Marriage Decision Proves That It Is Perfectly Legal For States to Define Marriage As The Union of One Man and One Woman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 3, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"This is a great win for the cause of marriage, coming as it does on the heels of other pro-marriage court victories, that puts the lie to the claim that it is inevitable the US Supreme Court will redefine marriage. To the contrary, we believe they will leave this issue with the states." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today praised federal court Judge Martin Feldman for ruling today that the US Constitution does not preclude the state of Louisiana from defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and that voters made a rational decision in doing so when they adopted the state's marriage amendment. Feldman becomes the third federal judge to have ruled that traditional marriage laws are not unconstitutional, and the first since the US Supreme Court issued their decision invalidating a section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. A state judge in Tennessee has also ruled that the US constitution does not prohibit states from defining marriage a one man and one woman.

"Here we see the house of cards collapsing that supported the myth that redefining marriage is inevitable," said Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "This decision by Judge Feldman in Louisiana is a great win for the cause of marriage, coming as it does on the heels of other pro-marriage court victories, that puts the lie to the claim that it is inevitable the US Supreme Court will redefine marriage. To the contrary, we believe they will leave this issue with the states."

In his ruling issued today, Judge Feldman wrote that "Louisiana's definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and the limitation on recognition of same-sex marriages permitted by law in other states ... do not infringe the guarantees of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the United States Constitution... The defendants have shown that Louisiana's decision to neither permit nor recognize same-sex marriage, formed in the arena of the democratic process, is supported by a rational basis."

"Judge Feldman has authored a powerful opinion that points the US Supreme Court in the direction of upholding state marriage laws and constitutional amendments," Brown said. "He finds what should be obvious to everyone, that states have a legitimate concern in 'linking marriage to children with intact families.' It is perfectly appropriate for voters to determine if they wish to decide for themselves whether they wish to redefine this age-old institution that has served society so well. Overwhelmingly, voters have rejected redefining marriage, and we expect the US Supreme Court to do so as well."

Feldman becomes the third federal judge to uphold traditional marriage laws, joining judges in Nevada and Hawaii. Last month a judge in Tennessee ruled that the US Constitution does not prohibit Tennessee from adopting a marriage amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Statement on the 9th Circuit's Ruling

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 28, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian Brown, President, National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

"We are of course disappointed with the Ninth Circuit's decision today. The Ninth Circuit did not reach the appeal of the denial of motion to intervene, holding instead that even if NOM had been allowed to intervene on behalf of its members (including Oregon voters, wedding services providers, and a county clerk), it had no standing to appeal the judgment below even though the elected officials of the state refused to provide any defense of the marriage amendment adopted by a strong majority of Oregonians.

"We believe that the decision conflicts with a prior Ninth Circuit opinion specifically recognizing that a County Clerk with the duty to issue marriage licenses likely would have standing to intervene and appeal an adverse judgment. NOM alleged under oath that it had among its members just such a county clerk, and it sought to intervene on the clerk's behalf under the Supreme Court's well-established precedent in the case of NAACP v. Alabama allowing membership organizations to pursue the interests of their members when there are substantial hurdles to the members litigating in their own name, such as the real threats of harassment and violence that have been manifested elsewhere in the country around the marriage issue. Because of that conflict, we will certainly be exploring whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc with the full Ninth Circuit or whether we will seek review in the Supreme Court itself.

"Ultimately, though, NOM remains concerned that a sovereign act of the people of Oregon went entirely undefended by the elected officials of Oregon, an abdication of duty that resulted in the long-standing understanding of marriage in Oregon being rewritten by a single federal court judge. The policy fight over the definition of marriage is something that should ultimately be resolved by the people, not unelected judges. For now, Oregonians have been denied their voice on that important policy issue, and that is truly regrettable."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Pleased that the US Supreme Court Granted a Stay of the Decision Striking Down Virginia’s Marriage Amendment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 20, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage:

