Arizona appellate courts announced procedural decisions on special action petitions against the governor and the state over gay rights issues.

The state Supreme Court said that on Oct. 28 it will consider an action brought by six Republican legislators who seek to overturn Governor Napolitano’s executive order that state agencies not discriminate among employees on the basis of sexual orientation.

The court said it will decide this case without oral argument, based on the briefs. The governor’s response to the legislators’ filing will be made by her in-house legal staff and the Attorney General’s Office and is due with the court on Aug. 20, Tim Nelson, the governor’s general counsel, said.

The other case involves two homosexual men who have sued because they were denied a marriage license. The state Court of Appeals said it will hear oral arguments Aug. 19.

In the discrimination-order case, the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Scottsdale-based organization composed of more than 30 Christian ministries and 725 lawyers, represents five House members and one senator who say the governor’s executive order exceeds her authority. The legislators, all Republicans, are Sen. Thayer Verschoor, Dist. 22; and Reps. Andy Biggs, Dist. 22; Linda Gray, Dist. 10; Doug Quelland, Dist. 10; John Allen, Dist. 7, and Joe Hart, Dist. 3.

ADF also is involved in the same-sex marriage case. The state Court of Appeals earlier this month denied an ADF motion to have Sen. Mark Anderson, R-Dist. 18, intervene and defend the state’s 1996 ban on same-sex marriage. That lawsuit was brought by two gay men against the state and the clerk of Maricopa County Superior Court, who rejected the men’s application for a marriage license in July.

Victoria Mata of ADF said the appellate court is, however, permitting ADF to file a “friend of the court” brief that will argue in support of the law against homosexual marriage.

Line-Veto Response

In a third, unrelated, case, Scott Bales of Lewis and Roca was scheduled to file Ms. Napolitano’s response with the state Supreme Court on Aug. 15 to the lawsuit challenging her authority to increase state spending by using her line-item veto authority to eliminate spending reductions approved by the Legislature. The action was brought by Republican legislative leaders, who allege some of her 35 line item vetoes to the fiscal 2004 budget were unconstitutional because their effect was to appropriate money and only the Legislature has the authority to do that.

Oral arguments in this case are set for Sept. 9. After hearing the two sides, the court will decide whether to accept the case and rule on it or send it to a lower court for a trial. —