You are on page 1of 81

Case No's.

14-5003 & 14-5006


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
On APPEAL FROM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,. '
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Mary Bishop, Sharon Baldwin, Susan Barton, and Gay Phillips
Plaintiffs and Appellees
v.
Sally Howe Smith
Defendant and Appellant
and
The United States Of America, ex rei. Eric H. Holder, Jr.,
In His Official Capacity As Attorney General of the United States of America
Defendant
and
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives
Intervener - Defendant
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
IN SUPPORT OF OKLAHOMA'S CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
QUESTION 711
Filed By
Duane Morley Cox, Pro Se
4056 West 3830 South
West Valley City, Utah 84120
Ph: 801-755-3578
L-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 1
1 of 81
Docket Reference Number: [10150626]
Duane Morley Cox, Pro Se
4056 West 3830 South
West Valley City, Utah 84120
Ph: 801-755-3578
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, TENTH CIRCUIT
Mary Bishop et. al.
Plaintiffs and Appellee's
v.
Sally Howe Smith
Defendant and Appellants
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
IN SUPPORT OF OKLAHOMA'S
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
QUESTION 711
Case: 14-5003
14-5006
COMES NOW: Duane Morley Cox, ProSe, pursuant to Fed. R. App. Rule 29, and files
this Brief Of Amicus Curiae in support of Oklahoma's Constitutional Amendment.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT: Amicus is not a corporation. All research and all
arguments presented herein are exclusively those of Amicus. This Brief was prepared
and typed by Amicus, and has not been reviewed or contributed to by any outside person
or entity. All funds expended to prepare and reproduce this Brief are exclusively funds of
Amicus. Although Amicus is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day
Pg i
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 2
2 of 81
Saints (LDS) which is headquartered in Utah, and holds the Melchizedek Priesthood
therein, Amicus does not speak for or represent the LDS Church. However, Amicus does
believe that the issues he addresses affect the LDS Church and all of the 6+ Million
members of the LDS Church living in every State of the Nation, including over 43,000
members living in Oklahoma (Exhibit M), as well as millions of other religious
individuals of other faiths who believe that "Marriage" is solely between a man and a
woman, in the same manner as they affect him. And Amicus draws from the teachings
and scriptures of his LDS Faith as presented in the King James Version of the Bible and
the Book of Doctrine and Covenants published by the LDS Church, as used by the
leadership of the LDS Faith and its members in their study and worship.
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Page
Disclosure Statement .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
Table of Contents ............................................. ..... ..... .............................................. ... u
Table of Authorities .................................................................................................... iii
Identity of Amicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Amicus Interest . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Pg ii
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 3
3 of 81
TABLE OF CONTENTS, CONT'D: Page
Statement of Preparation ............................................................................................... 5
Arguments ..................................................................................................................... 6
I. The Court below was not properly briefed .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6
II. Oklahoma's Amendment Protects pt Amendment Rights ..................... 7
Ill. The "Decision" of the Court below usurps the rights of Oklahoma and
its Citizens in violation of the 9th and lOth Amendments To the
Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . 10
IV. The "Decision" requires the Supreme Court to become a
"Superlegislature" .................................................................................... 12
V. The "Decision" creates a "religious Test" violating Article VI
Of the U.S. Const ....................................................................................... 14
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 15
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES:
Case Law: Page
Annotation, S. Ct's Construction Of Eleventh Amendment,
106 L.Ed2d. 660 (S. Ct. 1989) ........................................................................... 13
Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (S.Ct. 1943) .................................................................. 12
111
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 4
4 of 81
Case Law Cont'd: Page
Bishop et. al. v. Smith et. al., 04-CV-848-TCK-TLW .............................. 7, 8, 10
Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 113 S.Ct. 2217 (1993) .. 3, 5, 6, 7
Lander v. United States, 358 U.S. 169 (1958) .................................................... 6
Nat. Fed. Oflnd. Businesses v. Sebelius, 567 U.S._ (2012)
as given on Pg 11 of Slip Opinion (See Exhibit A) ............................................. 6
McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 .................................................................. 14, 15
Other Authorities: Page
The Book of Doctrine and Covenants Of The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints, Containing Revelations Given To Joseph Smith, The Prophet, With
Some Additions By His Successors In The Presidency Of The Church, Published
By the Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
1981
D&C 42:22 ...... .-.................................................................................................. 1
D&C 88:20-24 .................................................................................................... 2
D&C 98:18 ......................................................................................................... 2
D&C 131:1-4 ...................................................................................................... 2
lV
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 5
5 of 81
Other Authorities: Page
The Holy Bible, containing The Old and New Testaments, Authorized King James
Version, Published By the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints, Salt Lake City,
Utah, U.S.A. 1979
1st Corinthians 15:40-41 .............. ..................... .. ....... ...... ................................... 2
Genesis 1:24-28 ............. ..................................................................................... 1
Genesis 2:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
John 14:2 ............................................................................................................ 2
Leviticus 20:13 .................................................................................................... 1
Leviticus 20:15 ................................................................................................... 1
Mark 10:7 ............................................................................................................ 1
Matthew 18:18 ..................................................................................................... 2
Matthew 19:5 ...................................................................................................... 1
U.S. Constitution, Article VI ................................................................................ 4, 5, 11
Exhibits Cited On: Page
Exhibit A, Pg 11, Extracted trom Slip Opinion for Nat. Fed.
Oflnd. Businesses v. Sebelius, 567 U.S._, (2012) ................ 6, 11
v
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 6
6 of 81
Exhibits Cited On: Page
Exhibit B, Group Loses Tax Break Over Gay Union Issue
By Jill Capuzzo, 18 September 2007 ......................................... 9, 11
Exhibit C, New York Marriage Equality Act ............................................... 9,10
Exhibit D, When Conscience and the New Marriage Collide, by
Clyde Haberman, July 2011 ............................................................ 14
Exhibit E, Town Clerk, I do not do 'I do', by Lauren Stanforth,
Staff Writer, 6 December 2011 ........................................................ 14
Exhibit F, Rights Collide as Town Clerk Sidesteps Role in
Gay Marriages, 27 September 2011 ................................................. 14
Exhibit G, History of the Church OF Jesus Christ of Latter Cay Saints,
By: B. H. Roberts, Published by the Church, Second Ed.
Revised, Printed by The Deseret Book Company, Salt
Lake City, Utah 1974 (Extracted Page 394, See Footnote) ............ 15
Exhibit H, Extermination Order, by Dale A. Whitman, BYU Harold B.
Lee Library, Extracted and Printed 11/28/2014 ................................ 15
Exhibit I, The Church: A Brief History, Extracted and Printed 2/4/2014 ......... 15
Exhibit J, Primary Source Reading: Patrick Henry's Speech to the Virginia
Convention ........................................................................................ 15
Vl
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 7
7 of 81
Exhibits Cited On: Page
Exhibit K, Mormon Church Backs Gay Rights Bill, by CBSNews AP, 11
November 2009 .............................................................................. 13
Exhibit L, Catholic Charities Ceases Adoption, 1 7 March 2006 Edition of The
Pilot ....................................................................................... 11, 15
Exhibit M, United States LDS Membership ............................................ ii, 3, 15
Vll
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 8
8 of 81
IDENTITY OF AMICUS: Duane Morley Cox, a 54 year resident of Utah, holds BS &
MS Degree in Mechanical Engineering, and is a devout Christian member of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) who holds the Priesthood and can perform
rites that clergy in other Christian Faiths perform. He has twice sought election to the
Utah House, desires to seek election to office in the future, and voted in favor of Utah's
Amendment No.3. His Faith teaches, and he believes, that "Marriage" is between a man
and woman, and that God does not approve of same sex unions.
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle,
and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and so it was ... And god
said, Let me make man in our own image after our likeness: and let them have
dominion ... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
them; male and female created he them. And god blessed them, and God said unto
them, Be Fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth and subdue it, ... "Genesis
1:24-28 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave
unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24 (See also Matt 19:5 and
Mark 10:7 "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her
and none else.'' D&C 42:22 "If a man lieth with mankind, as he lieth with a
woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to
death ... " Leviticus 20:13 "And if a man lieth with a beast he shall surely be put to
death ... " Leviticus 20:15
His Faith teaches, and he believes, that God has created many "Mansions"
dispersed across three degrees of Glory known as the celestial, terrestrial, and telestial
kingdoms as revealed in ancient and modem scripture. The celestial being the highest
kingdom, which requires that men and women be married together under a "new and
Pg 1
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 9
9 of 81
everlasting covenant of marriage" in order to have an '"increase" in the afterlife.
Christ said, "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would
have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." John 14:2 "Let not thy hearts be
troubled; for in my Father's house are many mansions, and I have prepared a place
for you; ... " D&C 98:18 "There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial:
but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of
the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory." rt Corinthians 15:40-
41 "That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever,
for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent they are sanctified.
And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you,
even the law of Christ must inherit another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial
kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom. For he who is not able to abide the law of
a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory. And he who cannot abide the
law of the terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory. And he who cannot
abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is
not meet for a kingdom of glory and must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom
of glory." D&C 88:20-24 "In the celestial glory, there are three heavens or
degrees; And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the
priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And ifhe
does not, he cannot obtain it. He may enter into another, but that is the end of his
kingdom; he cannot have an increase". D&C 131:1-4 [Insert in Original]
This new and everlasting covenant of "Marriage" is based upon ancient scripture.
"Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in
heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." Matt.
18:18
To quality for the highest level of the celestial kingdom a man and a woman must
be "Married" for "Time and Eternity" instead of until "Death Do Ye Part", as is the
custom of civil ceremonies. These "Marriages" for "Time and Eternity" are for worthy
members ofthe LDS Faith and are performed one ofthe 141 operating Temples of the
Pg2
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 10
10 of 81
LDS Faith, 79 of which Temples are located in 37 States (Exhibit M). And on 5 August
1960, was "Married" to his First wife for "Time and Eternity" in the Logan, Utah, LDS
Temple. As part of this ceremony, he made a sacred Covenant with his God to support
God's Plan, even at the peril of his life. All Temple Worthy members ofhis faith have
made the same Covenant with their God. And God's Plan is for man to marry a woman
to create offspring (which same sex couples can not do), and to be "Married" for "Time
and Eternity" so that they can inherit a "Mansion" in the celestial kingdom where they can
dwell with God and have eternal "increase" (which same sex couples also cannot do).
Because of these teachings, and the Covenant that Amicus has made to support and
sustain God's Plan, he cannot participate in same sex "Marriages" or the solemnization or
celebration thereof, because to do so, he would become and "Anti-Christ", and would be
denied entrance to the celestial kingdom and God's presence. The Courts must protect
Amicus and others of his Faith from civil actions by same sex couples on grounds of
discrimination.
"Religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible
to others in order to merit First Amendment protections [Citations Omitted]."
Church of The Lumkumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 113 S.Ct. 2217, Pg 2225
(1993)
Pg 3
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 11
11 of 81
AMICUS INTEREST: His interest is in not having his Faith brought into conflict with
the same sex 14th Amendment rights declared in the "Decision" of the Court below. He
maintains that Oklahoma's Constitutional Amendment, in its "Operation", protects
1st Amendment rights from discrimination lawsuits by same sex couples, without
establishing a "religious Test" that precludes his ability to seek elected office or
positions ofPublic Trust.
Amicus also argues that the "Decision" defeats and voids all protections, whether
"definitional" or statutory in every state, including Oklahoma, because the declaration of
a 14th Amendment protection for same sex "Marriage" by the Court below becomes the
"Law of the Land" and states can no longer protect religious institutions, clergy,
employees or members from civil actions or causes of action by same sex couples seeking
to gain entrance to sacred religious facilities for the performance or celebration of their
same sex "Marriages". Further, the "Decision" by the Court below establishes a
"religious Test" applicable in violation of Article VI@ 3 Of The U.S. Constitution
which precludes Amicus from seeking elected office or positions of Public Trust.
AUTHORITY TO FILE: The Oklahoma "Decision" has the same effect as the Utah
Pg4
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 12
12 of 81
"Decision" in that, if sustained, it will "Operate" to defeat all existing 1st Amendment
protections he now enjoys. Amicus argues that the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court
regarding the "Operation" of laws must also apply to the "Operation" of Court decisions.
"Apart from the text, the effect of a law in its real operation is strong evidence of
its object." Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 113 S.Ct.
2217, Pg. 2228 (1993)
The U.S. Constitution reserves to the States and the people the power to regulate
"Marriage" because it is not one of the enumerated powers granted to Congress or the
Courts, and the 14th Amendment mandates that Oklahoma protect 1st Amendment rights.
"The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, which has been applied to the
States through the Fourteenth Amendment, [Citations Omitted] provides that
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof ... ," Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v.
City of Hialeah, 113 S.Ct. 2217,2225, (1993)
Amicus has authority to file this Brief because the "Decision" violates the 9th and
lOth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and usurps his rights guaranteed thereunder to
help determine how his 1st Amendment rights should be protected, which "Decision" also
turns the Courts into a prohibited "Superlegislature", while establishing a prohibited
"religious Test" in violation of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.
STATEMENT OF PREPARATION: Amicus is ProSe and is unrepresented. All
Pg 5
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 13
13 of 81
research, preparation filing efforts and expenses are solely the work of Amicus.
ARGUMENTS: The information on pgs 1 - 5 are incorporated herein by reference.
I. The Court below was not properly briefed:
Review of the "Decision" of the Court below reveals little if any substantive
consideration of the religious protections that the Oklahoma Constitutional Amendment
provides. But a "vigorous prosecution and a vigorous defense" are essential.
"Sound judicial decision making requires 'both a vigorous prosecution and a
vigorous defense' and a constitutional rule announced sua sponte is entitled to less
deference than one addressed on full briefing and argument." Cf. Lander v.
United States, 358 U.S. 169, 173 (1958) (declining to address 'an important and
complex' issue ... and the court thought it 'should have a full argument before it
dealing with the question.')" Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of
Hialeah, 113 S.Ct. 2217, Pg. 2247 (1993)
And the Supreme Court has shown how to correct such deficiencies.
"We appoint H. Bartow F arr III to brief and argue in support of the Eleventh
circuit's judgement with respect to severability, and Robert A Long to brief and
argue the proposition that the Anti-Injunction Act bars the current challenges to the
individual mandate." Footnote in Nat. Fed. Of Ind. Businesses v. Sebelius, 567
U.S. _, (2012) as given on Pg 11 of Slip Opinion (See Exhibit A)
Amicus will demonstrate that there are "Unintended Consequences" of the
"Decision" which would have been realized had the Court below been adequately briefed
on the religious protections that Oklahoma's Amendment provides. Absent adequate
Pg6
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 14
14 of 81
briefing, argument and analysis, the lOth Circuit must reverse the "Decision" below.
II. Oklahoma's Amendment Protects rt Amendment Ri2hts: The Court below held:
"Part A [of Oklahoma's Amendment] intentionally discriminates against same-sex
couples desiring an Oklahoma marriage license without a legally sufficient
justification." Bishop et. al. v. Smith et. al., 04-CV-848-TCK-TLW, Pg 30
Which determination results from the presumption of "Intentional Discrimination".
" ... after an act of intentional discrimination is identified, the Court must ask
"whether the state's intentional decision to discriminate can be justified by
reference to some upright governmental purpose". Id., Pg 41
After which, the Court below spends approx. 6 pages evaluating whether or not
"Part A Intentionally Discriminates" Id., Pgs 42 thru 47 And then turns to the question:
"Is This Intentional Discrimination Justified?" Id., Pg 47+
But nowhere does the Court below ask the question: "Does the Oklahoma
Amendment Protect 1st Amendment religious rights as required by the 14th Amendment in
the regulation of"Marriage?" On this issue, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated:
"Apart from the text, the effect of a law in its real operation is strong evidence of
its object." Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 113 S.Ct.
2217, Pg. 2228 (1993)
Oklahoma's "definitional" approach to defining "Marriage" as being between a
man and a woman "Operates" to protect 1st Amendment religious rights by avoiding
Pg 7
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 15
15 of 81
equivalency. Without equivalency of"Marriage" between same sex couples and opposite
sex couples, there can be no claim of discrimination and therefore no cause of action.
Thus same sex couples cannot sue religious institutions, clergy, employees etc for their
refusal to recognize, perform, support or celebrate same sex "Marriages". And Oklahoma
did not have to declare protections by statute such as: "The refusal by clergy or a church
to conduct or celebrate the "Marriage" of a same sex couple does not create a cause of
action or any legal liability." On this subject, the Court below declares:
"Arguably, the 'state rights' portion of the Windsor decision stands for the
unremarkable proposition that a state has broad authority to regulate marriage, so
long as it does not violate its citizen's federal constitutional rights. New York has
expanded its citizen's rights, and there was no possible constitutional deprivation
in play." Bishop et. al. v. Smith et. al., 04-CV-848-TCK-TLW, Pg 37
While the majority of States took a "Definitional" approach, other States, including
New York and New Jersey took a statutory approach. But New Jersey initially had a
problem because it failed to include statutory protections. And bad results were quickly
apparent. Two lesbian couples, after being denied the use of the Methodist owned Ocean
Grove Camp Meeting Association property for their civil union ceremonies, filed civil
actions with the State Division of Civil Rights, and as a result, the state commissioner of
environmental protection "declined to recertify'' the tax exemption on a part of the
Pg 8
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 16
16 of 81
Association property (Exhibit A). After which, New Jersey enacted protections:
"'No member of the clergy of any religion authorized to solemnize marriage and no
religious society, institution or organization in this State shall be required to
solemnize any marriage in violation of the free exercise of religion guaranteed by
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or by Article 1, paragraph 4
of the New Jersey Constitution. No religious society, institution or organization in
this State serving a particular faith or denomination shall be compelled to provide
space, services, advantages, goods, or privileges related to the solemnization,
celebration or promotion of marriage if such solemnization, celebration or
promotion of marriage is in violation ofthe beliefs of such religious society,
institution or organization. No civil claim or cause of action against any society,
institution or organization, or any employee thereof, shall arise out of any refusal
to provide space, services, advantages, goods, or privileges pursuant to this
section. No state action to penalize or withhold benefits from any such religious
society, institution or organization, or any employee thereof, shall result from any
refusal to provide space, services, advantages, goods, or privileges pursuant to this
section. Id. Exhibit B, Pg 3
Later, New York enacted their Marriage Equality Act, stating: "Marriage" was
"valid ... regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of the same or different
sex" (Exhibit C, Pg 2), and statutory 1st Amendment protections were included:
"Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law ... a corporation ... shall be
deemed to be in its nature distinctly private and therefore, shall not be required to
provide accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges related to the
solemnization or celebration of a marriage ... A refusal ... to provide
accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges in connection with section
ten-a of this article shall not create a civil claim or cause of action .... Pursuant to
