"Christie was created and born a male. Her original birth certificate, an official document of Texas, clearly so states… At the time of birth, Christie was a male, both anatomically and genetically. The facts contained in the original birth certificate were true and accurate, and the words contained in the amended certificate are not binding on this court.

"There are some things we cannot will into being. They just are.

"We hold, as a matter of law, that Christie Littleton is a male. As a male, Christie cannot be married to another male. Her marriage to Jonathon was invalid, and she cannot bring a cause of action as his surviving spouse."

I support her in however she chooses to argue this case, because she is so obviously RIGHT, and so obviously being discriminated against by the mere fact that she is FORCED to fight this case at all.

Her attorney, Peggy Campbell, said that the new lawsuit is not about marriage equality: “All of the courts keep saying they don’t allow gay marriage. Our position is that this is not a gay marriage issue. It’s a man being married to a woman.”

As a legal strategy, this is all well and good. But from a broader perspective, I think this sort of reasoning is questionable at best. It does trans people no favors to attempt to overlay a gender-binary narrative onto everyone's life experience. It very well may be the case that "a man being married to a woman" is the most accurate way to describe Thomas and Nikki's relationship, but that's not really the point: their story does not fit into the proscribed cisgendered heterosexual gender-binary constraints, and so it is seen as somehow "less". The important part if that it's two people who love each other; the taxonomy is irrelevant.

Sad. So very, very sad. Shame on Heather. And shame on Texas.

Relatives squabbling over wills, benefits, etc. always gets ugly, though.