"We are pleased that the US Supreme Court has put a halt to the decision in Virginia redefining marriage in violation of the state’s marriage amendment overwhelmingly approved by voters. We had called upon the Court to take this step and are gratified that they will now be able to carefully consider the issues. This is another indication that the rush to judgment declaring marriage to be unconstitutional is not only premature, but incorrect. The US Supreme Court has determined that states have the right to define marriage and we remain confident that they will uphold all the various traditional marriage laws and constitutional amendments that have been wrongly invalidated by federal judges. We look forward to the US Supreme Court taking one or more of the three marriage cases now pending before them, and ultimately ruling that defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is entirely constitutional."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Calls for Supreme Court Stay of Decision Striking Down Virginia's Marriage Amendment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 14, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage:

"We urge the Supreme Court to grant Prince William County Clerk Michèle McQuigg's request for a stay of the decision in Bostic v. Schaefer while the matter is appealed. The 4th Circuit has wrongly rejected the request for a stay, and now it lies with the Justices in Washington to ensure that this case can be appealed in an orderly and reasonable fashion without the spectacle of premature same-sex ‘marriages’ filling the news as an affront to the people of Virginia who voted overwhelmingly to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. As the Court stayed a similar decision in the case coming out of Utah, we urge them to find the same good reasons for staying the present decision, maintaining the dignity and credibility of the judicial process and giving the people of Virginia the respect they deserve to defend their vote for marriage before our highest court."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

NOM Praises Judge for Showing Deference to Voters and Upholding Tennessee Marriage Amendment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 12, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"This important decision has largely been ignored in the media because it undercuts the narrative that same-sex marriage is inevitable. But it isn't." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today praised a state judge in Tennessee who ruled last week that the Tennessee state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman does not violate the federal constitution. He is the first judge to uphold the constitutionality of a state marriage amendment since the US Supreme Court issued their 2013 opinion striking down a section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

"It is refreshing to find a judge who is willing to apply the federal constitution as it is and not reinterpret the constitution so as to redefine marriage," said Brian S. Brown, NOM's president. "Judge Russell Simmons is exactly correct when he says that there is nothing about the US Supreme Court's Windsor decision that would invalidate the right of Tennessee voters to define marriage as one man and one woman or require the state to recognize a same-sex ceremony performed in another state."

The Tennessee case involved two gay men who 'married' in Iowa four years ago and now wish to force Tennessee to grant them a divorce. But Judge Simmons wrote in his ruling, "neither the Federal Government nor another state should be allowed to dictate to Tennessee what has traditionally been a state's responsibility."

A number of federal judges in recent months have misinterpreted the US Supreme Court's ruling in the Windsor case, which held that a section of DOMA was unconstitutional because it interfered with the right of New York to redefine marriage. The Court's majority held that regulating marriage has historically been a responsibility of the states and the federal government cannot substitute its judgment for that of the states.

"This important decision has largely been ignored in the media because it undercuts the narrative that same-sex marriage is inevitable. But it isn't," said Brown. "NOM is confident that when this issue reaches the US Supreme Court, likely within a few months, that the constitutionality of marriage amendments and statutes defining marriage as one man and one woman will be upheld."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Urges Appellate High Court to Rule in Favor of Traditional Marriage; Calls on US Supreme Court to Grant Review of Utah Decision

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 6, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"It's time that the votes of millions of Americans be respected and upheld." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

"We urge the 6th Circuit Court of Appeal to issue a ruling overturning the lower courts and upholding the right of voters and legislators to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. While they are not physically present in the courtroom in Cincinnati, the votes of 8.7 million citizens are at stake in this hearing to determine the constitutionality of traditional marriage in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. Voters passed marriage amendments by overwhelming margins in these four states — nearly 8.7 million votes were cast in support of these four amendments, amounting to a combined 65% of the vote cast. It's time that the votes of millions of Americans be respected and upheld.

