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
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
3:10-cv-01750 #103

3:10-cv-01750 #103

Ratings: (0)|Views: 126 |Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc #103 - BLAG Sur-Reply in opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment
Doc #103 - BLAG Sur-Reply in opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment

More info:

Published by: Equality Case Files on Oct 05, 2011
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

06/30/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ________________________________ )JOANNE PEDERSEN, et al., ))Plaintiffs, ))v. ) No. 3:10-cv-1750 (VLB))OFFICE OF PERSONNEL )MANAGEMENT, et al., ))Defendants. ) ________________________________ )INTERVENOR-DEFENDANT’S SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITIONTO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTPaul D. ClementH. Christopher BartolomucciConor B. DuganNicholas J. NelsonBANCROFT PLLC1919 M Street, Northwest, Suite 470Washington, District of Columbia 20036
Counsel for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives 
OF COUNSEL:Kerry W. Kircher, General CounselChristine Davenport, Senior Assistant CounselKatherine E. McCarron, Assistant CounselWilliam Pittard, Assistant CounselKirsten W. Konar, Assistant CounselOFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSELU.S. House of Representatives219 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, District of Columbia 20515
Case 3:10-cv-01750-VLB Document 103 Filed 10/05/11 Page 1 of 17
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................ iiARGUMENT .................................................................................................. 1I. THE HOUSE PRESENTS NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS THATCONSTITUTE LEGISLATIVE FACTS THAT THIS COURT ISFREE TO REVIEW ........................................................................ 1II. THE CLASSIFICATION AT ISSUE IN DOMA IS SUBJECT TORATIONAL BASIS REVIEW .......................................................... 3A. Persuasive Authority Reject the View That SexualOrientation Is a Suspect or Quasi-Suspect Class .......... 3B. Based on the Traditional Criteria, Sexual OrientationClearly Is Not a Suspect or Quasi-Suspect Class........... 51. Political Powerlessness ......................................... 62. Immutability ............................................................. 7CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 10
Case 3:10-cv-01750-VLB Document 103 Filed 10/05/11 Page 2 of 17
 
 
iiTABLE OF AUTHORITIESCases
Bowers v. Hardwick 
, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) ................................................... 4
Brown v. Board of Education 
, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) .................................... 2
Citizens for Equal Prot. v. Bruning 
, 455 F.3d 859 (8th Cir. 2006) ............. 4
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr.
, 473 U.S. 432 (1985) .................. 4
Cook v. Gates 
, 528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008), cert. denied sub. nom.,
Pietrangelo v. Gates 
, 129 S. Ct. 2763 (2009) ......................................... 4, 5
Daggett v. Comm’n on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices 
,172 F.3d 104 (1st Cir. 1999) .................................................................... 3
Disabled Am. Veterans v. U.S. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs 
, 962 F.2d 136(2d Cir. 1992) ........................................................................................... 6
Frontiero v. Richardson 
, 411 U.S. 677 (1973) ............................................. 6, 7
High Tech Gays v. Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office 
, 895F.2d 563 (9th Cir. 1990) ........................................................................... 4
Lawrence v. Texas 
, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) ..................................................... 3
Lofton v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Children & Fam. Servs.
, 358 F.3d 804(11th Cir. 2004) ........................................................................................ 5
Log Cabin Republicans v. United States 
, 716 F. Supp. 2d 884(C.D. Cal. 2010) ........................................................................................ 7
Log Cabin Republicans v. United States 
, __F.3d__, 2011 WL 4494225(9th Cir. Sept. 29, 2011) .......................................................................... 7
Lui v. Holder 
, No. 2:11-cv-01267-SVW (JCGx) (C.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2011)(ECF No. 38) ............................................................................................ 4
Lyng v. Castillo 
, 477 U.S. 635 (1986) ........................................................... 5, 6
Perry v. Schwarzenegger 
, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010) .............. 4
United States v. Virginia 
, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) ............................................ 2
Case 3:10-cv-01750-VLB Document 103 Filed 10/05/11 Page 3 of 17

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)//-->