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 or section
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
12-16995 #52

12-16995 #52

Ratings: (0)|Views: 308|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc #52 - Amicus Brief of GLAD in support of plaintiffs
Doc #52 - Amicus Brief of GLAD in support of plaintiffs

More info:

Categories: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

12/21/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Case Nos. 12-17668, 12-16995, and 12-16998UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BEVERLY SEVCIK, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants
,v.BRIAN SANDOVAL, et al.,
 Defendants-Appellees
, and COALITION FOR THE PROTECTION OF MARRIAGE,
 Intervenor-Defendant- Appellee
.On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of NevadaCase No. 2:12-CV-00578-RCJ-PAL, The Hon. Robert C. Jones, District Judge. NATASHA N. JACKSON, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants
,v. NEIL S. ABERCROMBIE, Governor, State of Hawai’i,
Defendant-Appellant 
,LORETTA J. FUDDY, Director, Department of Health, State of Hawai’i,
 Defendant-Appellee
, and HAWAII FAMILY FORUM,
 Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee
.On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of HawaiiCase No. 1:11-cv-00734-ACK-KSC, The Hon. Alan C. Kay, Sr., District Judge.
 
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF GAY & LESBIAN ADVOCATES &DEFENDERS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS SEVCIKAND JACKSON AND IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL OF THEJUDGMENTS BELOW
Mary L. BonautoCivil Rights Project Director Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders30 Winter St., Suite 800Boston, MA 02108(617) 426-1350mbonauto@glad.org
Attorney for Amicus Curiae
 
Case: 12-16995 10/25/2013 ID: 8837292 DktEntry: 52 Page: 1 of 43
Case: 12-16998 DktEntry 54Case: 12-17668 DktEntry 29
 
 
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageINTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE
..........................................................................
1ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................. 3I.
 
 Nevada’s and Hawaii’s Registered Domestic Partnership and CivilUnion Laws Perpetuate Discrimination Even Though They AlsoProvide Some Benefits ................................................................................... 3II.
 
Marriage Provides Access to Numerous Tangible Protections and Responsibilities Under Federal Law that Are OtherwiseInaccessible to Those Joined in Registered Domestic Partnership or Civil Union. ..................................................................................................... 6A.
 
Office of Personnel Management .......................................................... 8B.
 
Department of Defense ........................................................................ 10C.
 
Department of Homeland Security ...................................................... 12D.
 
Department of State ............................................................................. 14E.
 
Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service ................ 15F.
 
Department of Labor ........................................................................... 19G.
 
Department of Health and Human Services ........................................ 25H.
 
Social Security Administration ........................................................... 27I.
 
Department of Veterans Affairs .......................................................... 29J.
 
Office of Governmental Ethics ........................................................... 29K.
 
Federal Election Commission ............................................................. 30CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 31
Case: 12-16995 10/25/2013 ID: 8837292 DktEntry: 52 Page: 2 of 43
 
 
iii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCASES
 Baker v. Vermont 
,744 A.2d 864 (Vt. 1999) .................................................................................. 1
Garden State Equality v. Dow
, No. M-208(N.J. Oct. 18, 2013) ........................................................................ 7
Goodridge v. Dep’t of Pub. Health
, 798 N.E.2d 941(Mass. 2003) ............................................................................................ 1, 3, 5
 In re Marriage Cases
,183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008) ................................................................................. 5
Kerrigan v. Comm’r of Pub. Health
,957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008) ......................................................................... 1, 5
 Massachusetts v. U.S. Dep’t of Health and  Human Servs.
,682 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012) ................................................................................ 1
Opinions of the Justices to the Senate
,802 N.E.2d 565 (Mass. 2004) ...................................................................... 1, 5
Pedersen, et al. v. Office of Pers. Mgmt 
,881 F.Supp. 2d 294 (D. Conn. 2012) .......................................................... 1-2
Sevcik v. Sandoval
,911 F. Supp. 2d 996 (D. Nev. 2012) ............................................................... 6
United States v. Windsor 
,133 S.Ct. 2675 (2013) .............................................................................
 passim
 
CONTITUTIONS & STATUTES
5 U.S.C. § 8901(5) ..................................................................................................... 926 U.S.C. §§ 72(t)(2)(B)-(C) ................................................................................... 25
Case: 12-16995 10/25/2013 ID: 8837292 DktEntry: 52 Page: 3 of 43

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)//-->