subdivision ... nothing in this article shall be deemed or construed to prohibit any
religious or denominational institution or organization, or any organization
operated for charitable or educational purposes, which is operated, supervised or
controlled in connection with a religious organization from limiting employment or
sales or rental of housing accommodations or admission to or giving preference to
persons of the same religion or denomination or from taking action calculated to
promote the religious principles for which it is established or maintained." Id., Pg.
3 @ 6 thru Pg. 4 @ 2 " ... no clergyman or minister ... shall be required to
Pg 9
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 17
17 of 81
solemnize any marriage when acting in his or her capacity under this subdivision ...
A refusal by a clergyman or minister ... to solemnize any marriage under this
subdivision shall not create a civil claim or cause of action." Id., Pg 5@ 10-16
And the Court below acknowledges the success of such statutory schemes for
protecting 1st Amendment religious rights, stating: "New York has expanded its citizen's
rights, and there was no possible constitutional deprivation in play." Decision, Pg 37
But New York's success is also Oklahoma's success because Oklahoma's
"Definitional" approach "operates" similarly to protect religious entities, clergy etc. from
lawsuits and causes of actions. And because it does so, it's "Operation" is evidence that
its "Intent" is to protect 1st religious rights, which is a "rational" basis for its enactment.
Therefore, Oklahoma's Amendment has a "rational" basis, was not properly
briefed, vigorously debated on religious aspects or correctly analyzed, and the 1 0
1
h Circuit
Court must reverse the "Decision".
III. The "Decision" of the Court below usurps the riKhts of Oklahoma and its
citizens in violation of the 9th and lOth Amenllments to the Constitution.
Base upon ArKument II above, some may argue that all Oklahoma needs to now
do is pass protective statutes as in New York and New Jersey to protect 1st Amendment
religious freedoms. But now we can see the type of "Unintended Consequence" that
Pg 10
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 18
18 of 81
Defendant Smith argued would exist. For, if the of the Court below is upheld,
then it becomes a Constitutional mandate:
"The Constitution ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in
every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or Laws of any
State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Article VI, U.S. Constitution
Thus, the "Decision" of the Court below actually makes the statutory provisions
enacted by New Jersey and New York (which the Court below seems to like) null and
void on their face or as applied, because they cannot preclude same sex couples from
filing discrimination lawsuits against any and all religious entities, clergy, employees etc.
because same sex couples will have a 14
1
h Amendment right to non-discrimination as
pertains to "Marriage" which "trumps" all existing statutory or "DefinitionaP' protections
in New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Utah and every other state.
Therefore, the "Operation" ofthe "Decision" makes clear its true intent. It is to
burden only religion, churches, clergy, employees and even God loving members thereof
with discrimination lawsuits (like Exhibit A) which the States and Congress will be
powerless to stop. And the cost and administrative burden will no doubt compel
Religious entities to end services (Exhibit L) and stop "Marriages" by their own faithful
Pg 11
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 19
19 of 81
members in their Churches, Meeting Houses and Temples. And all clergy will be subject
to lawsuit for refusal to perform same sex "Marriages".
The "Decision" holding Oklahoma's Amendment Unconstitutional on grounds of
a newly created 14th Amendment right of same sex couples to "Marriage" "Operates" to
usurp the powers reserved to the States and the people in violation of the gth and 1oth
Amendments. The lOth Circuit must reverse the "Decision" of the Court below.
IV. The "Decision" requires the Supreme Court to become a "Superle&islature"
Mr. Justice Frankfurter has warned of the very narrow role and duty of the Courts
in cases involving the nullification of legislative actions.
"In neither situation is our function comparable to that of a legislature or are we
free to act as though we were a superlegislature. Judicial self-restraint is equally
necessary whenever an exercise of political or legislative power is challenged ....
responsibility for legislation lies with the legislatures, answerable as they are
directly to the people, and this Court's only and very narrow function is to
determine whether within the broad grant of authority vested in legislatures they
have exercised a judgement which for reasonable justification can be offered."
Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 648-649 (S. Ct. 1943) Justice Frankfurter dissenting
Oklahoma's Amendment operates to protect 1st Amendment religious belief and
action satisfies the "reasonable justification" test. Further, it is simple, narrow, and
did not mention same sex rights. In fact its narrow tailoring makes it possible for same
Pg 12
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 20
20 of 81
sex couples to perfect peripheral rights by other legislative enactments as has later
happened in Utah (Exhibit K). And the "Unintended Consequence" of the "Decision" of
the Court below is to nullify all existing statutory or "Definitional" protections that have
been put in place by the States, which establishes the Courts, especially the U.S. Supreme
Court, as a "Superlegislature" with the sole power to determine if religions, clergy,
employees etc can or can't be sued for failure to conduct, support or assist in same sex
"Marriages". Such a circumstance is similar to 200 year effort by the U.S. Supreme Court
to harmonize the conflicting rights of the immunity of States from suit under the 11th
Amendment and the rights of individuals to sue under the 14th Amendment (Supreme
Court's Construction Of Eleventh Amendment ... 106 L. Ed2. 660). Which prompts
the compelling question: "Which is the most or least protective of 1st Amendment
religious rights, Oklahoma's Amendment or the "Decision" of the Court below?"
"When the State enacts legislation [or a Court makes a decision] or unintentionally
places a burden upon religiously motivated practice, it must justify that burden by
'showing that it is the least restrictive means of achieving some compelling state
interest.' Thomas v. Review Board of Indiana employment Security Div., 450
U.S. 707, 718 (1981). See also Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 215 (1972)."
Church of The Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 113 S.Ct., 2217, Pgs.
2250-2251 (1993), Justice Blackmun, with whom Justice O'Connor joins,
concurring in judgment [Insert added to make the question]
Pg13
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 21
21 of 81
Amicus argues that Oklahoma's Amendment is a very simple. elegant approach to
protecting 1st Amendment rights while the "Decision" burdens only religions. clergy
etc. and destroys the ability of all of the 50 States to protect 1st Amendment religious
rights. leaving only the Supreme Court as the final arbitrator. And its eventual precedents
must surely mirror the statutory protections of New York and New Jersey which the
"Decision" destroys. If that doesn't constitute an instance where the Court's establish
themselves as a "superlegislature", Amicus is without common sense. The "Decision"
below must be reversed on grounds that it violates the principle of Judicial Self-Restraint.
V. The "Decision" creates a Test", Article VI of the U.S. Const.
Amicus can never in good conscience seek or hold public office or a position of
Public Trust because the "Decision" operates as a "religious Test", (McDaniel v. Paty,
435 U.S. 618). Amicus is not alone. Under New York's Marriage Equality Act, three
elected officials of religious conviction gave up their positions on religious grounds
(Exhibits D-F). Amicus desires to obtain a "Mansion" in the celestial kingdom. _
Amicus has no desire to suffer God's displeasure. Some might question the sincerity
of Amicus, but in his Faith, persecution has been their shadow. In 1832, Issac Morley, an
Pg 14
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 22
22 of 81
ancestor of Amicus, offered his life to stop the violence of mobs against the early
members of his Faith (Exhibit G). In 1838, Governor Boggs of Missouri signed an
"Extermination Order" designed to drive the LDS faithful from the State or
"Exterminate" them (Exhibit H). In 1844, mobs killed Joseph Smith, the first Prophet of
the LDS Church (Exhibit 1). But it was Patrick Henry who declared: "I know not what
course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death" (Exhibit J). The
"Decision" creates a "religious Test" contrary to Article VI, (McDaniel v. Paty, 435
U.S. 618), and must be Reversed.
Conclusion: Clearly there are substantial "Unintended Consequences" which will result
from the "Decision" of the Court below, and it must be anticipated that Churches will
stop providing services (Exhibit L), and stop performing "Marriages" oftheir own
membership in order to avoid financial ruin. For example, the LDS Faith alone has over
11,550 Bishops of"Wards" across America (Exhibit M) who could become targets for
discrimination lawsuits which only the Supreme Court, sitting as a "Superlegislature", can
decide. The "Decision" of the Court below ignores the "Operation" of Oklahoma's
Constitutional Amendment to protect religious rights and must be
Pgl5 7
/
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 23
23 of 81
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Certificate Of Service
Mary Bishop, et. al.,
Plaintiff's- Appellees
v.
Sally Howe Smith,
Defendant and Appellant
and,
United States of America, ex. rel. Eric
H. Holder, Jr. in his Official Capacity as
Attorney General of the United States of
America
Defendant
and,
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the
U.S. House of Representatives
Intervener - Defendant
Case: 14-5003 & 14-5006
Certificate of Service for Brief of
Amicus Curiae, Duane Morley Cox
Pg 1
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 24
24 of 81
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
'?..
I hereby certify that onLf:__ February 2014, that I filed by First Class Mail,
Postage Prepaid, the foregoing Brief to the 1Oth Circuit Court, and also by First Class
Mail, Postage Prepaid to the following:
Byron J. Babione
Austin R. Nimrocks
James A. Campbell
Holly L. Campbell
Brian W. Raum
Alliance Defending Freedom
15100 N. 90th Street
Scottsdale, Arizona, 85260
480-444-0020
bbabione@alliancedefendingfreedom. org
Dale Michael Schowengerdt
Kevin H. Theriot
Alliance Defending Freedom
15192 Rosewood
Leawood, Ks. 66224
913-685-8000
dschowengerdt@telladf.org
John David Luton, Assistant district Attorney
District Attorney's Office (Tulsa)
500 South Denver Ave., suite 900
Tulsa, Oklahoma 7 4103
918-596-4814
j luton@tulsacounty. org Pg2
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 25
25 of 81
W. Scott Simpson
United States Department of Justice, Civil Division
P.O. Box 883
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044
202-514-3495
scott.simpson@usdoj. gov
Kerry W. Kircher
U.S. House of Representatives
Office of the General counsel
219 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-9700
kerry.kircher@,mail.house/gov
Bentley C. Olsson
Helms & Greene, LLC
1900 NW Expressway, suite 430
Oklahoma City, Ok 73118
405-607-4100
blosson@helmsgreene.com
Phillip Craig Bailey
259 Waverly Dr.
Tulsa, Oklahoma 7 4104
918-595-8818
craig bailey I @cox.net
Pg 3
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 26
26 of 81
I
Don Gardner Holladay, Esq.
James Edward Warner, III, Esq.
Holladay & Chilton
204 North Robinson Ave, suite 1550
Oklahoma city, Ok. 73102
405-236-2343
dholladay@holladaychilton.com
Timothy P. Studebaker
Studebaker & Worley
5801 East 4P\ suite 300
Tulsa, Co. 74135
918-770-4890
tim@studebakerworleylaw .net
Joseph T. Thai
300 Timberdell Road
Norman, Ok. 73019
405-204-9579
thai(a)post.harvard.edu
=
Pg4
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204772 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 27
27 of 81
-.. '
Case No's. 14-5003 & 14-5006
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
On APPEAL FROM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Mary Bishop, Sharon Baldwin, Susan Barton, and Gay Phillips
Plaintiffs and Appellees
v.
Sally Howe Smith
Defendant and Appellant
and
The United States Of America, ex rel. Eric H. Holder, Jr.,
In His Official Capacity As Attorney General of the United States of America
Defendant
and
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives
Intervener - Defendant
APPENDIX TO
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
IN SUPPORT OF OKLAHOMA'S CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
QUESTION 711
Filed By
Duane Morley Cox, Pro Se
4056 West 3830 South
West Valley City, Utah 84120
Ph: 801-755-3578
0
,,
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 1
28 of 81
Duane Morley Cox, Pro Se
4056 West 3830 South
West Valley City, Utah 84120
Ph: 801-755-3578
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, TENTH CIRCUIT
Mary Bishop et. al.
Plaintiffs and Appellee's
v.
Sally Howe Smith
Defendant and Appellants
APPENDIX TO
AMICUS BRIEF OUT OF TIME
IN SUPPORT OF OKLAHOMA'S
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
QUESTION 711
Case: 14-5003
14-5006
This Appendix contains Exhibits A thru J as cited in the Brief of Amicus.
Exhibit A, Pg 11, Extracted from Slip Opinion for Nat. Fed. Oflnd. Businesses v.
Sebelius, 567 U.S._, (2012)
Exhibit B, Group Loses Tax Break Over Gay Union Issue By Jill Capuzzo, 18 September
2007
Exhibit C, New York Marriage Equality Act
Exhibit D, When Conscience and the New Marriage Collide, by Clyde Haberman, July
2011
A-1
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 2
29 of 81
Exhibit E, Town Clerk, I do not do 'I do', by Lauren Stanforth, Staff Writer, 6 December
2011
Exhibit F, Rights Collide as Town Clerk Sidesteps Role in Gay Marriages, 27 September
2011
Exhibit G, History of the Church OF Jesus Christ of Latter Cay Saints, By: B. H. Roberts,
Published by the Church, Second Ed. Revised, Printed by The Deseret Book Company,
Salt Lake City, Utah 1974 (Extracted Page 394, See Footnote)
Exhibit H, Extermination Order, by Dale A. Whitman, BYU Harold B. Lee Library,
Extracted and Printed 11/28/2014
Exhibit I, The Church: A Brief History, Extracted and Printed 2/4/2014
Exhibit J, Primary Source Reading: Patrick Henry's Speech to the Virginia Convention
Exhibit K, Mormon Church Backs Gay Rights Bill, by CBSNews AP, 11 November 2009
Exhibit L, Catholic Charities Ceases 17 March 2006 Edition of The Pilot
Exhibit M, United States LDS Membership, 1 January 2011, Rickety at
www.rickety.us/lds/us/,
A-2
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 3
30 of 81
APPENDIX A
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 4
31 of 81
1
j
!
L
(Slip Opinion} OCTOBER TERM, 2011
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote} will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNIT
(I
Syllabus
h
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, ...
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-393. Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012-Decided June 28, 2012*
In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health
insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision is
the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain
"minimum essentiaf' health insurance coverage. 26 U. S. C. 5000A.
For individuals who are not exempt, and who do not receive health
insurance through an employer or government program, the means of
satisfying the requirement is to purchase insurance from a private
company. Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the
mandate must make a "[s]hared responsibility payment" to the Fed-
eral Government. 5000A(b)(l). The Act provides that this "penalty"
will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual's tax-
es, and "shall be assessed and collected in the same manner" as tax
penalties. 5000A(c), (g)(1).
Another key provision of the Act is the Medicaid expansion. The
current Medicaid program offers federal funding to States to assist
pregnant women, children, needy families, the blind, the elderly, and
the disabled in obtaining medical care. 42 U. S. C. 1396d(a). The
Affordable Care Act expands the scope of the Medicaid program and
increases the number of individuals the States must cover. For ex-
*Together with No. 11-398, Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices et al. v. Florida et al., and No. 11-400, Florida et al. v. Department
of Health and Human Services et al., also on certiorari to the same
court.
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 5
32 of 81
Cite as: 567 U. S. __ (2012) 11
Opinion of the Court
powers. The Court of Appeals unanimously held that the
Medicaid expansion is a valid exercise of Congress's power
under the Spending Clause. U.S. Canst., Art. I, 8, cl. 1.
And the court rejected the States' claim that the threat-
ened loss of all federal Medicaid funding violates the
Tenth Amendment by coercing them into complying with
the Medicaid expansion. 648 F. 3d, at 1264, 1268.
We granted certiorari to review the judgment of the
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit with respect to
both the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion.
565 U.S._ (2011). Because no party supports the Elev-
enth Circuit's holding that the individual mandate can
be completely severed from the remainder of the Affordable
Care Act, we appointed an amicus curiae to defend that
aspect of the judgment below. And because there is a
reasonable argument that the Anti-Injunction Act de-
prives us of jurisdiction to hear challenges to the individ-
ual mandate, but no party supports that proposition, we
appointed an amicus curiae to advance it.
2
II
Before turning to the merits, we need to be sure we have
the authority to do so. The Anti-Injunction Act provides
that "no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment
or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court
by any person, whether or not such person is the per-
son against whom such tax was assessed." 26 U.S. C.
7421(a). This statute protects the Government's ability
to collect a consistent stream of revenue, by barring litiga-
tion to enjoin or otherwise obstruct the collection of taxes.
Because of the Anti-Injunction Act, taxes can ordinarily be
2We appointed H. Bartow Farr III to brief and argue in support of the
Eleventh Circuit's judgment with respect to severability, and Robert A.
Long to brief and argue the proposition that the Anti-Injunction Act
bars the current challenges to the individual mandate. 565 U. S. _
(2011). Both amici have ably discharged their assigned responsibilities.
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 6
33 of 81
APPENDIXB
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 7
34 of 81
vwup Loses 1 ax tlreak Over Gay Union Issue -New York Times
Welcome to Times People
\/\hatst.'1/s? TimesPeople Lets You Share and Discover the Best of NYTlmes.com
rlCME ?AG:: 7!MES IODAY"S P!>.PER V10EO MOST ?OPL:AR TCP!CS
N.Y./ Region
722 ',;>' :
Pagel
Log In or Register
.;,
Get Home De!rvery :r Nc"v
NY./R ion
WORLD l:.s _;REGION BVSlli'"F.SS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEP .LTH SPORn; OPlli'lON ARTS :,TI1"E 'TR.4.YEL JOBS REAL ESTATE AUTOS
Tr-IE. C!TY IN THE REGION N.Y.iREG!ON OPlNiONS
Group Loses Tax Break Over Gay Union Issue
3) J1LL ? CAP:JZZO
P<..tm;;rsc S&r;:er:"O'O' '3. ?:Cit';-
SIGN ;N TQ E-MAIL
OR SAVE lH;S
A boardwalk pa,ilion in the seaside town of Ocean Grove, N.J., that
has been at the center of a battle over gay civil union ceremonies has
lost its tax-exempt status because the state ruled it no longer met the
requirements as a place open to all members of the public.
PRlN<
REPR1NTS
Sh;..RE
City Room Blog
The latest
ne, ..-s and
reader
discussions
from around
the tive boroughs and the
region.
Go to City Room >l
In a letter to the administrator of the
Ocean Grove Camp Meeting
... t\.ssociation, a Methodist organization
that owns the pavilion property, the state commissioner of
environmental protection, Lisa Jackson, declined to
recertify the pavUion as eligible for a real estate tax
exemption it has enjoyed since 1989 under the state's
Green Acres Program, but did renew the tax-exempt status
of the rest of the boardwalk and the beach, also owned by
the association.
The issue arose after the association, which has owned the land, the beach and 1,ooo feet
of the sea itself since 1870, rejected the requests of two lesbian couples to have their civil
union ceremonies at the Boardwalk Pavilion.
The couples complained to the State Division on Ci,il Rights, which began a
discrimination investigation. The association sued the state, claiming that the
investigation "iolated its First ... .!\mendment rights because civil unions were contrary to
the beliefs ofthe L"nited Methodist Church.
A federal district court judge refused last month to halt the investigation.
In a letter dated Saturday that revoked the longstanding certification, Ms. Jackson, the
environmental protection commissioner, -wTotel "It is clear that the pavilion is not open
to all persons on an equal basis."
The administrator of the Camp =.vieeting .A.ssociation, Scott Hoffman, said in a vvritten
statement that "the Camp Meeting is revie.-1.ng the letter. However, it is worth noting
that over 99 percent of the Camp :Meeting's land was recertified as tax-exempt.'"'
Every three years since 1989, the association has applied for, and received, tax
exemptions for its boardwalk, beach and the pavilion under the Green Acres Program,
designed to encourage the use of privately owned lands for public recreation and
http:i 'v,rww.nytimes.com/2007 /09/i 8/nyregion/18grove.html
More Articles in New York Region))
Breaking News Alerts by E-Mail
Sign up to be notified when 1mportant breaks
Privacy Policy
We love our kids, we worry
about their health, and we
care about the envfronment.
We're ChildSafe Advocates .
MOST POPULAR
SLOGGED SEARCH!::D
1. YouT ube Videos Pull In Real
2. Nicholas D. Kristof: secretar}-")f Fr;oc?
3. Wilde Detroit Slept
4- State of Art: Best Bets in Cameras,
5- A Good Appetite: l.l..u.-ury on Sa;e: The Lobster c;;.!t
6. Obama Team Set on Emironrner.t
8. A 7.3-Year-Old Gf\.-es Basketball a Second
9 Your Yloney: It Ylay Be Time to About Bu:. n>; a
House
10. Get Bobbed, but Don't Get Clipped
Go to Comoiete Ust ),
12ii 1 200il
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 8
35 of 81
vruup LOses tax J:5reak Over Gay Union Issue- New York Times
conservation. This is the first time any part of its application has been turned down.
Facing a deadline of last Saturday mandated by the Green Acres rules, Ms. Jackson said it
was important to make clear where her department stood on the definition of open
property.
"When people hear the words 'open space,' we want them to think not just of open air
and land, but that it is open to all people," said Ms. Jackson." And when the public
subsidizes it with tax breaks, it goes with the expectation that it is not going to be parsed
out, whether it be by acti,ity or any particular beliefs."
The tax assessor in Neptune Tov.-nsbip, where Ocean Grove is located, said he could not
estimate how much more tax the association might have to pay because of the changed
status of the pa,ilion. When the lawsuit was filed against the state last month, the
assessor, Bernard Haney, estimated that the association was saving about Ssoo,ooo a
year because of all of its Green Acres exemptions.
In a letter sent to the state last week arguing that the tax-exempt status of the Pa,ilion,
should be retained, Michael Behrens, the association's lawyer, said that the use of the
open-air had not changed since it was first included in the Green Acres Program
18 years ago.
The pavilion, which is used largely for Sunday church services and youth ministry
programs, has also been a place where boardwalk strollers are welcome to sit and relax.
"But never was the general public granted unfettered right to use the pavilion in any way
it chooses (e.g., to reserve it for an exclusive use such as a civil union ceremony)," Mr.
Behrens wrote.
Get an extra dose of
news with Times Extra.
Page 2 of3
Need to know more?
Donate Now
Get 50% off home delivery of The
Times.
Get Times Reader Free. A Digital
Newspaper That Reads Like The
Real Thing.
The case has drawn national attention, in part because Ocean Grove has long been
considered a community that embraced gay residents. Steven Goldstein, executive
director of Garden State Equality, a New Jersey gay rights organization, said he has
gotten more e-mail messages on this issue than on any other cause his group has taken
up.
INSIDE 1'1YTIMES.COM
"I'm hearing from gay people all over the country who thought Ocean Grove was the
. leading light for gay tolerance and that's not the case anymore," Mr. Goldstein said.
NYTimes.com. Where the conversation begins .
. :::..ds oy Googie
l_r:'l_n
Bed and BreakraSt_ Ocean Grove NJ Monthiy Theaier. 1 bik from ocean
Lockmg f.:Jr Ocean Grove" exactly '.'!hat you .var:t today

