Carol Marin wrote an opinion piece in The Chicago Sun-Times about the freedom to marry for Illinois couples. The piece profiles Patrick Bova and Jim Darby, who are plaintiffs in the consolidated marriage lawsuits filed by Lambda Legal and the ACLU of Illinois.  The article tells the story of the couple's efforts to advocate for the passage of SB 10, which failed to pass in the House this spring. In the meantime, the lawsuit is awaiting its next hearing before the Cook County Circuit Court.

 They, along with other gay and lesbian families, trekked to the General Assembly to lobby for passage of a same-sex marriage bill. Though they have the tweedy look of academics, they are longtime warriors in this battle.

Another skirmish, just announced Friday, is set for Oct. 22 when a coalition of equal marriage advocates will “March on Springfield” as the fall veto session gets under way. It will be another attempt to reclaim the hope everyone felt this May when legislation that had already passed the Senate was ready to be called in the House.

Read the article.

The National Law Journal wrote about the recent Supreme Court victory which invalidated patents held by Myriad Genetics Inc. on two gene mutations that indicate a greater risk of breast and ovarian cancers. The new ruling will allow thousands of women to undergo diagnostic testing to detect whether or not they are a carrier of the gene and thus prevent diagnosis of these life-threatening illnesses.

The justices' decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics surprised few in the patent law field. Following oral arguments in April, the court appeared to be leaning favorably towards an argument presented by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. Breaking with the position held by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Verrilli urged the justices to hold that isolated, naturally occurring DNA is not patent-eligible, but that laboratory-created, synthetic DNA is.

Read the entire article.

Politico posted an article about the lawsuit filed by the National office of the ACLU against the National Security Administration challenging their phone surveillance program and application of the Patriot Act. The ACLU claims the program violates Americans' constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy.

The suit filed Tuesday argues that the phone-tracking system detailed in The Guardian violates freedom of speech and privacy rights, with the ACLU arguing on its own behalf as a Verizon customer. The group wants the National Security Agency’s surveillance program stopped and all its records to be purged.

The case is aimed at the Supreme Court, where it would pose a challenge to a 1979 ruling that found no expectation of privacy when sharing information with a third party and would build on some of the doubts the court expressed in 2012 about that decision’s relevance in the current technological era.

Read the rest.