"No matter what happens with this appeal today in the 6th Circuit, the future of marriage is headed to the US Supreme Court. NOM is optimistic about ultimate victory. We urge the Supreme Court to grant review of the Utah marriage amendment case which was filed yesterday by the state. Utah is the first of many states that will be asking the Supreme Court to reverse the lower court rulings and uphold the right of voters and their elected representatives to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, which it is in reality and has been since the dawn of time."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Condemns Virginia Court for Ignoring History, Reality and Rule of Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 28, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"It is a terrible abuse of power for a court to abandon the definition of marriage which has existed throughout the history of the Commonwealth of Virginia, was adopted by the people, and reflects in law the reality of what marriage is, the union of one man and one woman." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

"We are extremely disappointed, though not surprised, with today's ruling from the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidating the definition of marriage in Virginia. It is a terrible abuse of power for a court to abandon the definition of marriage which has existed throughout the history of the Commonwealth of Virginia, was adopted by the people and reflects in law the reality of what marriage is, the union of one man and one woman.

"While we condemn the ruling of the majority, we are pleased with the strong dissent authored by Justice Paul Niemeyer who noted that the 'linguistic manipulation' of case law employed by the majority to create a 'fundamental right' to same-sex marriage will also result in 'the right of a father to marry his daughter and the right of any person to marry multiple partners.'

"Justice Niemeyer's dissent lays bare what the majority has done — they have invented a right to redefine marriage because two justices have substituted their views for the considered opinion of the General Assembly and the voters of the Commonwealth.

"We call on the state to appeal this decision to the US Supreme Court and to vigorously fight for the truth of marriage and the right of the people and the elected representatives of the state to define marriage in law consistent with what it is in reality — the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Expresses Concern Over New Executive Order, Calls on Congress to Protect People of Faith Against 'Reverse Discrimination'

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 21, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"The fact is that non-discrimination rules like the order issued by President Obama can become a weapon used to punish and harass individuals and groups who support marriage as the union of one man and one woman." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) expressed concern over President Obama's signing today of a new executive order ostensibly aimed at preventing workplace discrimination against LGBT persons but that in reality could target Christians and other people of faith for reverse discrimination and harassing lawsuits. The executive order applies to all groups, including religious employers, who contract with the federal government.

"The fact is that non-discrimination rules like the order issued by President Obama can become a weapon used to punish and harass individuals and groups who support marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said Brian S. Brown, NOM's president. "As with the flawed ENDA (Employee Non-Discrimination Act) legislation that was rejected by Congress, President Obama's order has the great potential of putting employers in the position of standing up for their faith values or violating the new order. This will unnecessarily subject people of faith to harassing complaints and lawsuits."

Brown surmised that this executive order could lead to Christians and others with belief in marriage as the union of a man and a woman facing reprisal and even punishment simply for expressing their views in the workplace.

"All manner of frivolous lawsuits could result from an action like this, and that's a dangerous thing when the courts have already shown such a lack of restraint when it comes to the question of the definition of marriage," Brown maintained. "This is nothing more than an agenda to create a cultural narrative wherein the belief in marriage as the union of one man and one woman becomes the legal and social equivalent of bigotry or hate speech. It is the next step on a path we've already seen this administration proudly pursuing, a path toward a new thought-policing state where those who hold traditional values about marriage and family are to be marginalized."

Brown called on Congress to pass legislation overturning the new executive order and to revisit the issues of conscience protection and religious freedom for believers in traditional marriage. He urged citizens to contact their Senators and Representatives about these concerns.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Announces Boycott of JP Morgan Chase for Offensive Survey Questions and Dishonest Dealings with the Public

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 16, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Chase was clearly pushing an LGBT agenda with these invasive survey questions, and also created an intimidating and threatening atmosphere for their employees who wondered what the 'right' answers were and how 'wrong' answers would be dealt with. Furthermore, we have evidence that Chase has lied to the public about this matter, constituting a major betrayal of trust. Therefore, we are launching a boycott and international petition drive at www.VoidChase.com to give consumers a way to object to the bank's offensive actions." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced a boycott against JP Morgan Chase in protest of what deemed "offensive and inappropriate questions" given to employees in an annual survey. In addition to launching the boycott at VoidChase.com, NOM's president also revealed new evidence today that shows JP Morgan Chase has misled consumers and employees about the survey, which asked workers if they are an "ally of the LGBT community." After the survey was brought to light by whistleblowers and reported in several news outlets, Chase has repeatedly insisted that the survey was "voluntary and anonymous." But NOM has released a screen shot provided by a Chase employee establishing that employees had to "log in" to the Chase computer system using their unique employee ID number in order to complete the survey, allowing the megabank to learn which employees are loyal to the LGBT community.

