US District Court Judge Bernard Friedman, for the Eastern District of Michigan, has struck down Michigan’s ban on marriage equality:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendants are hereby
permanently enjoined from enforcing the Michigan Marriage Amendment and its implementing
statutes, as they conflict with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
What I found most interesting were his findings of fact as they relate to Mark Regnerus (emphasis added):
The Court finds Regnerus’s testimony entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious
consideration. The evidence adduced at trial demonstrated that his 2012 “study” was hastily
concocted at the behest of a third-party funder, which found it “essential that the necessary data
be gathered to settle the question in the forum of public debate about what kinds of family
arrangement are best for society” and which “was confident that the traditional understanding of
marriage will be vindicated by this study.” See Pls.’ Motion in limine to Exclude Testimony of
Mark Regnerus, Ex. 9.
In the funder’s view, “the future of the institution of marriage at this
moment is very uncertain” and “proper research” was needed to counter the many studies
showing no differences in child outcomes. Id. The funder also stated that “this is a project where
time is of the essence.” Id. Time was of the essence at the time of the funder’s comments in
April 2011, and when Dr. Regnerus published the NFSS in 2012, because decisions such as
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010), and Windsor v. United States,
-13-833 F. Supp. 2d 394 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), were threatening the funder’s concept of “the institution
In other words; Junk science concocted to influence the Supreme Court.