H;ghland ?crY. t.uxurf i-iotel8y SMli Camous S142!Night
.nw ccrr-
Tips
More Articles in New York Region
on sord, phrase or 3arne. A
Past Coverage
http:ii'N"'cWJ.nytimes.cornJ2007 /09/18/nyregion/18grove.html
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 9
36 of 81
Box Turtle Bulletin Ocean Grove NJ Page 1 of 1
UPDATE: The language of the section is as follows. The amendment starts at lb.:
5. (New section) I a.! No member of the clergy of any religion authorized to solemnize marriage and no religious society, institution or
organization in this State shall be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the First
Amendment to the United States Constitution or by Article I. paragraph 4 of the New Jersey Constitution.
I b. No religious society, institution or organization in this State serving a particular faith or denomination shall be compelled to provide space,
services, advantages, goods, or privileges related to the solemnization, celebration or promotion of marriage if such solemnization, celebration
or promotion of marriage is in violation of the beliefs of such religious society, institution or organization.
c. No civil claim or cause of action against any religious society, institution or organization, or any employee thereof, shall arise out of any
refUsal to provide space. services, advantages, goods, or privileges pursuant to this section. No State action to penalize or withhold benefits from
any such religious society, institution or organization, or any employee thereof, shall result from any refusal to provide space, services,
advantages, goods, or privileges pursuant to this section.
d Nothing in this act shall be construed to limit the effect of section 2 of P.L.J979, c.428 (C.J8A:35-4. 7).
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 10
37 of 81
APPENDIXC
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 11
38 of 81
Legislative Bill Drafting Commission
12066-04-l
s.
Senate
IN SENATE--Introduced by Sen
--read twice and ordered printed,
and when printed to be committed
to the Committee on
------- A.
Assembly
IN ASSEMBLY--Introduced by M. of A.
with M. of A. as co-sponsors
--read once and referred to the
Committee on
*DOMERELA*
(Enacts the Marriage
relating to ability of
to marry)
Equality Act
individuals
Dom Rel. ability to marry
AN ACT
to amend the domestic relations law,
in relation to the ability to marry
The People of the State of New
York, represented in Senate and
Assembly, do enact as follows:
IN SENATE ____________________________ ___
Senate siguo.t:u:re
S2D Mams sH Farley a58 XB!IDec!.y sl.S McD:.ts=ery
,,,
Savino
slS Al!dAbbo s34. Uein s54 s28 Serruo
ass liesi s08 Puscbillo s2.5 Krueger sSJ O'H<C:a
sU. Avellll G.-l.liva.n s27 !:r.Jger
""

