Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
P. 1
Windsor: Amicus Brief of Foundation for Moral Law

Windsor: Amicus Brief of Foundation for Moral Law

Ratings: (0)|Views: 274|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files

USA v. Windsor: Amicus Brief of Foundation for Moral Law in support of BLAG on the merits.

USA v. Windsor: Amicus Brief of Foundation for Moral Law in support of BLAG on the merits.

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Equality Case Files on Feb 08, 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

09/17/2013

pdf

text

original

 
No. 12-307
W
ILSON
-E
PES
P
RINTING
C
O
.,
 
I
NC
.
 
 – 
 
(202)
 
789-0096
 
 – 
 
W
ASHINGTON
,
 
D.
 
C.
 
20002
 
I
N
T
HE
 
Supreme Court of the United States
————U
NITED
S
TATES OF
 A 
MERICA 
,
 Petitioner
, v.E
DITH
S
CHLAIN
W
INDSOR
,
IN
H
ER
C
 APACITY  AS
E
 XECUTOR OF THE
E
STATE OF
 T
HEA 
C
LARA 
S
PYER
,
 et al
.,
 Respondents
.————
On Writ of Certiorari to theUnited States Court of Appealsfor the Second Circuit
————
BRIEF
 
OF
 
 AMICUS
 
CURIAE
 
FOUNDATION
 
FOR
 
MORAL
 
LAW
 
IN
 
SUPPORT
 
OF
 
RESPONDENT
 
BIPARTISAN
 
LEGAL
 
 ADVISORY 
 
GROUP
 
OF
 
THE
 
UNITED
 
STATES
 
HOUSE
 
OF
 
REPRESENTATIVES
————
* Counsel of Record
 
J
OHN
 A.
 
E
IDSMOE
*F
OUNDATION
F
OR
M
ORAL
L
 AW
 One Dexter AvenueMontgomery, AL 36104(334) 262-1245eidsmoeja@juno.com
 Attorney for Amicus Curiae
 
January 29, 2013
 
 
(i)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), 1 U.S.C. § 7, violates the Fifth Amend-ment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws asapplied to persons of the same sex who are legallymarried under the laws of their State2. Whether the Executive Branch’s agreementwith the court below that DOMA is unconstitutionaldeprives this Court of jurisdiction to decide this case.3. Whether the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Groupof the United States House of Representatives has Article III standing in this case.
 
 (iii)TABLE OF CONTENTSPageQUESTIONS PRESENTED................................ iTABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................... iiiTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................ vSTATEMENT OF IDENTITY ANDINTERESTS OF
 AMICUS CURIAE
............... 1SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................. 2 ARGUMENT ........................................................ 3I. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THEDEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACTSHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THETEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION, THESUPREME LAW OF THE LAND ............ 3II. THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACTDOES NOT VIOLATE THE EQUALPROTECTION COMPONENT OF THEFIFTH AMENDMENT BECAUSE THEFIFTH AMENDMENT CONTAINS NOSUCH COMPONENT ............................... 7III. THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACTIS RATIONALLY SUPPORTED BY MANY LEGITIMATE REASONS ANDIMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS,INCLUDING THE “LAW OF NATURE AND OF NATURE’S GOD” ANDTHOSE INTERESTS ADVANCED BY CONGRESS WHEN IT PASSED THESTATUTE. ................................................. 13

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
la428 liked this

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)//-->