Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Perry: Amicus Brief of U.S. Catholic Bishops

Perry: Amicus Brief of U.S. Catholic Bishops

Ratings: (0)|Views: 48 |Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Hollingsworth v. Perry: Amicus Brief of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in support of Prop 8 Proponents
Hollingsworth v. Perry: Amicus Brief of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in support of Prop 8 Proponents

More info:

Categories:Business/Law
Published by: Equality Case Files on Jan 29, 2013
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

04/11/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
No. 12-144
In the Supreme Court of the United States
__________
D
ENNIS
H
OLLINGSWORTH
,
 
et al
.,
 Petitioners
,
v.
RISTIN
M.
 
P
ERRY 
,
 
et al
.,
Respondents.
__________
On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Courtof Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
__________
BRIEF
 AMICUS CURIAE 
OF UNITED STATESCONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPSIN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS ANDSUPPORTING REVERSAL
__________
 A 
NTHONY 
R.
 
P
ICARELLO
,
 
J
R
.*
General Counsel
J
EFFREY 
H
UNTER
M
OON
 
Solicitor
M
ICHAEL
F.
 
M
OSES
 
 Associate General Counsel
 U
NITED
S
TATES
C
ONFERENCE
 
OF
C
 ATHOLIC
B
ISHOPS
 3211 Fourth Street, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20017(202) 541-3300apicarello@usccb.orgCounsel for
 Amicus Curiae
 January 29, 2013 *
Counsel of Record
 
 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ...................................... iiiINTEREST OF
 AMICUS 
............................................ 1SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 1 ARGUMENT ............................................................... 4I. Proposition 8 Is Rationally Related toLegitimate State Interests. ................................ 4 A.
 
Two Unique Features of Opposite-SexUnions Supply Two of Many RationalBases for Distinguishing Those Unionsfrom Other Relationships. .......................... 51. Recognizing the Unique Capacity of Opposite-Sex Couples to Procreate. ... 62. Recognizing the Unique Value toChildren of Being Raised by TheirMother and Father Together. ............ 7B.
 
The Court Below Erred in Finding theUnique Affirmation of Opposite-SexUnions Irrational. ..................................... 121.
 
Rationality Does Not Require theState to Endorse or Promote Same-Sex Relationships If It Endorses orPromotes Opposite-Sex Unions. ....... 122. Rationality Does Not Require
 Acceptance of the Lower Court’s
Incoherent Definition of Marriage. .. 14
 
 
iiC.
 
The Court Below Failed to ShowCalifornia the Judicial DeferenceCharacteristic of the Rational BasisStandard, or Appropriate to StateDecisions in Areas of OngoingControversy and Traditional Concern. .... 15D.
 
 Although Rational Basis Review Is the Appropriate Standard, Proposition 8Would Also Survive More RigorousScrutiny..................................................... 18II. Proposition 8 Is Not Rendered InvalidBecause It Was Informed by Religious andMoral Viewpoints. ............................................. 19III. Redefining Marriage Will Generate Wide-Ranging Burdens on Religious Liberty andOther Well-Established Constitutional Rights 21CONCLUSION ......................................................... 24

You're Reading a Free Preview

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