"Asking employees whether they're allies of the gay community is a highly inappropriate question in the first place, but it is particularly offensive when the answer can be tied directly to individual employees, as is the case when someone must enter their Employee ID number to ‘log in' to complete the survey," Brown said. "And now, to top it off, we have the 'smoking gun' that shows Chase has lied about this matter to both their employees and to the public."

NOM produced a computer screenshot of Chase's internal employee publication, the "Daily Bulletin" dated March 28, 2014, urging employees to "log in and complete the 10 minute survey." This screenshot was provided by a Chase employee, who confirmed in an email that "employees were required to identify themselves with their employee Standard ID Number prior to taking the survey." This information corroborates employee reports provided by Professor Robert P. George at Mirror of Justice and by Breitbart News.

And while participation in the survey is technically voluntary, employees are subject to substantial internal pressure to participate. The employee said, "There was a big push to make sure that all employees completed the survey. About a week before the survey all employees received an email from CEO Jamie Dimon stressing the importance of completing the survey. Then, all employees in my department received an email from the head of our department emphasizing the importance of 100% participation in the survey....This was followed up by my immediate supervisor confirming with me and all my co-workers to make sure that we took the survey. So, no, this was not voluntary or anonymous."

Despite this evidence, Patricia A. Wexler, a Chase spokesperson, told several people who inquired about the matter that, "The news report is not correct. These surveys are anonymous and voluntary." Another JP Morgan Chase spokesperson, Jaclyn D'Aversa, also told the Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal that the survey was "completely voluntary and anonymous."

Brown said the Chase survey potentially subjects those employees who do not answer in the "politically approved way" to discrimination and sanctions: "As one employee put it, this could be a way to create a ‘fire these people first' list."

"It's clear that Chase has lied to its employees and customers about the survey and its attempt to push the LGBT agenda. This is a major violation of trust, the central value in any banking relationship," Brown said. "We are launching an international boycott and petition drive at www.VoidChase.com to give consumers a way to object to the bank's offensive actions, demanding that they issue an apology and pledge never again to engage in this conduct."

To kick off the boycott, Brown said that he would be moving his own home mortgage, presently held with Chase, to another company. He also said that VoidChase.com and NOMblog.com had additional information about the scandal and contained news reports to show how the evidence has mounted against Chase in this matter.

Brown also noted that NOM was partnering with ActRight.com and the international advocacy organization CitizenGo to distribute the "Void Chase" petition across the globe. These partnerships give the initiative an initial reach of several million activists worldwide.

"Based on their actions to date, we expect that JP Morgan Chase will continue to try to cover up their conduct, but we are determined to hold them accountable," Brown said. "We will keep up this boycott and petition drive until JP Morgan Chase issues a formal apology for their offensive conduct and pledges never again to invade the privacy of their employees by attempting to learn their private views about LGBT issues."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Condemns Federal Court Decisions Invalidating Marriage in Utah and Indiana

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 25, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following should be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

"Today's split decision of a panel of judges in the 10th Circuit is not surprising given that this Circuit refused to even order a stay of the district court decision when it came down during the Christmas holidays. While we strongly disagree with the two judges in the majority, we are encouraged by the strong defense of marriage articulated by Justice Paul Kelly in his dissent, and especially his defense of the sovereign right of the people of Utah to decide this issue for themselves. This principled recognition by a federal judge considering the marriage issue underscores that the people of a state are entitled to respect and deference in their desire to promote marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Indeed, the US Supreme Court decided in the Windsor case that the federal government must respect the right of states to define marriage. The majority in the Utah case engage in sophistry to attempt to argue their way around the Supreme Court's ruling that it is up to the states to define marriage. As Justice Kelly noted in his dissent, ‘If the States are the laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions—contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives—turns the notion of a limited national government on its head.'"

