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
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Amicus Brief of Social Science Professors

Amicus Brief of Social Science Professors

Ratings: (0)|Views: 160|Likes:
Published by mcanham4472
Amicus brief involving two BYU professors saying that studies showing no difference in parenting outcomes with children of gay couples are not conclusive.
Amicus brief involving two BYU professors saying that studies showing no difference in parenting outcomes with children of gay couples are not conclusive.

More info:

Published by: mcanham4472 on Mar 26, 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

09/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
N
OS
.
 
12-144,
 
12-307I
N
T
HE
 
Supreme Court of the United States
D
ENNIS
H
OLLINGSWORTH
,
ET AL
.,
 
Petitioners 
,
 
v.
RISTIN
M.
 
P
ERRY 
,
ET AL
.,
 
Respondents 
.U
NITED
S
TATES
,
 
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
,
 
and
B
IPARTISAN
L
EGAL
 A 
DVISORY 
G
ROUP OF THE
U
NITED
S
TATES
H
OUSE OF
R
EPRESENTATIVES
,
 
Respondents 
.
On Writs of Certiorari to the United States Court of   Appeals for the Ninth and Second Circuits 
 
AMICI CURIAE BRIEF OF SOCIAL SCIENCEPROFESSORS IN SUPPORT OFHOLLINGSWORTH AND BIPARTISAN LEGALADVISORY GROUP ADDRESSING THE MERITSAND SUPPORTING REVERSAL
 Abram J. Pafford
Counsel of Record 
 
P
 AFFORD
L
 AWRENCE
&
 
C
HILDRESS
PLLC1776 I Street N.W., Suite 900Washington, DC 20006(202) 756-4886apafford@pafflaw.com
Counsel for Amici Curiae 
 
 
i
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Hollingsworth, et al. v. Perry, et al.
 1. Whether the Equal Protection Clause of theFourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of aman and a woman.
United States v. Windsor, et al.
 1. Whether Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. § 7, violates the equal protectioncomponent of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
 
 
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUESTIONS PRESENTED ...................................... iTABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................ iiTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....................................... ivINTEREST OF
AMICI CURIAE 
............................... 1SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ........................... 3 ARGUMENT ............................................................... 5I.
 
Compelling Evidence Shows that ChildrenBenefit from the Unique ParentingContributions of Both Men and Women. ............ 5II.
 
The Claim of “No Difference” In Outcomes of Children Raised By Gay and Lesbian Parentsand Intact Biological Parents Is EmpiricallyUndermined by Significant MethodologicalLimitations. .......................................................... 13 A.
 
The APA studies are based on smallsample sizes. .......................................... 15B.
 
The APA’s studies are largely basedon homogeneous samples. ..................... 17C.
 
Most of the samples in the APA-citedstudies relied on non-random,convenience sampling. .......................... 19

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)//-->