:s40 B.o.ll o24
""=
s21 Parker
s42 ... s13 s25 Sq-.LI!dron
54-S &re3lin s47 Gz;:if:fo sOl LaValle s!.6
s36 C'arlccei s60 Grtsanti &62. R..n:z:enhofer s35 Ste";Jiart-
s5o so' :nmnon &4.5 Litt:.e s481titeie Cm:.si:u;
632 Die 5!6 .iias6el1 s05 Ka.reeUi!J.o s:l!l :ltivera sH Valesky
sl7 Dilu
"-
sti7Me....--tiu.s aS& llobach s57 Yo-=s-
s29 Dutllle &10 Rtmtley 562 Ma=i.&rz: ;;03 Zeld'...n
all 3&pe.ilbt s04 Jolm.son
,.,.
""""""-'
sl.s
IN ASSEMBLY ____________________________ __
Abbate e.095 o.OJS!!li.Ue.r, .. .012 Sl12a4illo
a0!2 Abi.D.lmt:i aOli Ccrran Jeffries a052 MiU.man aUl Say.oard
1!.105 Am:!Sore. aG63 Cwr.ick 1!11.35 John& 4103 Molinaro . ., Sc=bo=agh
a084 hroyc o.04S Cp:b:rovitz: all.2 Jcr:!.lll!. Montes:!l:lO Schi.:Jzel
a035 Aubl;y 1103-\1 tleDDekker .a099 Eatz a"ll2 XDrel.le a1.4C Sell.ialio.geJ:
5arcUI.y a08l. Dil1owit: it074 XllVIUUigh e.Q39 Mayo. aus Schro911er
al.l4 truprey a065 :::elluer a054 S:!.lver
a0a2 Bened,..tto a004 ;;al.OO a036
11.073 Bing a229 <olb Oaks aU.6
'""""'
4122 Bl8:1lkelhush a06!f O'DQ!mell a Spano
11.055 Boylt:..nd a007 a09l r.aO:Ier e.OSl ortiz .,Cr79 Steve!laon
ao"'a 30yle 1.37 l"riend a.Ol-3 r.avine tU.36ral.mes= SweeDey
a026 B=ll:l&tei::l aOSO a088 ?au1in Teoiisc:c
a.04i er=nen a09.0 Gal.er: ol25 I.i.ftor. e.l.U al.15 Teruuey-
a1ll. B::=lSC>;L al3S Gant.t a072 Li.J:Iarea a002
11.046 a:rook-::tra:=y aC77

a327 Lope, P. aoss E'erry a06l Ti::O:Se
al47 3-.JXl!...D!l Gigl.!o a053 'Loil!!'Z, v. aOS7 ?retlow aoJ;. Titus
lll.l.7 Butler a061> Glicic. aCOl. wsqu.ad...""'' a021 :u. .a062 Tobo=
al.Ol. Cahill al.SO Goodell al.26 :;:.up.u:lkl all-97 3.abbitt Weinstei:t
a07S a.ll.l. l:lagee .aOOS' ltaia a02!1 Weise::>berg"
aoos Ma;on=elli
11.106 Ca:nertrar' .... <1.05'8 Gu:atber 4:.055' Maisel al34 a070 ilfrigb1:
a.oes ees:;ell.i a.C60 Hal.!.iot:!lki.s a1D9 hilly a094 Zabrowsld
.!l.<l-86 cast:tO all$1 liaVl.ey a030 Markey alt18 livera. J. a02::!
.u.38 ceretto aUB Hayes n013 aOBO :i.ivera, .. a-o:2.7
a033 Cli!1.1:k aCa3 Beastie o:.I.04 !!!Cltlle:Ily a07S Rivera. .. a054
aD4?C-olton a028 nevesi e.Ol.7 Kc.!:evit':: a1l.9
a04.8 F.:.k:f.Il.C. al.OS aOS6
ao22 Meii.g aC58
"'-"
Co:wi::. al.U aoyt un D. a067 aos=.tho.l
aC85 C:'e.spo a..l.02 J.

Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 12
39 of 81
06/14/ll 2 12066-04-1
1 Section 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Marriage
2 Equality Act".
3 2. Legislative intent. Marriage is a fundamental human right. Same-
4 sex couples should have the same access as others to the protections,
5 responsibilities, rights, obligations, and benefits of civil marriage.
6 Stable family relationships help build a stronger society. For the
7 welfare of the community and in fairness to all New Yorkers, this act
8 formally recognizes otherwise-valid marriages without regard to whether
9 the parties are of the same or different sex.
10 It is the intent of the legislature that the marriages of same-sex and
11 different-sex couples be treated equally in all respects under the law.
12 The omission from this act of changes to other provisions of law shall
13 not be construed as a legislative intent to preserve any legal
14 distinction bet><een same-sex couples and different-sex couples with
15 respect to marriage. The legislature intends that all provisions of law
16 which utilize gender-specific terms in reference to the parties to a
17 marriage, or which in any other way may be inconsistent with this act,
18 be construed in a gender-neutral manner or in any ><ay necessary to
19 effectuate the intent of this act.
20 3. The domestic relations law is amended by adding two new sections
21 10-a and 10-b to read as follows:
22 10-a. Parties to a marriage. 1. A marriage that is otherwise valid
23 shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of
24 the same or different sex.
25 2. No government treatment or legal status, effect, right, benefit,
26 privilege, protection or responsibility relating to marriage, whether
27 deriving from statute, administrative or court rule, public policy,
28 common law or any other source of law, shall differ based on the parties
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 13
40 of 81
06/14/11 3 12066-04-1
l to the marriage being or having been of the same sex rather than a
2 different sex. When necessary to implement the rights and responsibil-
3 ities of spouses under the law, all gender-specific language or terms
4 shall be construed in a gender-neutral manner in all such sources of
5 law.
6 10-b. Application. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
7 pursuant to subdivision nine of section two hundred ninety-two of the
8 executive law, a corporation incorporated under the benevolent orders
9 law or described in the benevolent orders law but formed under any other
10 law of this state or a religious corporation incorporated under the
11 education law or the religious corporations laws shall be deemed to be
12 in its nature distinctly private and therefore, shall not be required to
13 provide accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges related to
14 the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.
15 2. A refusal by a benevolent organization or a religious corporation,
16 incorporated under the education law or the religious corporations law,
17 to provide accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges in
18 connection with section ten-a of this article shall not create a civil
19 claim or cause of action.
20 3. Pursuant to subdivision eleven of section two hundred ninety-six of
21 the executive law, nothing in this article shall be deemed or construed
22 to prohibit any religious or denominational institution or organization,
23 or any organization operated for charitable or educational purposes,
24 which is operated, supervised or controlled by or in connection with a
25 religious organization from limiting employment or sales or rental of
26 housing accommodations or admission to or giving preference to persons
27 of the same religion or denomination or from taking such action as is
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 14
41 of 81
06/14/ll 4 12066-04-1
1 calculated by such organization to promote the religious principles for
2 which it is established or maintained.
4. Section 13 of the domestic relations law, as amended by chapter
4 720 of the laws of 1957, is amended to read as follows:
5 13. Marriage licenses. It shall be necessary for all persons
6 intended to be married in New York state to obtain a marriage license
7 from a town or city clerk in New York state and to deliver said license,
8 within sixty days, to the clergyman or magistrate who is to officiate
9 before the marriage ceremony may be performed. In case of a marriage
10 contracted pursuant to subdivision four of section eleven of this chap-
ll ter, such license shall be delivered to the judge of the court of record
12 before whom the acknowledgment is to be taken. If either party to the
13 marriage resides upon an island located not less than twenty-five miles
14 from the office or residence of the town clerk of the town of which such
15 island is a part, and if such office or residence is not on such island
16 such license may be obtained from any justice of the peace residing on
17 such island, and such justice, in respect to powers and duties relating
18 to marriage licenses, shall be subject to the provisions of this article
19 governing town clerks and shall file all statements or affidavits
20 received by him while acting under the provisions of this section with
21 the town clerk of such town. No application for a marriage license shall
22 be denied on the ground that the parties are of the same, or a differ-
23 ent, sex.
24 5. Subdivision 1 of section 11 of the domestic relations law, as
25 amended by chapter 319 of the laws of 1959, is amended and a new subdi-
26 vision 1-a is added to read as follows:
27 1. A clergyman or minister of any religion, or by the senior leader,
28 or any of the other leaders, of The Society for Ethical Culture in the
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 15
42 of 81
06/14/11 5 12066-04-1
1 city of New York, having its principal office in the borough of Manhat-
2 tan, or by the leader of The Brooklyn Society for Ethical Culture,
3 having its principal office in the borough of Brooklyn of the city of
4 New York, or of the Westchester Ethical Society, having its principal
5 office in westchester county, or of the Ethical Culture Society of Long
6 Island, having its principal office in Nassau county, or of the River-
7 dale-Yonkers Ethical Society having its principal office in Bronx coun-
8 ty, or by the leader of any other Ethical Culture Society affiliated
9 with the American Ethical Union; provided that no clergyman or minister
10 as defined in section two of the religious corporations law, or Society
11 for Ethical Culture leader shall be reguired to solemnize any marriage
12 when acting in his or her capacity under this subdivision.
13 1-a. A refusal by a clergyman or minister as defined in section two of
14 the religious corporations law, or Society for Ethical Culture leader to
15 solemnize any marriage under this subdivision shall not create a civil
16 claim or cause of action.
17 6. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall
18 have become a law.
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 16
43 of 81
APPENDIXD
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 17
44 of 81
When Conscience and N.Y.'s vay Mamage Law Collide- NY hmes.com
WQ[I_cl

N,Y/

Tec,hnology

H!<il!!h
SJ;!o..rts
0.!1iDiQl1
M5
Stvle

J9bs

Au_tgs
\:',,,t.;f' ,' l"

