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
13-4178 Amicus Brief of Indiana, et al.

13-4178 Amicus Brief of Indiana, et al.

Ratings: (0)|Views: 79|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
[10148253 Amicus Brief of States of Indiana, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, and South Carolina in support of Defendants. Filed in both Kitchen (Utah) and Bishop (Oklahoma).
[10148253 Amicus Brief of States of Indiana, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, and South Carolina in support of Defendants. Filed in both Kitchen (Utah) and Bishop (Oklahoma).

More info:

Published by: Equality Case Files on Feb 11, 2014
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

04/16/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
Case Nos. 13-4178, 14-5003, 14-5006 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
DEREK KITCHEN, individually, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. GARY R. HERBERT, in his official capacity as Governor of Utah, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of tah, Civil Case No. 2:13-CV-00217-RJS MARY BISHOP, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, and SUSAN G. BARTON, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants, v. SALLY HOWE SMITH, in her official capacity as Court Clerk for Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, Civil Case No. 04-CV-848-TCK-TLW
BRIEF OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, ALABAMA, ALASKA, ARIZONA, COLORADO, IDAHO, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, OKLAHOMA AND SOUTH CAROLINA AS
 AMICI CURIAE
 IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL
Office of the Attorney General IGC South, Fifth Floor 302 W. Washington Street Indianapolis, IN 46204 (317) 232-6255
 
Tom.Fisher@atg.in.gov GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana THOMAS M. FISHER Solicitor General
 
Counsel for
 Amici
 States
(Additional counsel listed inside cover)
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019199981 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 1
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019200026 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 1
Docket Reference Number: [10148253]
 
 
i
A
DDITIONAL
C
OUNSEL
 
L
UTHER
S
TRANGE
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
S
TATE OF
A
LABAMA
 T
IMOTHY
C.
 
F
OX
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
S
TATE
O
F
M
ONTANA
 M
ICHAEL
C.
 
G
ERAGHTY
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
S
TATE OF
A
LASKA
 J
ON
B
RUNING
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
 S
TATE OF
 N
EBRASKA
 T
HOMAS
C.
 
H
ORNE
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
S
TATE OF
A
RIZONA
 E.
 
S
COTT
P
RUITT
A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
S
TATE OF
O
KLAHOMA
 J
OHN
S
UTHERS
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
 S
TATE OF
C
OLORADO
 A
LAN
W
ILSON
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
 S
TATE OF
S
OUTH
C
AROLINA
 L
AWRENCE
G.
 
W
ASDEN
 A
TTORNEY
G
ENERAL
 S
TATE OF
I
DAHO
 
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019199981 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 2
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019200026 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 2
 
 
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................ iv INTEREST OF THE
 AMICI CURIAE 
 .............................................................. 1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ............................................................... 2 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................... 5 I. No Fundamental Rights or Suspect Classes are Implicated ......... 5 A. Same-sex marriage has no roots in the Nation’s history and traditions ....................................................................... 5 B. Adhering to traditional marriage implicates no suspect classes ................................................................................. 8 1. Traditional marriage is not sex discrimination ......... 8 2. Traditional marriage does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, and such a classification would not elicit heightened scrutiny in any event ................................................. 9 II. Traditional Marriage, Embodied in the Laws of Oklahoma, Utah and Thirty-One Other States, Satisfies Rational-Basis Review ......................................................................................... 13 A. The definition of marriage is too deeply imbedded in our laws, history and traditions for a court to hold that adherence to that definition is illegitimate ....................... 14 B. States recognize marriages between members of the opposite sex in order to encourage responsible  procreation, and this rationale does not apply to same-sex couples ........................................................................ 15
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019199981 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 3
Appellate Case: 13-4178 Document: 01019200026 Date Filed: 02/10/2014 Page: 3

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)//-->