Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
12-63 #5 DOJ Response

12-63 #5 DOJ Response

Ratings: (0)|Views: 7,676 |Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
EQCF Dkt#5 - DOJ Response Brief
EQCF Dkt#5 - DOJ Response Brief

More info:

Published by: Equality Case Files on Aug 31, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/31/2012

pdf

text

original

 
No. 12-63
 In the Supreme Court of the United States
E
DITH
S
CHLAIN
 W
INDSOR
,
IN HER CAPACITY AS
E
 XECUTOR OF THE
E
STATE OF
T
HEA 
C
LARA 
S
PYER
,
PETITIONER
v.
U
NITED
S
TATES OF
 A 
MERICA 
,
ET AL
.
ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI  BEFORE JUDGMENT TO THE UNITED STATESCOURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 
BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES
D
ONALD
B.
 
 V 
ERRILLI
,
 
J
R
.
 Solicitor GeneralCounsel of Record
S
TUART
F.
 
D
ELERY
 Acting Assistant AttorneyGeneral
M
ICHAEL
J
 AY
S
INGER
 A 
UGUST
E.
 
F
LENTJE
H
ELEN
L.
 
G
ILBERT
 Attorneys Department of JusticeWashington, D.C. 20530-0001 SupremeCtBriefs@usdoj.gov(202) 514-2217 
Case number 12-63 EQCF Doc #5 Filed 08/31/2012
 
QUESTION PRESENTED
Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)defines the term “marriage” for all purposes under fed-eral law, including the provision of federal benefits, as“only a legal union between one man and one woman ashusband and wife.” 1 U.S.C. 7. It similarly defines theterm “spouse” as “a person of the opposite sex who is ahusband or a wife.”
 Ibid.
The question presented is: Whether Section 3 of DOMA violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the lawsas applied to persons of the same sex who are legallymarried under the laws of their State.
(I)
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageOpinion below........................................1Jurisdiction..........................................1Statement...........................................2Discussion...........................................9Conclusion..........................................21
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases:
 Arizonans for Official English
v.
 Arizona
,520 U.S. 43 (1997).............................17
 Baeh
v.
 Lewin
, 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993).............2
 Bake
v.
 Nelson
:191 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 1971).....................7409 U.S. 810 (1972)..............................7
Camreta
v.
Greene
, 131 S. Ct. 2020 (2011).... 17, 18, 19
 Dames & Moore
v.
 Regan
, 453 U.S. 654 (1981)...... 13
 Dragovich
v.
United States Dep’t of the Treasury
,No. C 10-1564, 2012 WL 1909603 (N.D. Cal. May24, 2012), appeal pending, No. 12-16461(9th Cir. filed June 26, 2012) and No. 12-16628(9th Cir. filed July 23, 2012).....................
11
 Elk Grove Unified Sch. Dist
. v.
Newdow
, 542 U.S. 1(2004).........................................17
 Estate of Ranftle, In re
, 917 N.Y.S.2d 195 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011).................................15
 Friends of the Earth, Inc.
v.
 Laidlaw Envtl. Servs.(TOC), Inc.
, 528 U.S. 167 (2000)..................16(III)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->