1
No. 14-31037
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
J
ONATHAN
P.
R
OBICHEAUX
,
et al., Appellants
, v. J
AMES
D.
C
ALDWELL
,
et al.
,
Appellees
______________________
A
PPELLEES
’
U
NOPPOSED
M
OTION
TO
E
XPEDITE
B
RIEFING AND
O
RAL
A
RGUMENT
______________________
Pursuant to Fifth Circuit Rule 34.5, Appellees ask the Court to set an abbreviated briefing schedule in this appeal and to advance it for argument at the same time and before the same panel as the pending appeal in
De Leon v. Perry
, No. 14-50196.
See
5
TH
C
IR
.
R. 34.5 (providing the Court may “for good cause on motion of either party … advance any case for argument, and prescribe an abbreviated briefing schedule”). There is extraordinary cause for this motion: unless briefing and argument are expedited, the constitutional validity of Louisiana’s marriage laws will be settled by the
De Leon
appeal, which involves the validity of Texas’s marriage laws. Appellants do not oppose this motion.
Case: 14-31037 Document: 00512776076 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/19/2014
2
1.
This appeal arises from Judge Martin L.C. Feldman’s decision upholding Louisiana’s marriage laws against constitutional challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Robicheaux v. Caldwell
, __ F.Supp.2d __, 2014 WL 4347099 (E.D. La. Sept. 3, 2014),
appeals docketed
, No. 14-31037
(5th Cir. Sept. 3-4, 2014). That decision is the mirror opposite of the
De Leon
decision from the Western District of Texas, which enjoined Texas’s marriage laws under the Fourteenth Amendment.
De Leon v. Perry
, 975 F.Supp.2d 632 (W.D. Tex. 2014),
appeal docketed
, No. 14-50196 (5th Cir. Mar. 1, 2014).
De Leon
will be fully briefed by October 10 but has not been set for argument. Because a decision in
De Leon
will impact Louisiana’s marriage laws, Appellees move to expedite briefing and argument in
Robicheaux
so that the Court may hear argument by the same panel as
De Leon
and dispose of the appeals at the same time. (Appellees do not, however, ask that this appeal be consolidated with
De Leon
). 2.
The lower court decisions in
Robicheaux
and
De Leon
address identical constitutional claims against substantively identical state marriage laws.
Compare Robicheaux
, 2014 WL 4347099, at *1 (noting Plaintiffs’ claims that Louisiana’s refusal to license or recognize same-
Case: 14-31037 Document: 00512776076 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/19/2014
3
sex marriages violates equal protection and due process),
with De Leon
, 975 F.Supp.2d at 639 (noting identical claims against Texas’s marriage laws). The two decisions reach opposite conclusions:
Robicheaux
ruled that Louisiana’s retention of the man-woman definition of marriage in 2004 did not offend the Fourteenth Amendment;
De Leon
ruled that the same policy decision by Texas in 2005 violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Compare Robicheaux
, 2014 WL 4347099, at *12 (concluding Louisiana’s marriage laws “do not infringe the guarantees of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses”), with
De Leon
, 975 F.Supp.2d at 666 (concluding Texas’s marriage laws “violate[ ] Plaintiffs’ equal protection and due process rights”). Both decisions cannot be correct, and resolving one will effectively settle the other. 3.
Hearing the two appeals by the same panel is consistent with recent practice in other Circuits. As this Court is well aware, the constitutionality of state marriage laws is the subject of a remarkable wave of national litigation. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in
United States v. Windsor
, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), numerous federal court decisions have invalidated state marriage laws, with Louisiana the only exception.
See Robicheaux
, 2014 WL at 4347099, at *5 n.9
Case: 14-31037 Document: 00512776076 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/19/2014