July 18,2011,8:29 am
When Conscience and the New Marriage Law
Collide
By CLYDE HABER!yfAN
Pagel ot3
As usual, Laura L. Fotusky attended Sunday morning services at Union Center Christian Church, which she
described as "a nondenominational, Bible-preaching church" in Union Center, N.Y., a town about seven miles
northwest of Binghamton. Her life is about to change significantly. But on Sunday Ms. Fotusky described herself
as at peace.
Clyde Haberman offers his take on the news.
"I don't really have any regrets," she in a telephone interview. "I feel like I did what I needed to do."
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20 11107118/when-conscience-and-the-new-marriage-la... 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 18
45 of 81
when Conscience and N.Y.'s vay Marrrage Law Collide - NY limes.com Page 2 ot j
What she did was to announce her resignation as the town clerk of nearby Barker. Her religious beliefs, Ms.
Fotusky said, made it impossible for her in good conscience to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
Her last day in a job that she has held for four years is Thursday, lhree days before New York's same-sex
marriage law goes into effect.
"In Acts 5:29," she wrote to the Barker town board last week, "it states, gught toQb_e_y<lod_n!ili<rrJhllJJmen.'
"And it is clear to her, she said, that the Bible defines marriage as solely the union of a man and a woman.
As best as can be determined, hers was the first resignation of conscience since the York l!lw "\\'as
last month. It wasn't the last. On Thursday, Rosemary Centi, the town clerk in Guilderland, N.Y., outside Albany,
over wedding ceremonies (a function that Ms. Fotusky does not perform in
Barker).
Ms. Centi said she would continue as clerk, and would issue marriage licenses to everyone who was eligible, but
she could no longer be Guilderland's marriage officer. A!l_<!...l3,Qm_an_<:::.a1b_oli.c, she said, she felt that she could not
perform the actual rituals for same-sex couples.
Undoubtedly, some will denounce these women as bigots. But others will find them admirable for standing by
their beliefs.
Ms. Fotusky, for one, is literally putting her money where her mouth is. At some sacrifice, she is giving up a job
that pays about $25,000 a year; she isn't clinging to a paycheck while refusing to enforce a law that she cannot
abide. To complete the remaining 17 months of her term, she said, the Barker town board appointed a woman
who "doesn't have a problem" with issuing same-sex marriage licenses.
"I've gotten some negatives," Ms. Fotusky said, "but I've gotten a tremendous amount of support." By her
estimate, favorable reactions outnumber the hostile by five to one. "I had somebody stop me in the store today
saying that they admired someone standing up for their convictions, that it was nice to see that," she said.
For most of her adult life, Ms. Fotusky, 56, was a stay-at-home mother of five. "I did a bit of things here and
there to help supply income," she said, "but this was my first time in a regular job since I was a young woman."
On New Year's Day 2007, she said, "I prayed and told God that I needed my brain stretched." In short order,
there was a vacancy at town hall when the previous clerk resigned. Ms. Fotusky was appointed to the position,
and was then elected twice to two-year terms of her own.
"It was a wonderful experience," she said. "! loved it. I loved the challenge, and loved meeting people, and loved
being friendly to people. So I'm going to miss that."
As clerk, she keeps town records and issues death certificates and a variety of licenses. It was never likely that
gay couples would have beaten a path to her door; she is called on to issue relatively few licenses even for
traditional marriages. "I only did 6 last year, and the previous year it was 14," she said. "This year I sold only
one."
What comes next? Ms. Fotusky said that she had no idea. "We're just trusting God," she said. By "we," she
included her husband, Timothy Fotusky, who installs air-conditioning and heating units. "He's been wonderful
about not saying a thing to me about money or about me getting a job," she said. "He completely supports what
I've done."
"The Lord's going to provide for me and take care of me," she said. "I just have to see what's around the corner."
For more local news from The Times, including Coney hland's vanishing shops, Gov. Andrew A1. Cuomo's
http://cityroom.biogs.nytimes.com/20 11107118/when-conscience-and-the-new-marriage-la... 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 19
46 of 81
APPENDIXE
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 20
47 of 81
own clerk: 1 ao not ao '1 do' - lrmes Uruon
Tuesday, Decemoer 06. 2011
t
"" a .. Albany,NY

0,. 6.' c.mesunian.corn Web by YAHOO! : ; Bus1neHeS
Page 1 of3
Sucscri::-e Tif"les
Subscn!::-er Ser.nces
P!ace 3f! Ad
Get ---v Weekly Magszu:e
HOME NEVIS sPORTS atJS!NCSS CPl'-l!D-\l ENTEi'fTA!!'>lft.E:-.!T SLOGS -:CBS HOMES CARS CL.C.S.SiF!EDS HELP 'NOEX
Local Yc-ur Town Cao1t01 Naho--"1 Wend Techr.ology The Advc-cate Oata:;ases Soeciai 7-0ay AcC;;ve Sc"'!coi Cios!ngs
Town clerk: I do not do 'I do'
Guilderland official quHs as marriage officer, citing faith. same-sex !aw
By LAUREN STANFORTH Staff writer
Upec'.ed073?a.rn
VIEW: LARGER I HIDE 1of4
Rosemary Centi, Guilderland town derX poses fofaphct.agraph at the Guilderland Town Hall on Wednesday, July 20i1ln
Guilderland. Centi wiH stay on as Town Cleft(. but she WJU no longer do marriages. As a Calholic she belleves marriage is a
sacrament and should only be between a man and a woman. Two town judges will be doing an future marriages. {Paul
BuckowskJ I Times Union)
18 192
Like
GUILDERLAND-- Tmvn Clerk Rosemary Centi, who has
ser>ed as Guilderland's marriage officer since 2001, will
stop overseeing weddings on Wednesday, saying her
Catholic faith prevents her from marrying same-
sex couples.
Pri<itable-VeiSi<Jn
Centi submitted a briefletter to Town Supen-isor Ken
Runion, a fellow Democrat. resigning from her
appointed role, but she will remain the elected town clerk and continue to issue marriage
licenses to all eligible applicants.
'This was a personal decision," said Centi of her response to the state's Marriage Equality Law,
which takes effect July 24. "I would think everyone who has a personal choice should be
alloved to have that personal choice "ithout any kind of backlash."
Runion, however, said as a government official Centi should feel obligated to execute the law,
no matter Vfhat her personal belief about marriage are.
Photo Galleries
Top Jobs
Your Town
Get expanded coverage of and
events targeted to your community
Optician FT, M-F Delmar cust
serv1ce oriented pnvate optometry practice Exp wl
ancillary test... more :o
ACCOUNTANT II City of Albany
The City Treasurer's Office :s seeking a responsible
individual to. mere .,
Computer Support Technician
WIY'IHT EducatiOnal Telecommunications Please see the
full job desert. more ,
Rental Coordinator Caterpillar
forklift oealersh1p. Eager to leam about eqwp. & good
cust. svc
MORE
Latest News
Cohoes man charged with felony OWl on
Thruway -- 5? a."'
Victim tackles robber, holds him for
cops ; - .:::;: a.'n
http://www.tirnesunion.com/locallarticle/Town-clerk-I-do-not-do-I-do-1465272.php 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 21
48 of 81
1 own clerK: 1 ao not ao '1 ao - limes uruon
'We all take oaths to follow the laws of the state and the town and the federal government;
said Runion. "Same-sex marriages are permitted under the law and it's our duty to
perform them."
Centi was appointed clerk in 2000. was designated a marriage officer the follo\\ing year, went
on to \'\<in six elections and is running unopposed in November for another twu-year term.
She officiates at about four weddings a month. The town doesn't have to appoint a marriage
officer, but Runion said it has proved helpful-- particularly when other officiants have
canceled at the last minute. The Tmv'll Board '""ill discuss at its August meeting if it will appoint
someone else to be a marriage officer. Runion said to\\rn Justices Denise Randall and .john
Bailey will perform marriages in Centi's stead.
Centi is not the only government official in New York to balk at the new law. In Broome
County, the to\\'-n clerk of Barker announced her resignation, sa:ying her religious beliefs would
make it impossible for her to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple.
Centi said her resignation as marriage officiant is in no way a commentary on her feelings
about gay rights, noting she has friends who are gay. She said her faith teaches her that
marriage is a sacrament-- a sacred rite-- between a man and a woman.
She said she thought the debate in the state Legislature would continue past this year's session,
and was shocked the morning of June 25 to hear about the state Senate's historic 33-29 \ate in
favor of the law. While it requires that no government benefit relating to marriage should differ
based on the gender of the parties involved, the statute provides an exclusion for religious
entities and benevolent organizations from the requirement of performing or host marriage
festhities if it goes against religious principles.
On Monday morning, Centi will preside over her final marriage ceremony at Town Hall.
"It's not an easy decision," she said. "But I think I would have been getting into a dialogue with
couples who were getting married and I didn't want to get into that dialogue."
Reach Lauren Stanforth at 454-5697 or lstanforth@timesunion.com.
Printable Version S Ema!l This
We Recommend
1 Burger King cashier calls cops on 'herb' smoker
Times Union
1 Police: Mom charged after car rolls through
parking lot with .
1 Woman dies in 1-88 wreck Times Union
1 Studying? Digital do's and don'ts - Times Union
' Rotterdam dentist gets G months in jail - Times
Union
' 65 families still need Santa's help Times Union
18
From Around the Web
1 Facebook Causes Wife to Stab Husband in
Arizona. Fox News . (Fax:News.com)
1 Mom Who Lied About Welfare Got More Jail
Time Than a Murderer (The Stir By cafe Mom}
1 Drop Dead Ad Bannai Qyer Thin Model (Fashion
Etc.)
1 Car review: BMW J-Series (Auto Express)
1 Cops Shoot Woman Stabbing Her Daughter:
Police (Tire Huffingtan Post)
Page 2 of3
Veteran SUNY leader Hayden
resigns 23
Agents looked for child porn in Bernie Fine
search -o s.:. a . .-:;
FROM OUR HOMEPAGE
Surgery, pain. humor and no
turning back
OVldeo
SEEN: UAibany vs. Siena
basketball, Albany Cup 2011
" '
" -

'
'

r-,
Charges remain undecided
http://WVvw.timesunion.com/local/article/Town-clerk-I-do-not-do-I-do-1465272.php 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 22
49 of 81
APPENDIXF
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 23
50 of 81
.'.Ights Clash as 1 own Clerk KeJects Her Kole m vay Mamages - NY 1 tmes.com Pagel ot4
------ -- -- -----------
r!OME PAGE TOOAY'S PAPER VIDEO MOST POPULAR , TIMES TOP'CS Log in Register Now Help
. ---------------
Search AU NYT1mes.com
N.Y. I Region
'WORI.D C.S. Bt:SJJ'I;"'E._<::$ SPORTS OPIXIO"' ARn: snLE TRAVEL JOBS REALESTATE
'
1
AUTOS
FedEx. Solutions That
Rights Collide as Town Clerk Sidesteps Role in Gay
Marriages
Rose f&:fie Belfortl. !C'<.'i!'l der'...: in :...edyar.::. does net ,.;ant to s.gn same-sex r:ar;.age ::censes arranged
for a lssue ell ma;;iage -:censes t:y appe!;,tr;ent
9-y THOMAS KAPLAN
401>
LEDYARD, N.Y.- Rose Marie Belforti is a 57-year-old cheese maker,
the elected town clerk in this sprawling Finger Lakes fanning
community and a self-described Bible-believing Christian. She
1
believes that God has condemned homosexuality as a sin, so she does
1 not '""ant to sign licenses; instead, she has
; arranged for a deputy to issue all marriage licenses by appointment_
Related in Opinion
Room For Debate: Are Religion and
>iarriage Indivisible?
Follow @l'i"YI'Metro L
Connect with @h"'YfMetro IIIJ
1

breaking news and headlmes.
But when a lesbian couple who m''TI a
farm near here showed up at the tm"n
hall last month, the women said they
were un1Ailling to wait.
Now Ms. Belforti is at the heart of an
emerging test case, as national
advocacy groups look to Ledyard for
an ail.S'''er to how the state balances a
RECOMMEND
TWITTER
UNKEDIN
COMMENTS
1520)
SIGN iN TOt:-
PRiNT
REPR(NTS
SHARE
=


