Lower Court Judges are often elected or appointed to Higher Courts or positions of government; with this in mind please
answer the following questions.
1. The current Presidential Administration states that "activist judges" are rewriting state law without being elected.
What is your opinion as it relates to the recent highlighted cases in the media regarding same-gender marriage? And
do you feel an amendment banning same-gender marriage would be constitutional?
2. The Wisconsin State Legislature has introduced and passed legislation to amend the WI Constitution to ban same-gender
marriage and any other similarly recognized partnership; i.e. civil marriage, domestic partnership for heterosexuals and homosexuals.
The City of Milwaukee provides benefits to the registered domestic partner of individuals employed by the Municipality.
How do you see this legislation, if enacted, effecting (if at all) this benefit?
3. If you were (re)elected, how would you advance and protect the rights of LGBT people?
4, Why should HRL-PAC endorse you?
SURVEY ANSWERS:
Valarie Hill
1a. I am not opposed to same-gender marriages or civil unions.
1b. Amendments to the constitution (U.S. or State) should be for the purpose of expanding
the rights of citizens. Without further legal research (which unfortunately I just don't have the time to do right now),
I am unable to provide an answer about whether or not an amendment banning same-gender marriage would be constitutional.
I do think however, that an amendment would be redundant in this state since Wisconsin law has already defined
marriage as being between a man and a woman.
The Wisconsin State legislature has introduced and passd legislation to amend the WI Constitution
2. If Wisconsin passed legislation as currently proposed ("A legal status identical or substantially
similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state"), the City of Milwaukee's
provision of benefits to domestic partners would surely be challenged as unconstitutional. This challenge
to the benefit provision can reasonably be expected, particularly, since this benefit has been challenged in at
least one state that has passed an amendment with similar language. This language affects not only same-gender
couples but all unmarried couples and as a result the ripple effect of such an amendment would be far more impactful than
the public is being told.
3. When re-elected, I will continue to ensure that all individuals receive fair and equal
protection under the law regardless of their race, creed, color, religious affiliation, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.
4. The HRL-PAC should endorse my re-election bid because I will continue to dispense justice in a fair
and impartial manner to all of the members of this community. Since being elected to Milwaukee Municipal Court, Branch
1, I've reinstated night court and the Branch's participation in the court's community outreach projects. Night Court
and the community outreach projects make the court more accessible to the public. In addition, I have a diverse legal
background which includes 7 years of judicial experience handling municipal, criminal, small claims, administrative, traffic,
and juvenile matters. I've handled thousands of cases as a judge and as a Public Defender. I am actively involved
in the community and not just during campaign season. I serve on the Children's Outing Association Board of Directors
and the Department of Public Instruction's Truancy Task Force. I've donated countless volunteer hours to Milwaukee Public
Schools, American Red Cross, American Cancer Society, Girl Scouts, and many others. I also enjoy the support of elected
officials, community leaders, both my colleagues and 2 of Milwaukee's largest unions, AFSCME-District Council 48 and the Milwaukee
County Labor Council. These are just a few of the reasons the HRL-PAC should endorse my candidacy.
David Halbrooks
1) I do not support a constitutional amendment banning same-gender marriage. I believe all individuals should
be treated the same with the same rights. I believe the recent cases attacking same-gender marriage are divisive and
are being used for political advantage of those opposed to equal rights for all individuals.
2) While the amendment seems to indicate that individuals who have rights as domestic partners in the City
of Milwaukee will not be affected, this is an open question. I am concerned that this issue could be decided adversely
to the city in litigation currently pending in Michigan. If this case is decided in such a manner it will be necessary
to defeat the amendment in order to guarantee the maintenance of the hard-fought benefits already obtained by individuals
living and working in Milwaukee.
3) As a municipal judge I have heard thousands of cases affecting the rights of many individuals in the City
of Milwaukee. My experience and concern for the civil rights of all individuals make this position valuable to members of
the LGBT community. As a result of my prior experience with our court system and working in Milwaukee's neighborhoods,
I am uniquely qualified to advance and protect the rights of all individuals in our city. I am also familiar and aware
that certain individuals use our laws and the court system as a pretext to unfairly discriminate against individuals in our
neighborhoods. My experience has given me an awareness regarding these individuals and their attempts to use the system
to divide our citizens.
4) I have noticed that in our emerging neighborhoods in the City of Milwaukee much of the preservation and
redevelopment has been led by members of the LGBT community. The reason that I became an attorney was to work on housing
and neighborhood improvement issues. I have spent my career attempting to preserve our housing stock and to build strong
neighborhoods where all individuals can live peacefully together in a diverse community. As such I believe we share
a vision for our city.
I would be honored and grateful for the endorsement of the HRL-PAC.