Mr. Brown also commented on the decision of a federal judge in Indiana to strike down that state's laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

"The elected representatives of the people of Indiana have decided, for good and proper reasons, to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It is judicial activism for a single judge to substitute his own views on marriage for the considered opinion of the people’s representatives. This is just the latest example of activism from the federal bench, but we fully expect this decision to eventually be reversed when the US Supreme Court upholds the right of states to define marriage as a man and a woman. We call on Governor Mike Pence to immediately appeal this decision and to seek a stay of the ruling. In the meantime, it is also imperative that the state legislature move forward a state constitutional amendment preserving marriage so that the people always remain in control of the definition of marriage in Indiana."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

IRS Admits Wrongdoing in Release of the National Organization for Marriage's Confidential Tax Return and Donor List; Agrees to Pay $50,000 in Settlement of Lawsuit

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 24, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Thanks to a lot of hard work, we've forced the IRS to admit that they in fact were the ones to break the law and wrongfully released this confidential information." — John Eastman, NOM chairman —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — In response to a lawsuit brought by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has admitted wrongdoing in releasing the organization's confidential tax return and donor list which was obtained by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), NOM's chief political rival. The IRS has agreed to pay NOM $50,000 to settle the lawsuit.

"It has been a long and arduous process to hold the IRS accountable for their illegal release of our confidential tax return and donor list, which was ultimately given to our chief political rival by the recipient," said John Eastman, NOM's chairman and a member of the ActRight legal Foundation team that brought the lawsuit against the IRS on NOM's behalf in October, 2013. "In the beginning, the government claimed that the IRS had done nothing wrong and that NOM itself must have released our confidential information. Thanks to a lot of hard work, we've forced the IRS to admit that they in fact were the ones to break the law and wrongfully released this confidential information."

NOM said that an investigation revealed that its 2008 tax return and list of major donors was released to Matthew Meisel, a gay activist in Boston, MA. Email correspondence from Meisel revealed that he told a colleague that he had "a conduit" to obtain NOM's confidential information. While testifying under oath in a deposition in the litigation, Meisel invoked the 5th Amendment against self-incrimination and refused to disclose the identity of his conduit. Documents obtained during the litigation prove that Meisel then provided NOM's tax data to the Human Rights Campaign (whose president was a national Co-Chair of the Obama Reelection Campaign). The information was also published by the Huffington Post.

"While we are very pleased that the IRS has been exposed as being responsible for this leak of our confidential information to our political opponents, we believe the IRS may still be hiding information from the American people," Eastman said. "We have called on the Attorney General to grant Matthew Meisel immunity from prosecution so that we can force him to disclose the identity of his conduit . We urge the Congress to explore this issue with the appropriate government officials. It's imperative that all those who have engaged in corrupt practices and illegal acts in the IRS be identified and held accountable."

NOM will also be seeking an additional award of attorney fees to offset some of the cost of bringing the case, but the briefing schedule for that has not yet been set.

###

To schedule an interview with John Eastman, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, mthebolt@crcpublicrela[email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Launches Independent Expenditure Campaign in Support of Claudia Tenney; Opposes Republican Incumbent Richard Hanna

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 23, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Claudia Tenney is a principled conservative who believes in marriage, supports the right of voters to have a say, and will vote to protect innocent human life in the US House." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The nation's most prominent organization working in support of natural marriage today announced it had launched an independent expenditure campaign to defeat incumbent Republican Representative Richard Hanna, and support his opponent in the GOP primary, Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) said it was spending tens of thousands of dollars to defeat Hanna and support Tenney.

"Richard Hanna has abandoned Republican principles and is a foe of New York families. He wants to redefine marriage and has refused to allow voters a say on this critical issue. He's also militantly pro-abortion," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Hanna's positions are anti-family and in favor of big government. Claudia Tenney is a principled conservative who believes in marriage, supports the right of voters to have a say, and will vote to protect innocent human life in the US House."

NOM sent a direct mailer to tens of thousands of voters in Hanna's district, New York's 22nd Congressional District noting that Hanna is the 3rd most liberal Republican in the US House, according to National Journal. The mailer said, "On core issues, Richard Hanna has abandoned us." It says that Hanna is "militantly pro-gay marriage" and "shockingly pro-abortion."