religious freedom claim by a local official against a civil
rights claim by a same-sex couple.
Readers' Comments
Ms. Belforti, represented by a Christian legal ad,ocacy
group based in Arizona, the Alliance Defense Fund, is
arguing that state Ia'"' requires New York to accommodate
her religious beliefs.
Log ,., see ,'f!"at
are em nyt-nes_<:,.."'<T:
log In Witl!: Facebook
Policy ; i/\lhat's This?
What's Popular Now II]
Astronomers II Send In the
Find Biggest Clueless
Black Holes Yet
II
Baal<of-
-
TicketWatch: Theater Offers by E-Mail
I
Sign up for ticket offers from Broadway-shows and other
advertisers
,'
II
Sea Sample 1 .Pn'iac:y Policy
L OP-ED COLUMNIST
Send in the Clueless
MOSTVIE\-\'ED
GRADING THE DIGITAL SCHOOL
Online Learning, Personalized
3. Astronomers Find Biggest Black Holes Yet
4- PUNCHED OUT
Derek Boogaard: A Brain 'Going Bad'
5. THESTONE
Art and the Limits ofXeuroscience
6. OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Bring Health Care Home
7. CONTRlBliTOR
\\-hy Schooi Choic..:! Fails
B 'J.U7
http:/ /\'.llNW.nytimes.corn/20 11 /09/28/nyregion/rights-clash-as-town-clerk -rejects-her-role-i... 12/6/20 11
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 24
51 of 81
LJasn as 1 own LJerK KeJects tier Kole m vay Mamages- NY limes.com Page 2 of4
"'Nev,. York law protects my right to hold both my job and
my beliefs," she said in an inteniew last week, pausing
briefly to collect $50 from a resident planning to take 20
loads of refuse to the town dump. ''I'm not supposed to
have to leave my beliefs at the door at my government job."
But the couple, Deirdre DiBiaggio and Katie Carmichael of
Miami, are arguing that the law requires all clerks in New
Derek Boogaard: Blcod on the Ice
OPED COLUMNIST
The Won1.-y Liberal
10. GrayingTo\\n Builds a Life Beyond Bingo
York to provide marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The Go ro Complete L!st., Show My Recommendations
couple are being represented by a liberal advocacy
organization, People for the American Way, based in
Washington.
"Gay people have fought so long and hard to get these civil
rights," said Ms. Carmichael. 53, a filmmaker. "To have her
basically telling us to get in the back of the line is just not
acceptable."
Ms. Belforti is one of several t0\\111 clerks who have said the
state's Marriage Equality Act. the measure approved in
June that legalized same-sex marriage in New York, violates
their religious beliefs. Two clerks resigned in July rather
than comply with the law.
Gov. Andre,.., M. Cuomo, a Democrat, who made same-sex
marriage a priority of his first year in office, has expressed
little 5)-mpathy for clerks who object to the law. "'When you
enforce the laws of the state, you don't get to pick and
choose," he said this summer. And the State Health
Department issued a memorandum to clerks that refusing
to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples would be a
misdemeanor.
But compliance is being tested here in Ledyard, a town of
1,900 people on the shore of Cayuga Lake that has
thousands of acres of corn and soybeans and not one traffic
light.
Ms. Belforti, a Republican, first won election as town clerk a decade ago, and thought she
had a creative solution this summer to a vexing problem by agreeing to delegate the
signing of marriage licenses.
"For me to participate in the same-sex marriage application process I don't feel is right,"'
she said. "God doesn't want me to do this, so I can't do what God doesn't want me to do,
just like I can't steal, or any of the other things that God doesn't want me to do."
The clerk's office is open nine hours a week- Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday mornings.
Ms. Belforti also does duty cleaning the town hall bathrooms. 1\.nd s.l!_LLul faTII!<OJ:, married
viith four grown daughters, who makes probiotic kefir cheese.
A Protestant who worships at several area churches, Ms. Belforti read to a reporter a
1
passage from the first chapter of Romans, which she says condemns homosexual activity,
offering it as an explanation for her stance.
i ''This is about religious freedom," she said. 1his is not about trashing gay people."
But Ms. DiBiaggio and Ms. Carmichael say it is discriminatory, and they are contemplating
filing a lawsuit. The women, 'vbo have been together for 10 years and 0\-\-Tl a working farm
in nearby Springport, declined )is. Belforti's request that they make an appointment and
j return later when they stopped by the Ledyard clerk's office seeking a marriage license.
'Announcing Win-a-Trip 2012
ALSO IN OPINION
Video: Win-a. Trip 2012
Kristof: Gifts that say you care
nytimes.com OPINION
introduc::ng: 1"1.' Arts & Ente:lain.ment
Guide-
ts
ebc-i'rwfiKken.rs
VISIT
.
Aos by Gocgie what's this?
Alzheimer's Foundation
Alzheimer's Foundation of America
Reach out to us for help
alzfdn_org
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/nyregion/rights-clash-as-tO\vn-clerk-rejects-her-role-i... 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 25
52 of 81
r< Jgms L!asn as 1 own LierK KeJects tier KO!e m uay !Vlarnages - N Y limes. com
'1 was shocked," Ms. Carmichael said.
Deborah Uu, the general counsel for the People for the American Way Foundation, which
1 is working with a New York law finn, Proskauer Rose, on the case, said, "VVe totally respect
1 everyone's right to have their own personal beliefs." But Ms. Belforti, Ms. Liusaid, "doesn't
i have the right to use them to relieve herself from doing a major part of her duties."
; The issue has roiled this t0\\1'"11, where Republicans slightly outnumber Democrats, and
often on Election Day there are fewer voters than for a race for high school class president.
Most of the tovm is farmland, but Ledyard also contains the village of Aurora, home to
Wells College, an opera house and a lakeside inn vhere a one-night .....ine country geta\'-1IY
I goes for as much as $813 per couple.
In interviews last week, some residents applauded Ms. Belforti for standing up for her
j beliefs, while others said she should either sign all marriage licenses or find another line of
j work.
i
j "You get about a so-so split," said Jim Wilcox, 42, who runs the white-clapboard Wilcox
General Store and who got his own marriage license from Ms. Belforti a few years ago. He
called the Marriage Equality Act "a long time coming" and worried that the controversy
could paint Ledyard in a bad light. "'We'd hate to be the ones who slowed down the wheels
of change here,"' he said.
i Another resident, Ed Easter, is now seeking to defeat Ms. Belforti in a write-in campaign
when she is up for re-election in November. Mr. Easter, 40, who works in a wine tasting
l room, said he felt that someone needed to challenge her, rather than assuming the courts
would eventually settle the matter.
'
' "The easiest way for her to go, and to settle this whole issue, is to take it to a vote -just
vote her out of office," he said.
Ms. Belforti said she had no regrets. Her re-election campaign literature consists of a
handout that trumpets her maintenance of nine different record-keeping computer
databases and the She also notes that she is facing a challenger, "because I
have taken a stand on same-sex marriage."
"'I'm totally at peace, because God comes first for me,., she said. "It's not a question at all. If
they want to get me out, you know, I'-ve sh0\ ...'11 them what I can do for 10 years - if that's
not good enough and people want somebody else, that is their choice."
!1, ct L'11s art>ee apr;earec "' :mr>:. ::n .ta. . cr:
9llQe _A' of Nth'.' '-'if.< editicr. w1h ;l;e :oeaa:r;e R;gr;:s CJo;.ce ;;s
::;\vn Clerl< S<c-este:;:s R.cie l:"l Gay Mamage2
COMMENTS
SIGN INlO !::
?RINT
REPRINTS
, Get 50% Off The New York Times & Free All Digital Access .
.".'r'-<;1 s-- '' Get Fre& E-mail Alerts on These Topics
'Jar.lty
Rick Perry Quotes the Part Of Ecclesiastes from That
ByrdsSong
Megazme
Scarlett Johansson's Fittest and Hottest Moments
Chief Rabbi blames Apple, Steve Jobs for selfish'
Same-Sex :.ramage, Civil Lnions and Domestic:
Partner..,hi.ps
Ch il Righi.:: and Libertie,;
Page 3 ot 4
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/nyregion/rights-clash-as-town-c1erk-rejects-her-role-i... 12/6/2011
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 26
53 of 81
APPENDIXG
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 27
54 of 81
HISTORY
OF THE
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST
OF
LATTER-DAY SAINTS
PERIOD I.
History of Joseph Smith, the Prophet
BY HIMSELF
VOLUME I.
AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES
BY
B. H. ROBERTS
PUBLISHED BY THE CHURCH
Second Edition Revised
---
THE DESERET BOOK COMPANY
Salt Lake City. Utah
1974
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 28
55 of 81
394 HISTORY OF THE CHURCH
[A. D. 1833
Early in the morning of the 23rd of July, the mob
again assembled, armed with weapons of
The Second
Gathering of war, and bearing a red flag; whereupon the
the Mob.
Elders, led by the Spirit of God, and in order
to save time, and stop the effusion of blood, entered
into a treaty with the mob, to leave the county with-
in a certain time.* The treaty was as follows:
Memorandum of argeement between the undersigned of the Mormon
Society in Jackson County, Missouri, and a committee appointed by
a public meeting of the citizens of said county, made on the 23rd day
of July, 1833.
It is understood that the undersigned members of the society, do
give their solemn pledges, each for himself, as follows, to-wir:-
That Oliver Cowdery, W. W. Phelps, William M'Lellin, Edward
Partridge, Lyman Wight. Simeon Carter, Peter and John Whitmer,
and Harvey H. Whitlock shall remove with their families out of this
county on or before the first day of January next, and that they, as
well as the two hereinafter named, use all their influence to induce all
the brethern now here to remove as soon as poSlSible: one half, say.
by the first of Januaty next. and all by the first day of April next; to
advise and try all means in their power to stop any more of their sect
from moving to this county; and as to those now on the road, they
will uSJe their influence to prevent their settling permanently in the
county, but that they shall only make arrangements for temporary
shelter, till a new location is agreed on for the society. John Corrill
and Algernon Sidney Gilbert, are allowed to remain as general agents
to wind up the business of the society, so long as necessity shall re-
quire; and said Gilbert may sell out his merchandise now on hand,
but is to make no new importation.
The Star is not again to be published nor a press set up by any of
the society in this county.
If the said Edward Partridge and W. W. Phelps move their families
by the first day of January, as aforesaid, that they themselves will be
allowed to go and come, in order to transact and wind up their business.
The committee pledge themselves to use all their influence to prevent
*It was at this point, too, that several of the brethren stepped forward and of-
fered themselves as a ransom for the Church, expressing themselves as being willing
to be scourged or to die if that would appease the anger of the mob against the Saints.
The mob would not accept the sacrifice of the brethren, however, but renewed their
threats of violence against the whole Church. The brethren who offered tbemselve.
as a ransom for the Saints were John Corrill, John Whitmer, William W. Phelps.
Algernon S. Gilbert, Edward Partridge, and Isaac Morley.
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 29
56 of 81
APPENDIXH
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 30
57 of 81
txtermmanon uraer - 1 ne r.ncyclOpema ot Nlormomsm Page 1 of:
BYP IJarold }J. Lee Library
Search
Search
Navigation
Home
Recent changes

Views
Page

View source
HistQry
Personal tools
Log in
Toolbox


Spy_cia!pages
Printable version
Permanent link
Extermination Order
this pl!gt; i_n originl!l 1992_ pul:Jlicl!t:i<m.
Author: Whitman, Dale A.
A military order signed by Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs on October 27, 1838, directed that the Mormons be
driven from the state or exterminated (see Missouri Conflict). Boggs's action was based on information brought to him
that day by two citizens of Richmond, l\1issouri, concerning the Mormon-Missourian conflicts in northwest Missouri and
on reports of the Battle of Crooked River, in which armed Mormons had clashed with a company of state militia on
October 25.
Boggs, acting in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the Missouri militia. ordered General John B. Clark to March to
Ray County with a division of militia to carry out operations against armed :'v!ormons. The order described the Mormons
as being in "open and avowed defiance of the laws, and of having made war upon the people of this State." It stated that
"the Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary for the public
http:/ i eom.byu.edu!index. php/Extermination _Order 1/28/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 31
58 of 81
cxrermmauon vraer - 1 ne t:ncyclopeaJa ot !Vlmmomsm
peace-their outrages are beyond all description."
Page 2 of:
A copy of the order reached General Samuel D. Lucas of the state militia by the time he encamped outside the LDS town
of Far West. in Caldwell County, on October 31. Lucas gave a copy to the LDS Colonel George M. Hinkle and other
Church representatives, to whom he dictated terms of surrender, and they showed it to Joseph Smith. It was probably a
significant factor in the Prophet's decision to surrender to Lucas.
Following Joseph Smith's surrender, arrest, and imprisonment, the govemor's order was carried out by a combination of
militia troops and vigilantes. It culminated in the forcible removal from Missouri of virtually all members of the Church
during the winter and early spring of 1838-1839.
The legality and propriety of Boggs's order were vigorously debated in the Missouri legislature during its 1839 session.
The order was supported by most northwest Missouri citizens, but was questioned or denounced by others. However, no
determination of the order's legality was ever made.
On June 25, 1976, Governor Christopher S. Bond issued an executive order rescinding the Extermination Order.
recognizing its legal invalidity and formally apologizing in behalf of the state of Missouri for the suffering it had caused
the Latter-day Saints.
Bibliography
"Document Containing the Correspondence, Orders, etc. in Relation to the Disturbances with the Mormons; and the
Evidence Given before the Hon. Austin A. King." Office of the Boon's Lick Democrat, Fayette, Mo., 1841, p. 61
(contains full text of the order)
Gentry, Leland H. "A History of the Latter-day Saints in Northern Missouri from 1836 to 1839." Ph.D. diss .. Brigham
Young University, 1965.
Leonard, Glen M. Review of Cultures in Conflict: A Documentary History ofthe Mormon War in Illinois, edited by John
E. Hailwas <J.nc;IE,qgerD._Launi1!S. BYC/ S!udies 36:2 (1996-971:23.5-240.
LeSueur, Stephen C. The 1838 Mormon War in Missouri. Columbia, Mo., 1987.
DALE A. WHITMAN
A i B l C I DIE IF I G! H! I I J i KILl M i ?\ l 0 I Pi Q! R IS! Ti G l V! W i Xi Y i Z
Retrieved from

