Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2:13-cv-00217 #2

2:13-cv-00217 #2

Ratings: (0)|Views: 39|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc 2 - Complaint
Doc 2 - Complaint

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Equality Case Files on Jul 03, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


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





Peggy A. Tomsic (3879)tomsic@mgpclaw.com  James E. Magleby (7247)magleby@mgpclaw.com  Jennifer Fraser Parrish (11207)parrish@mgpclaw.com 
170 South Main Street, Suite 850Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-3605 Telephone: 801.359.9000Facsimile: 801.359.9011Attorneys for Plaintiffs
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISIONDEREK KITCHEN, individually; MOUDISBEITY, individually; KAREN ARCHER,individually; KATE CALL, individually;LAURIE WOOD, individually; andKODY PARTRIDGE, individually,Plaintiffs,v.COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY ANDINJUNCTIVE RELIEFGARY R. HERBERT, in his officialcapacity as Governor of Utah; JOHNSWALLOW, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Utah; and SHERRIESWENSEN, in her official capacity asClerk of Salt Lake County, Case No.Defendants. Honorable
Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 2 Filed 03/25/13 Page 1 of 26
 2Plaintiffs Derek Kitchen, Moudi Sbeity, Karen Archer, Kate Call, Laurie Wood,and Kody Partridge (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) allege and complain against DefendantsGary R. Herbert, John Swallow, and Sherrie Swensen, in their official capacities(collectively, “State of Utah” or “Defendants”), as follows:
1. More than 40 years ago, the Supreme Court of the United Statesrecognized that “[m]arriage is one of the ‘basic rights of man,’ fundamental to our veryexistence and survival.”
Loving v. Virginia
, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967). But today, as a resultof the approval of Amendment 3 to the Utah Constitution on November 2, 2004, and itseffective date on January 1, 2005 (“Amendment 3”), the State of Utah discriminatesagainst and denies its gay and lesbian citizens access to marriage by providing in itsconstitution that “[m]arriage consists only of the legal union between a man and awoman.Utah Constitution, Art. I, sec. 29. Amendment 3 further provides that [n]odomestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given thesame or substantially equivalent legal effect.”
This unequal treatment of gay menand lesbians by the State of Utah denies them the basic liberties and equal protectionsunder the law that are guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United StatesConstitution.2. For these reasons, Plaintiffs seek a declaration from this Court thatAmendment 3 violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and
Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 2 Filed 03/25/13 Page 2 of 26
 3is therefore unlawful, and a judgment to permanently enjoin enforcement of Amendment3, and any other Utah statute that seeks to exclude gay men and lesbians from accessto civil marriage.
3. This action raises questions under the Constitution of the United Statesand 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and thus this Court has jurisdiction over all claims for reliepursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1331.4. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because allDefendants reside in this District and the State of Utah. Venue is also proper because asubstantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this district.
5. This action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeks: (1) a declaration thatAmendment 3 to the Utah Constitution, which denies gay and lesbian individuals theopportunity to marry civilly and enter into the same officially sanctioned familyrelationship with their loved ones as heterosexual individuals are granted theopportunity to do; and also denies same-sex couples legally married in other states fromhaving their marriage recognized in the State of Utah as an officially sanctioned familyrelationship with their loved ones, the same as heterosexual couples legally married inother states are officially recognized in the State of Utah, is unconstitutional under theDue Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United
Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 2 Filed 03/25/13 Page 3 of 26

You're Reading a Free Preview

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