"We realize that Congressman Hanna may have a lead in this race, but we believe he is unfit to serve New York," Brown said. "We are hopeful that New York voters will shock the establishment just as voters in Virginia did in unseating Rep. Eric Cantor. Regardless of the outcome, we are standing on principle to let Rep. Hanna and his allies in Washington know that we will not sit still and watch liberal Republicans join with liberal Democrats to redefine marriage and kill innocent children. We urge voters to reject Richard Hanna on Tuesday."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Condemns Wisconsin Judge’s Decision on Marriage and Her Refusal to Stay Its Decision

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 10, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Again, an individual, activist judge is legislating from the bench and trampling on the sovereign will of the people of Wisconsin." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), condemned the decision of U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb to overturn Wisconsin's duly enacted state marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Crabb joins a growing list of activist judges falling over themselves to legislate from the bench and make a mockery of the sovereign will of the people. Further, Crabb refused to stay her decision resulting in confusion throughout Wisconsin's county clerks.

"Again, an individual, activist judge is legislating from the bench and trampling on the sovereign will of the people of Wisconsin," declared Brian Brown president of the National Organization for Marriage. "This has got to stop, and the only way it will is for the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and protect the democratic process and the rights of the tens of millions of voters who have declared that they want their state's social policy to define marriage as it has been known for millennia — the union of one man and one woman."

In 2006 nearly 60% of the voters of Wisconsin approved Referendum 1 which defined marriage in the state as the union of one man and one woman.

NOM praised State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen for defending the rights of the people of Wisconsin and declaring that Wisconsin will "continue to defend the constitutionality of our traditional marriage laws and the constitutional amendment, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters." Van Hollen stated that he would seek an emergency order stopping same-sex marriage from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals while the state appeals the decision.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Statement by the National Organization for Marriage on the Decision of the US Supreme Court to Deny Its Request to Stay the Decision of a Federal Judge in Oregon to Redefine Marriage

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to John Eastman, Chairman of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Claremont Institute:

"We are disappointed that the US Supreme Court has declined to issue a stay of a federal judge's order redefining marriage in Oregon. Because the state Attorney General has worked in concert with the plaintiffs to deny the people of Oregon a defense of their state marriage amendment, and because the trial judge refused our request to defend the amendment, the people have at least temporarily lost their common-sense law which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It's important to recognize that the Supreme Court has not decided the merits of the underlying issue. NOM has filed an appeal of the trial judge's decision to prevent us from intervening in the case to defend Oregon's marriage amendment. That appeal is on track, with briefs due in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal in August and September, and oral argument sometime afterwards. We will continue to press this case because we believe that the people of Oregon are entitled to a vigorous defense of marriage, and because it is in the public interest to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with John Eastman, Chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Congratulates Jeff Bell on Winning the Republican Senatorial Primary in New Jersey

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Congratulations to Jeff Bell on winning his republican primary. Jeff is a true conservative, a champion for marriage, family, and life." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — Today, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) congratulates Jeff Bell on winning the Republican Senatorial primary in New Jersey. NOM endorsed Bell in his campaign and ran automated calling to 100,000 pro-marriage republican voters in New Jersey in support of Bell.

"Congratulations to Jeff Bell on winning his republican primary. Jeff is a true conservative, a champion for marriage, family, and life," stated Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "The U.S. Senate needs conservative champions like Jeff, especially at this time as we seek to move forward legislation that will protect marriage and every child's right to a mother and a father. NOM will continue to support Jeff's candidacy as he faces the anti-marriage and anti-family candidate Corey Booker in November."

The National Organization for Marriage is committed to supporting candidates across the country that will support and defend marriage on the national stage. Part of NOM's five-point strategic plan for 2013/2014 is to take back the U.S. Senate so that pro-marriage and family legislation can move through the U.S. Congress. Bills such as the "State Defense of Marriage Act," "The Marriage and Religious Freedom Act," and the proposed Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman can only be passed if marriage champions take back the U.S. Senate.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).