P.O. Box 26800, Provo, [IT 84602-6800
(801) 422-2927
Home
Contact Us
Site: Indt::lC
Mobile Site
1:: Youp.g University
http://eom.byu.edu/index. php/Extermination 1/28/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 32
59 of 81
APPENDIX I
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 33
60 of 81
Amencan Prophet: 1 he Story ot Joseph Smith Page I ot l.
C!E I I t:llii!llVlEE'l
Church History
& Beliefs
Brigf History
c Core Beliefs
and Doctrines
e Understanding
the Early
Persecutions
Online
Resources
*W
.Joseph Smith
Documenta;y
orr PRS
PnJducr
Information
Production
Credits
PBS Online
I-I orne
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was officially organized on April 6,
1830 in Fayette, New York, with six members. Today, congregations of the Church are
found in more than 160 nations and territories. With more than I 0 million members. it is
one of the fastest growing religions in the world and one of the largest Christian
churches in the United States.
From the outset, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was a missionary
church. In the mid-nineteenth century, converts were encouraged to gather with the
Saints. However, swelling ranks of immigrants from Europe and the eastern United
States soon provided fuel for growing opposition.
To escape the escalating turmoil, Church headquarters moved from New York to Ohio,
then to Missouri, and later to Illinois. In 1839, the Latter-day Saints established the
community of Nauvoo, Illinois on a tract of swampland bordering the Mississippi River.
Under the leadership of Joseph Smith, they drained the swamps and began erecting a
community of homes, farms, and businesses. They also built a temple.
By 1844, Nauvoo rivaled Chicago in population. But
mounting suspicion and anxiety within neighboring
communities fed an atmosphere of extreme agitation
and distrust. "Nauvoo grew so quickly and rose to
such political power that the locals wondered if those
they has once befriended would come to dominate
their lives. The once prevailing sense of sympathy
gradually deteriorated into suspicion, economic
jealousy, distrust, and fear, bordering on hysteria."
1
Newspapers in neighboring towns began to call for the Latter-day Saints' extermination.
At the height of this turmoil, Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum were shot to death by
an armed mob in nearby Carthage, Illinois. Mobs attacked Latter-day Saint settlements
in the region, burning crops, destroying homes, and threatening to exterminate the
people. Church leaders knew a move was once again at hand. This move would become
one of the largest westward migrations in American history.
Pursuing a revelation initially articulated by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young prepared the
Latter-day Saints-perhaps 17,000 of them by that time--for an historic trek across the
vast wilderness to the Rocky Mountains, 1,300 miles to the west. In 1846, the Saints
were driven from Nauvoo. After trudging across the Iowa plains, they rested on the
opposite side of the Iowa territory, in a place they called "Winter Quarters." The first
pioneer party departed from Winter Quarters early in the spring of 1847 and arrived in
the Yalley of the Great Salt Lake on July 24 of that year.
During the next few years, thousands of other Latter-
day Saints struggled across the Great Plains to the
newly found refuge. Some of the pioneers crossed
the plains in wagons. Others were equipped with
small, light-weight handcarts. Ten handcart caravans
http://Vi\\W.pbs.org/americanprophet/lds.html 2/4/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 34
61 of 81
Amencan Prophet: The Story of Joseph Smith Page 2 of:L
crossed the plains in the next four years. Eight made
the journey with relative success, but two endured tragedy and saw hundreds perish of
htmger, fatigue, and exposure.
After their arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, members of the Church were commissioned
by Brigham Young to establish colonies throughout the West. In all, the pioneers settled
more than 600 communities in a broad swath stretching 1,350 miles from southern
Alberta into Mexico.
When Utah was granted status as the nation's 45th
state on January 4 1896, Church membership totaled
a quarter of a million, the majority living in Utah,
with a modest number scattered in colonies
throughout the western United States, southern
Alberta and northern Mexico. By 1930, only about
half of the membership lived in Utah, but the
remainder was still largely North American. As the
Church reached membership milestones throughout
the twentieth century-one million in 1947, two
million in 1963, three million in 1971, and four
million in 1978-the demographic malceup remained primarily American but was
beginning to change markedly. Similarly, the Utah proportion became smaller and
smaller.
Membership of the Church reached ten million people in the fall of 1994. Of that total,
approximately one sixth reside in Utah. and one half in the United States. In late
February of 1997, Church membership outside of the U.S. surpassed Church
membership within.
Footnotes
1. Richard E. Bennett, We'JlfincL!)le P l ~ < : : s : p. 5.
http://www.pbs.org/americanprophet/lds.html 2/4/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 35
62 of 81
APPENDIXJ
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 36
63 of 81
Primary Source Reading: Common Sense
I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished under her former connection with Great Britain, that the
same connection is necessary toward her future happiness, and will always have the same effect. Nothing can be more
fallacious than this kind of argument ....
Not one third of the inhabitants, even of this province [Pennsylvania J are of English descent. Wherefore I reprobate the
phrase of parent or mother country applied to England only, as being false, selfish, narrow and ungenerous ....
The injuries and disadvantages we sustain by that connection are without number; and our duty to mankind at large, as well
as to ourselves, instruct us to renounce the alliance: Because, any submission to, or dependence on Great Britam, tends
directly to involve this continent in European wars and quarrels; and sets us at variance with nations, who would otherwise
seek our friendship, and against whom, we have neither anger nor complaint. As Europe is our market for trade, we ought
to form no partial connection with any part of it ....
[Continued British rule will lead to J the ruin of the continent. And that for several reasons. First. The powers of governing
still remaining in the hands of the king, he will have a negative over the whole legislation of this continent. And as he hath
shown himself such an inveterate enemy to liberty, and discovered such a thirst for arbitrary power; is he, or is he not, a
proper man to say to these colonies, "You shall make no laws but what I please" .... Secondly. That as even the best terms,
which we can expect to obtain, can amount to no more than a temporary expedient, or a kind of government by
guardianship, which can last no longer than till the colonies come of age, so the general face and state of things, in the
mterim, will be unsettled and unpromising ....
0 ye that love mankind! Yet that dare oppose, not only tyranny, but the tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the old world is
overrun with oppression.
Thomas Paine, Conwwn Sense, 1776
Primary Source Reading: Patrick Henry's Speech to the Virginia Convention
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the
House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to
those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and
without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own
part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery: and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be
the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fuHill the great responsibility which we hold to
God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as of
treason towards my country and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen
to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for
liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly
concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of sptrit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know
the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but
by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British mmistry for the last ten years to
justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which
our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not ourselves to be betrayed with a kiss.
Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and
darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be
reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and
subjugation; the last arguments to whtch kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 37
64 of 81
us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to
call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They
are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose
to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject?
Nothing. We have held the subject up in eveq light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and
humble supplication? What terms shall we find wh1ch have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, s1r, deceive ourselves.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now conung on. We have petitioned; we have
remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its mterposition to arrest the
tyraimical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional
violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne!
In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There IS no longer any room for hope. If we wiSh
to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not
basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon
until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the
God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next
week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we
gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and
hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper
use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, anned in the holy cause of liberty, and
in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, s1r, we shall not
fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will ra1se up friends to fight our battles
for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, su, we have no election. If we were
base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat bur m submission and slavery! Our chains are
forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next
gale that sweeps from the nortl1 will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already m the tleld! Why stand
we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price
of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take;
but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 38
65 of 81
APPENDIXK
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 39
66 of 81
Mormm, Church Backs Uay Klghts Bill - CBS News Page 1 ot 4
CBSNews.com CBS Evening News CBS This Morning 48 Hours 60 Minutes Sunday Morning Face The Nation Le-y ; r. Search
By CBSNEWSAP Nouember11,2009, 7: s;-.rt.i\1
Mormon Church Backs
Gay Rights Bill
The Mormon Temple is a tru;y awe-inspirtng piece of a.rchttecture_ Home to tne Mormon Tabernacle choir. t.l-;ls
marvei in Salt Lake City, Utah, draws millions of visitors each year_ CBS/DAN BARUCH
Comment
Shares
Tweets
Stumble
Email
M o r e ~
The Mormon church for the first time has announced its support of gay rights
legislation, an endorsement that helped gain unanimous approval for Salt Lake
City laws banning discrimination against gays in housing and employment.
The Utah-based church's support ahead of Tuesday night's vote came despite its
steadfast opposition to gay marriage, reflected in the high-proffie role it played last
year in California's ballot measure that barred such unions.
"The church supports these ordinances because they are fair and reasonable and
do not do violence to the institution of marriage," Michael Otterson, the director of
public affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said.
Passage made Salt Lake City the first Utah community to prohibit bias based on
sexual orientation or gender identity. Under the two new ordinances, it is illegal to
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mormon-church-backs-gay-rights-billl
1-
One Question Site Survey
WhiCh of the following brands do you associate with
music?
SELECT IJP TC S ANSWERS
~ = Bud light
C Red Bull
EJ _or: Pepper
EJ Coke
0 Pepsi
[J None of the above
VOTE TO SEE R<;$ULTS
POWERED SY NIELSEN
Most Popular
01
Seahawks beat 49ers 23-17
to win NFC title
66544 views
02
Woman, 28, posts You Tube
video saying teacher molested
her
21614 vieu:s
03
Attempted exorcism cited in
death of two Md. toddlers
18633 uiews
04
Target fraud suspects
arrested at Texas border
15433views
05
"Black widow" eyed as threat
to Sochi Olympics
14673 views
play VlOEO
Chinese flight 'lttendants dance
1/2112014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 40
67 of 81
MormoL Church tlacks vay Klghts tltll - Ct:IS News
fire someone from their job or evict someone from their residence because they
are lesbian, bisexual, gay or trans gender.
Utah lawmakers tend to quickly fall in line when the influential church makes a
rare foray into legislative politics. So Tuesday's action could have broad reaching
effects in this highly conservative state where more than So per cent of!awmakers
and the governor are church members.
'What happened here tonight I do believe is a historic event," said Brandie Balken,
director of the gay rights advocacy group Equality Utah. "I think it establishes that
we can stand together on common ground that we don't have to agree on
everything, but there are lot of things that we can work on and be allies."
But the church has pointed out an inherent dispute it has with the gay lifestyle.
Mormonism considers traditional marriages central to God's plan. Gays are
welcome in church, but must remain celibate to retain church callings and full
membership.
It's strong support for Proposition 8 in California last year drew a sharp reaction
from gay rights supporters nationwide, with many protesting outside temples that
singled out Mormons as the key culprits in restricting the rights of gay couples.
Since then, however, Utah's gay community has sought to engage church leaders
in quiet conversations to help foster better understanding, said Valerie Larabee,
executive director of the Utah Pride Center.
"I thought this conversation would never come to be while I was here in Salt Lake
City," said Larabee, adding that the discussions have "shifted her perspective of
what's possible" and could foreshadow a different relationship between the two
sides.
But addressing the council on Tuesday, Otterson said the endorsement is not a
shift in the church's position on gay rights and stressed it "remains unequivocally
committed to defending the bedrock foundation of marriage between a man and a
woman."
Church support for the ordinances is due in part to the way the legislation was
drafted to protect those rights. Exceptions in the legislation allow churches to
maintain, without penalty, religious principles and religion-based codes of
conduct or rules.
"In drafting these ordinances, the city has granted common-sense rights that
should be available to everyone, while safeguarding the crucial rights of religious
organizations," Otterson said Tuesday.
Previous Utah legislation that sought statewide protections for the gay community
did not contain those exceptions.
And although this was the church's first public endorsement of specific legislation,
it is not the first time the church has voiced support for some gay rights. In August
2008 the church issued a statement saying it supports gay rights related to
hospitalization, medical care, employment, housing or probate as long as they "do
not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of
churches."
http://wv..'W.cbsnews.com/news/mormon-church-backs-gay-rights-bill/
Page 2 of4
..:. ring travei iUSh
Humana
Medicare Plans
humana.com/medicare
Get An Al!-In-One Humana
Medicare Plan w/ Prescription
Drug Coverage
Most Shared
Dolphins' plight sparks
international controversy
"Partridge Family" star dead at
82
The higher purpose of
doodling
Grammy nominated music
teacher a maestro at changing
lives
Flipped classrooms provide a
new way of learning
36 PHOTOS
Sherlock Helmes on screen
Most Discussed
914
Putin: Russia must "cleanse"
itself of homosexuality
1/21/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 41
68 of 81
Mormor, Church Backs <Jay Klghts l::hll- CtlS News
Last year, church leaders were silent on a package of gay rights bills known as the
Common Ground Initiative, dooming them from the start.
2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten, or redistributed.
O:mnent
Shares
Tweets
Stumble
Email
CBS News
the web
~ ~ ~ - -
Vanessa Williams' Surprising
DNA Test
Ancest1y.com
Did You Know These 20 Stars
Are Gay?
Hollyscoop
Featured in U.S.
Grammy foundation
awards prize for top music
teacher
Recipient of inaugural Music Educator
Award has been bringing music to life
for kids for a quarter-century
Filt:s show how Chicago
15 Worst Transitions From
Child Star To Adult...
Sty/ehlazer
More-
D o n ~ Pay Interest On Your
Credit Bard Balance
Nex&ldvisor Daily
Popular on CBS News
Deer goes through windshield,
injures two
Play VIDEO
A taste of Beatlemania in the
1960s
Play VIDEO
CBS News reports on the
Beatles in 1963
Play VIDEO
Who is Walter Cronkite? The
Beatles know
Play VIDEO
What does the Beatles' name
mean?
Play VIDEO
Halliburton manager gets
probation in Gulf oil spill
Files show how Chicago
archdiocese covered up child
sexualabusefordecades
http:, <.\-v .-.cbsnews.com/news/mormon-chrrrch-backs-gay-rights-bill!
598
i65
94
92
Page 3 ot 4
Obama: Marijuana not "more
dangerous" than alcohol
Christie's problems deepen
amid new bullying allegations
Study: Guns in home increase
suicide, homicide risk
Chris Christie's Lt. Gov. denies
Sandy aid allegation
~
! Medicare
OCompare a
of Affordable
112112014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 42
69 of 81
APPENDIXL
A-
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 43
70 of 81
Home 1 This week's Pilot 1 Local/ Nation 1 World 1 Opinion 1 Calendar 1 Media 1 Officials f Past editions 1 Multimedia( News Videos
VISIT CARDINAL SEAN'S SLOG
Friday, March 17, 20o6 edition of The Pilot
Catholic Charities ceases adoption
work



