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
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2:13-cv000395 #57

2:13-cv000395 #57

Ratings: (0)|Views: 24|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc 57 - Registrar Janet Rainey's Opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment
Doc 57 - Registrar Janet Rainey's Opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Equality Case Files on Oct 25, 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

03/24/2014

pdf

text

original

 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIANORFOLK DIVISION
TIMOTHY B. BOSTIC,
et al.
, ))Plaintiffs, ))v. ) Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00395)JANET M. RAINEY,
et al.
, ))Defendants. )
DEFENDANT JANET M. RAINEY'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION
The right to ask the judicial branch to coercively alter a State's traditional definition of marriage was recognized nowhere in this country until 2003
 – 
and then only under the constitutionof a single state. It has never been recognized under the United States Constitution by anyappellate court or federal district court from which an appeal lay.
See Perry
v.
Schwarzenegger 
,704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010),
aff'd on other grounds
,
 Perry
v.
 Brown
, 671 F.3d 1052(9th Cir. 2012),
vacated for want of jurisdiction
,
 Hollingsworth
v.
 Perry
, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013).Furthermore, unless and until
 Baker 
v.
Nelson
, 409 U.S. 810 (1972), is overturned, a claim thatmaintaining the traditional definition of marriage under state law violates either the EqualProtection or Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment fails to present a substantialfederal question. Finally, Virginia's definition of marriage survives constitutional scrutiny under established doctrine.
DEFENDANT RAINEY'S RESPONSE TOPLAINTIFFS' STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED LEGISLATIVE FACTS
1.
 
Denied. Since 1607, Virginia law has defined the institution of marriage as aunion between a man and a woman. Virginia Code § 20-45.2 speaks for itself.
Case 2:13-cv-00395-AWA-LRL Document 57 Filed 10/24/13 Page 1 of 22 PageID# 416
 
22.
 
Denied that Plaintiffs have fully stated the provisions of Virginia Code § 20-45.2which speaks for itself in any event. Denied that Virginia Code § 20-45.2 alters the commonlaw. Denied that Plaintiffs have acknowledged the rational bases supporting it.3.
 
Denied that the 2004 amendment of Virginia Code § 20-45.3 amended thedefinition of marriage. Denied that Plaintiffs have fully quoted the 2004 amendment to VirginiaCode § 20-45.3, which speaks for itself, or have acknowledged the rational bases underlying it.4.
 
Denied that the 2004 amendment of Virginia Code § 20-45.3 amended thedefinition of marriage. Denied that Plaintiffs have fully quoted the 2004 amendment to VirginiaCode § 20-45.3, which speaks for itself, or have acknowledged the rational bases underlying it.Denied that any party has standing to challenge the civil union provisions of the act.5.
 
Admitted that the Affirmation of Marriage Act was known as House Bill Number 751 in the Virginia House of Delegates and was sponsored by Marshall, R.G., Albo, Black, Coleand Welch.6-12. Denied that House Bill Number 751, which speaks for itself, is accuratelycaptured in the quoted phrases. The bill had eight whereas clauses and three paragraphs of legislative findings including traditional propositions usually advanced in defense of the conjugaldefinition of marriage. These provisions also reflected political process concerns.13-14. Denied that as a matter of evidence or substance the hearsay statement of amember of a multimember legislative body can be received or considered on summary judgmentor properly accorded weight under the rational basis test.15. Denied that Virginia Constitution article I, § 15-A, which speaks for itself, wasdesignated the Marshall/Newman Amendment. Admitted that article I, § 15-A was ratified in2006.
Case 2:13-cv-00395-AWA-LRL Document 57 Filed 10/24/13 Page 2 of 22 PageID# 417
 
316-17. Virginia Constitution article I, § 15-A speaks for itself. Denied that any party hasstanding to challenge the civil union provisions of Virginia Constitution article I, § 15-A.18.
 
Denied that Plaintiffs have completely and accurately summarized the opinion,which speaks for itself, or have completely and accurately acknowledged its context. Insubstance, it opined that existing contractual rights by those in same-sex relationships would not be impaired under the common law by the amendment. Taking care that this was so is evidencethat the amendment did not have a bare design to harm under the
Windsor 
animus theory. Theopinion has been vindicated by subsequent events.19.
 
Denied as a matter of evidence or substance that such hearsay statements may bereceived or given weight under the rational basis test.20.
 
Denied that as a matter of evidence or substance the hearsay statement of amember of a multimember legislative body can be received on summary judgment or be properlygiven weight under the rational basis test.21-23. Denied that as a matter of evidence or substance the hearsay statement of amember of a multimember legislative body can be received or considered on summary judgmentor properly accorded weight under the rational basis test.24.
 
These documents speak for themselves. As a matter of law, colleges anduniversities may not adopt public policy contrary to the public policy established by the GeneralAssembly. This includes public policy established by the explicit declination of the GeneralAssembly to act with respect to a particular subject.25.
 
Virginia Code § 63.2-1709.3 speaks for itself.26-27. Like most states Virginia does not provide special protection based upon sexualorientation. Virginia Code §§ 2.2-3901, 18.2-57(B), and 36-96.3 speak for themselves.
Case 2:13-cv-00395-AWA-LRL Document 57 Filed 10/24/13 Page 3 of 22 PageID# 418

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)//-->