This is the story of
Christie Lee Littleton
a woman of courage who faced gross injustice
in the land that touts "liberty and justice for all"

It is the tragic story of the death of her husband of seven years and how an insensitive judiciary not only invalidated her marriage, but declared her to be a "male" despite having a vagina and all other female physical appearance characteristics. Despite all medical evidence to the contrary, the courts have said that she cannot sue a doctor for wrongful death of her husband, because her marriage is invalid.

Christie Lee and Jonathan on their wedding day

The happy couple toasts to their life together

It is the story of how narrowmindedness and prejudice can affect us all.  It can even affect those who are not even personally aware of their chromosome configuration, or have chromosomes that do not fit within the court's narrow definition of what are "man" and "woman" chromosomes.

After a long period of grieving, Christie sought out an attorney to try to prevent the physician who treated her husband just prior to his death from harming
anyone else. The attorney suggested a "wrongful death suit," so Christie agreed to go forward. It surfaced during depositions that Christie had been identified as "male" on her original birth certificate and the defendant's attorneys sought summary judgment on the theory that Christie was a "male" at the time of her marriage and is still a "male" -- "same-sex" marriages being illegal, then Christie's marriage was invalid and thus she did not have any legal standing to file suit.

One of many picnics in the park

A backyard BBQ with friends

The trial judge agreed with the defense, and subsequently
the Texas 4th Court of Appeals agreed with the trial
judge.  The Texas Supreme Court denied petition for review and Christie's attorney dropped her case. With new
attorneys now representing her, a petition for rehearing
by the Texas Supreme Court was filed on April 18, 2000.

On May 18, 2000, the Texas Supreme Court denied hearing again, and Christie's legal
team filed a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court on July 3, 2000. The Court denied the writ on October 2, 2000. She has vowed to fight on, helping those who face similar injustices.

Christie Lee with her family today

Mrs. Christie Lee Littleton

It's not just a case of possible medical malpractice, Christie Lee Littleton is in a fight to regain the validity of her cherished marriage and her dignity as a woman and human being that was stripped from her by ignorance and prejudice exercised in the judicial system -- she seeks
JUSTICE!

To Jonathan Mark Littleton -- a Yellow Rose of Texas
Let us not forget that it was his marriage too, and we are his voice as well since he can no longer speak out for justice.

The Result of the 4th Court's Error
in the Littleton Case

Two More Lesbians Set to Tie the Knot
Women Get Marriage License on 9/20/00
Read the Story

Two Lesbians Wed on 9/16/00
See Press Releases & Media Coverage

What does all this mean?

• First, it shows just how crazy the 4th Court's Decision was in terms of "traditional" notions of marriage -- it nullified a "traditional" heterosexual woman with vagina marriage to a man with a penis. Christie Lee is medically recognized as a female phenotypically with little physical difference between her and a genotypical female having a complete hysterectomy or a phenotypical AIS woman with XY chromosomes.

• Second, it opens the door for the first step in establishing legitimate same-gender marriage -- the people involved are legally and administratively recognized as being of the same current gender (the marriage license is based on birth gender and not current gender). It is only a small step beyond for all same-gender couples to file for marriage licenses, and then sue in federal court for equal protection based on these existing same current gender marriages. Remember that in medical gender terms, both partners in these marriages are same-gender.

• Third, it demonstrates clearly to everyone just how inconsistent the legal status of people in Christie Lee's situation is -- the issues in San Antonio's microcosm reflect the situation worldwide. Society and government must either recognize legitimacy of medical gender assignations (of which the birth gender assignation is one) or wild presumptions of the "Creator's" intended gender.

• A final interesting tidbit in the overall picture is that the 4th Court's Littleton decision validates a host (there is no way to estimate the number) of already existing same current gender marriages. These are marriages entered before one of the spouses completes gender transition (akin to using the original birth certificate in the Wicks' marriage). Even amongst Christie Lee's legal team of over a dozen people, there are two of these same current gender marriages -- both long-term of over 27 years.

Go figure...
Christie Lee can go to Houston, Texas and legally marry a man, but if she moves back to San Antonio, Texas, her legal marriage in Houston is now illegal. She could legally marry another woman in San Antonio though, and it would be a same-gender marriage because the State of Texas administratively recognizes her current gender as female.  Harris County only accepts current gender for marriage licenses, and Bexar County only accepts original birth certificate gender for marriage licenses, not current gender. Confused?  Texas government certainly is. This is what happens when government, in this case the courts, starts meddling in people's private lives.

The New Hardberger Testament		A new  "Adam & Eve" for a new Millennium
A vision of Barbie and Ken (neither have any genitalia), given their genders by their "Creator" (Mattel) and forever immutable (of course, we presume Barbie's chromosomes to be XX and Ken's to be XY although Mattel has not done any chromosome testing on the pair) -- is this Chief Justice Hardberger's idea of what Texas-sanctioned marriages should be...

Filings

TX 4 COA

TX Sup. Ct. 1

TX Sup. Ct. 2

US Supreme Ct.

Rulings

288 Dist. Ct.

TX 4 COA

Legal Articles

Gender Markers

Early Precedent

Family Code

VA Decision

Gender Legality

L/G Law Notes

Human Rights

NZ - Marriage

MA Atty. Gen.