Text size SY ChnstmeWiloams

I
BOSTON - The bOard of Catholic Charities
of the Archdiocese of Boston annour.cad
that the organization would no longer
I
provide adoptions in a statement dated
March 1Q_
The difficult decision came a week after the
I
I four bishops of Massachusetts dedared that
Church teaching prohibited Catholic
agencies from placing adoptive children with
l same-sex couples. Eight members of
I
, Charities board of
resrgned in protestofthedeCiston.
I Speaking to The March 15 .. Father J
I
Brian Hehir. pres1dent Gf Boston s Catholic
Charities. said that the organization's need
) to step out of serv1ces is 'tragic"
! and devastating ross
I .
I
1
) that.
j we were not able to do it.
I
I "We were not trxing the raw to
c_ _____ _;:;_==-----_j make gay adoptions Father
Hehir cranfied. was just given Church
teaching and praeJces, tt'!at we
Cardinal-designate sean P. O'Malley said in a statement on March 10, ''Sadly, we have come to
a moment when Catholic Charfties in the Archdiocese of Boston must withdraw from the work of
adoptions, in order to exercise the religious freedom that was the prompting for having begun
adoptions many years ago.-
Between 1987 - when Massachusetts reorganized r.s contracting with adoption agencies -
and 2005. Catholic Cha.IT'.Jes placed 13 children m same-sex hcuseho!ds. which represents 1 8
percent of aU adoptions. said Father Hehir
As outlined in a letter from the 2003 Congregation of the Doct'ine of the Faith, placing children
with same-sex families is rnorally wrong, he said
"They cbviously talked about It being gravely wrong to out children into same-sex households."
Father Heh1r continued.
After rr.edia reports publicized the same-sex adoptions, Cardinal-designate O'Malley formed a
committee to advise the Massachusetts bishops on how to move forward. Catholic Chanties
representatives from Fall R1ver. Worcester and Boston participated. Catholic Charities of
Sprir.gfie!d coes r:ot provide adoption services. he said
The licensmg requirements for adoption agencres in Massaehuset"i.S mandate that agencies
must s1gr. a non-discrim1nation pledge that mc!udes gendec he said
-At first! thought that 1f r didn'ttake any state money 1 cou!d resolve the 1ssue, but that doesn't
do it because the fundamental thing is to get licensed as an adoption agency in the state
Father Hehir said. we couldn't get iicensecl under the terrr:s of Church teachmg Secondly. we
couldn't get contracted vJitil DSS ltlle state Department of Social SefVIceSJ for these hard cases.
which we specialize in.'
<=ather Hehir also sought the counci! of the firm R:ooe-s & 3ray.
worKed !'or us November iO Feb. 18. they helped :.;s darr.J the :ega! situation ana
they :::lid us for any work.- he sald
The GO:""lrr!ittee ooked 7or :-eccurse in the leg;siatt've. executive ana branc.l--)=s of :."le
govemrr-ent. Gcv i./Htf. Remrey informed t."'em that :he exect.:tive levei was nci an option ::nd
Catho!:c Charities determmed that the legislature was not a 'liaole cptior. he sa1d.
cathc\ic Chanties is not supporti.'1Q the governor's bill. Father Hehir said We already
Page 1 of'
Search
http i'cvww.thebostonpilot.com/articlearchives.asp'7ID=296l 17/1 i i/OOR
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 44
71 of 81
:JII 1/LVVo. catholic Charities ceases adoption work

Contact us
Adveri.:ise
Subscribe
Change of address
at the legislative road and made a deCision there was no possibility there
Romney proposed the bill designed to a!IOIN Catholic Charities to continue providing adoptions
without serv1ng same-sex couples but still allow other agencies to provide adoptions to gay
couples.
'They have within their religion the belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
and that children should not be sent into homes without a mother and father, Romney said
about Catholic Chanties. "Thafs their religious freedom to have that belief and we'd like them to
be able to be true to that religion and at the same time provide a service to the Commonw-ealth
of plaang special needs
Father Heh1r added that the committee decided not to seek help from the judicial branch
th1rd route was through the courts, and that would have been a long process with
- inconclusive he said
Father Hehir said he and the other members of the board were concerned that seeking an
exemption threaten the rest of the prograMs over iime, including their management and
funding.
Catholic Charities has pledged to piace the children who remain in their care with families
"Catholic Charities will work with the Department of Soc!al Services and other appropriate
agencies to make this transition as smooth as possible. During the transition. the agency's
priority will continue to be to serve and protect the children entrusted to us. With the ultimate
goal of finding safe, ioving and nurturing homes, said a March 10 statement.
CathoEc Cha:1ties has provrded adoption services for aver 100 years and has placed more than
720 children :n homes over the past 20 years. specializing m special-needs adoptions. Father
Hehir said
The special-needs adoptions are not infants. these are kids in the foster care system who have
psychological difficulties, physiclo!;ical difficulties, have been subject of abuse, have been
caught m the iegal system. he said. "We do 3 i percent of those and seven other agenaes do
52 percentr.
.. Catholic Charities is one of the largest providers of adoption services m the state and spends
$1 3 ml!lion of their annua! S35 million budget on adoptions, he said.
"We value the adoption program. We value it highly." Father Hehir said. skill and
dedication of our staff is recognized throughout the state ..
AP materials contributed to this report
http:/!''""'-". thebostonpilot.com/ articlearchives.asp ?ID=2961
Page 2 of 4
l2i11i2008
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 45
72 of 81
''
APPENDIXM
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 46
73 of 81
Page I of 9
Rickety
FAMilY FINANCE GOVERNMENT RECREATION REliGION SERIES TECHNOLOGY
Blog lDS Site Sundry Posts Comments
U.S.
United States LDS Membership
Membership as of 1 January 20JJ.
(.'lick ONC 'Eon column headers to sort.
State
http://www. rickety. us/Ids/us/ 1/22/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 47
74 of 81
Page 2 of9
/\Jahanw 34,725 564 389 368 0.70 6 41 33 1
Alaska 32,170 709 1,099 902 4.40 7 50 30 1
AriY.Oll<l 387,950 6,413 6,405 6,715 5.80 90 713 88 4
b
Arkansas 27,559 582 772 909 0.90 5 35 27 1
California 763,370 6,257 2,148 5,475 2.10 157 1,187 174 16
Colorado 142,473 3,418 2,742 2,586 2.80 30 257 32 3
( 'onncct icut 14,990 241 205 206 0.40 4 27 5 1

D\'I<JW<If'(' 5,184 131 493 -25 0.50 1 10 3
I )i.';trict of Colwnbia 2,382 34 157 25 0.37 2 1
, .. ,( \l id;J
13G,54D 2,383 2,184 2,744 0.70 26 184 50 5 2
Ccnrgi;l 77,948 1,884 1,650 1,654 0.77 15 112 39 3 1
IL1 1q i i GD,872 1,022 730 1,014 5.30 1S 124 10 1 2
Idaho 414,182 7,337 3,993 3,425 27.00 121 979 98 2 5
S5,750 G87 349 290 0.43 12 94 34 2 2
lnrlimLl 41,290 390 661 100 0.60 11 68 31 1 1
]()1\ ;) 24,()14 218 710 385 0.80 7 37 32 1
kiJISdS 34,190 934 679 461 1.20 7 53 21
l\(111 ucky 502 568 693 0.73 7 42 34 1
l 01 Ji<.;iana 28,567 509 349 590 0.63 6 32 19 I

i'vlaiiH' 10,684 190 191 143 0.80 2 16 12
http://www .rickety. us/Ids/us/ 1/22/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 48
75 of 81
'


Page Jot Y
Maryland 40,854 408 497 1,099 0.70 8 65 13 2 I
Mass;whusct ts 24,965 364 211 276 0.38 4 38 13 1 1
Michigan 42,319 177 -43 -237 0.40 8 66 30 2 1 1
Minnesota 30,603 456 298 299 0.57 8 54 26 1 1
Mississippi 21,217 434 230 176 0.70 4 29 14 1
Missouri 66,071 1,449 1,456 949 1.10 14 108 37 2 2
Mont ;ma 46,484 376 591 4.70 11 78 42 1 1
Ncbr:.1ska 23,133 482 334 427 1.:30 4 41 20 1 1
Neva< Ia 175,149 1,309 1,023 487 6.70 35 293 30 2 2
l\jcw ll;unpshirc 8,231 24 123 -7 0.62 3 Hi 5 1
New Jersey 31,673 biG 381 396 0.36 5 36 23 2 1
f\lew :'\'lexico G7,637 885 U06 1,459 3.30 13 89 4G 2 1
N 'IV Yo1 k 78,031 1,848 959 1,220 0.40 14 88 6(\ 4 3 2
[\lortl1 Carolinn 76,865 2,448 1,486 1,194 0.80 16 114 40 2 1
1\Jor1l1 I l;ilwta 6,9:\0 JJS 22() S64 O.DG 2 7 D 1
Ol1io 58,436
!-'I":' 'I
,),J,) 873 518 o.so 13 DG 32
,,
,) 1
( >klahorna 43,033 864 9G8 518 1.10 7 58
2C' ,) 2 1
1 147,9GS G21 1,188 1,348 3.80 36 2S3 51 2 2
l'<'llllsylvnJJia 49,743 ()45 S47 719 0.40 10 75 32 2 1 1
Island 3,833 S:\ so 122 0.3S 6
http://www. rickety. us/Ids/us/ 1/22/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 49
76 of 81
South Carolina :HJ,947 397 582 0.80
f)
49 13 1
South Dakot :1 9,812 132 102 181 1.20 2 10 23 1
'l'cnnesscc 45,574 1,077 1,285 1,110 0.70 10 G9 29 2
Tcxas 296,141 8,822 8,410 9,239 1.10 5G 451 12G 8
Utah 1,910,343 34,054 26,710 25,9(:)6 68.00 546 4,479 355 6
Vermont 4,384 21 63 -2 0.70 1 7 5
Virginia 89,297 1,651 2,122 2,299 1.10 19 153 42 2
Washington 2Ei7,927 4,544 5,294 4,923 f)5 459 Ei3 5
'v\'cst Virginia JG,710 220 168 -Hi9 0.90 4 26 12 1
Wisconsin 24,49Ei 112 3Ei7 110 0.13 G 42 27 1
Wvomino
. t--
G3,0G9 1,4()0 981 658 11.50 16 133 21
G,144,582 100,637 84,862 85,675 2 l,4G5 11,551 2,040 104
L;Jst membership update 21 December 2011. Last temple update 21 December 2011.
Notes
a. Temples include those announced or under construction.
b. The totals for 1 he U.S. on page 324 of the 2012 Almvnac incorrectly used totals from the 2011 Almanac.
linking
To link to a specific state, for example New York, usc: http: I /www. rickety. us/lds/us/#NewYork
Realize that:
http://www .rickety .us/Ids/us/
..
Page 4 ot lJ
1
1
2
3 4
1 15
I
3
1
11 79
1/22/2014
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 50
77 of 81
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Certificate Of Service
Mary Bishop, et. al.,
Plaintiff's - Appellees
v.
Sally Howe Smith,
Defendant and Appellant
and,
United States of America, ex. rei. Eric
H. Holder, Jr. in his Official Capacity as
Attorney General of the United States of
America
Defendant
and,
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the
U.S. House of Representatives
Intervener - Defendant
Case: 14-5003 & 14-5006
Certificate of Service for Appendix to Brief of
Amicus Curiae, Duane Morley Cox
Pg 1
0
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 51
78 of 81
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
7:L
I hereby certifY that on I)? February 2014, that I filed by First Class Mail,
Postage Prepaid, the foregoing Appendix to Brief to the 1Oth Circuit Court, and also by
First Class Mail, Postage Prepaid to the following:
Byron J. Babione
Austin R. Nimrocks
James A. Campbell
Holly L. Campbell
Brian W. Raum
Alliance Defending Freedom
15100 N. 90th Street
Scottsdale, Arizona, 85260
480-444-0020
bbabione@alliancedefendingfreedom.org
Dale Michael Schowengerdt
Kevin H. Theriot
Alliance Defending Freedom
15192 Rosewood
Leawood, Ks. 66224
913-685-8000
dschowengerdt@telladf.org
John David Luton, Assistant district Attorney
District Attorney's Office (Tulsa)
500 South Denver Ave., suite 900
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103
918-596-4814
jluton@tulsacounty.org Pg2
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 52
79 of 81
W. Scott Simpson
United States Department of Justice, Civil Division
P.O. Box 883
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044
202-514-3495
scott.simpson@usdoj. gov
Kerry W. Kircher
U.S. House of Representatives
Office of the General counsel
219 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-9700
keny.kircher(mmail.house/gov
=
Bentley C. Olsson
Helms & Greene, LLC
1900 NW Expressway, suite 430
Oklahoma City, Ok 73118
405-607-4100
blosson@helmsgreene.com
Phillip Craig Bailey
259 Waverly Dr.
Tulsa, Oklahoma 7 4104
918-595-8818
craig bailey 1 @cox.net
Pg 3
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 53
80 of 81
Don Gardner Holladay, Esq.
James Edward Warner, III, Esq.
Holladay & Chilton
204 North Robinson Ave, suite 1550
Oklahoma city, Ok. 73102
405-236-2343
dholladay@)holladaychilton.com
Timothy P. Studebaker
Studebaker & Worley
5801 East 4P\ Suite 300
Tulsa, Co. 74135
918-770-4890
tim@studebakerworleylaw.net
Joseph T. Thai
300 Timberdell Road
Norman, Ok. 73019
405-204-9579
thai(mpost.harvard.edu
c.
Pg4
Appellate Case: 14-5003 Document: 01019204773 Date Filed: 02/19/2014 Page: 54
81 of 81