No. _________

 In the

 Supreme Court of the United States

  _________ G

EORGE

E.

 

S

CHAEFER 

,

 

III,

 IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE

C

LERK OF

C

OURT FOR

 N

ORFOLK

C

IRCUIT

C

OURT

,

 

P

ETITIONER 

, v. T

IMOTHY

B.

 

B

OSTIC

,

 ET AL

.  _________ On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit  _________

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

 _________ D

AVID

B.

 

O

AKLEY

 J

EFFREY

F.

 

B

ROOKE

 P

OOLE

M

AHONEY

PC 860 Greenbrier Circle, Suite 401 Chesapeake, VA 23320 Tel: 757.552.6035 Fax: 757.962.6180 doakley@poolemahoney.com S.

 

K 

YLE

D

UNCAN

 

Counsel of Record

D

UNCAN

PLLC 1629 K St. NW, Ste. 300 Washington, DC 20006 Tel: 202.714.9492 Fax: 571.430.7729 kduncan@duncanpllc.com

Counsel for Petitioner

August 22, 2014

 

 

i

Q

UESTION

P

RESENTED

 

In

United States v. Windsor 

, this Court invalidated the federal marriage definition in the Defense of Marriage Act  because it usurped the States’ “historic and essential authority to define the marital relation,” and sought to “influence or interfere with state sovereign choices about who may be married.” 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2692, 2693 (2013). Like two-thirds of the States, Virginia defines marriage as a man-woman union. It neither licenses nor recognizes same-sex marriages. The lower courts ruled, however, that the Fourteenth Amendment compels Virginia to do both. The question presented is: Whether the Fourteenth Amendment compels Virginia to license and recognize same-sex marriages.

 

 

ii

P

ARTIES TO THE

P

ROCEEDINGS

 

Petitioner George E. Schaefer, III, in his official capacity as the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk, Virginia, was a defendant in the district court and an appellant in the court of appeals. Respondents Timothy B. Bostic, Tony C. London, Carol Schall, and Mary Townley were plaintiffs in the district court and appellees in the court of appeals. Respondents Joanne Harris, Christy Berghoff, Victoria Kidd, and Jessica Duff, class-action plaintiffs in

 Harris v.  Rainey

, No. 5:13-cv-77, 2014 WL 352188 (W.D. Va. Jan. 31, 2014), intervened in the court of appeals to argue against the constitutionality of Virginia’s marriage laws. Michèle B. McQuigg, in her official capacity as the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Prince William County, Virginia, intervened in the district court to defend the constitutionality of Virginia’s marriage laws and was an appellant in the court of appeals. Janet M. Rainey was a defendant in the district court and an appellant in the court of appeals. She was sued in her official capacity as the State Registrar of Vital Records for the Commonwealth of Virginia. After litigation commenced, she reversed her position in the district court and argued against the constitutionality of Virginia’s marriage laws.