Plaintiffs’ brief in Amendment One lawsuit aims to prove NC marriage ban unconstitutional

Here’s the press release from Campaign for Southern Equality:

NC Attorney General’s office defends ban on same-sex marriage despite rulings from 16 federal courts striking down state bans on same-sex marriage

Asheville, N.C. (June 23, 2014) – Plaintiffs’ attorneys in General Synod of the United Church of Christ vs. Cooper continue to urge swift action from the court in a new filing in support of their motion for preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs in the case request that the Court issue a preliminary injunction due to the immediate and irreparable harms that discriminatory marriage laws inflict upon same-sex couples and clergy every day that these laws remain in effect. Beyond this, they argue that the State of North Carolina, represented by the Attorney General’s Office, can mount no substantive or valid legal defense of Amendment One.

“There are not valid legal arguments to uphold Amendment One – they simply will not stand up in court. It’s not a question of if Amendment One will be struck down, but when. That day cannot come quickly enough for loving, committed couples like Betty and Carol, plaintiffs in this case who have been together for 41 years and who seek the freedom to marry and to be married by their pastor,” said Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, Executive Director of the Campaign for Southern Equality.

The plaintiffs’ newly-filed brief reads in part:

“Since the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Windsor, 133 S.Ct. 2675 (2013), every court that has considered due process and equal protection challenges to state bans on same-sex marriage—at last count, 16 federal court and 3 state court decisions — have ruled that these prohibitions are unconstitutional. The remarkable uniformity in the legal and factual analysis and sheer weight and momentum of this precedent demonstrate that Plaintiffs have a very strong likelihood of success on the merits of their due process and equal protection claims.”

“Conspicuously and significantly, Defendants do not proffer any substantive legal arguments to dispute this remarkable trend in the law and its sufficiency to establish that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their due process and equal protection claims. There is simply no contrary authority for Defendants to cite and no good arguments to contest this tidal wave of decisions. Defendants do not even try. For all intents and purposes, in omitting any argument to the contrary, Defendants concede that Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits of these Fourteenth Amendment claims.”

The plaintiffs’ filing from June 20th can be downloaded at: http://www.southernequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/June-20-filing.pdf along with the entire list of federal and state court rulings dealing with same-sex marriage from the past year:
http://www.southernequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Federal-Court-rulings-since-DOMA.pdf

The NC Attorney General’s office has argued that a preliminary injunction should be denied, and that the State’s interest in following the law as written outweighs the Plaintiffs’ interest in obtaining immediate relief from these discriminatory laws. The Court will likely rule on the preliminary injunction in the coming weeks.

“The State fails to acknowledge the harm suffered by the plaintiff couples — a harm recognized by every court that has considered the issue since Windsor. We are sorely disappointed that the State of North Carolina continues to deny equal rights to all of its citizens. Sixteen federal courts in recent months have made clear – emphatically and unequivocally – that it is unconstitutional for state governments to discriminate against loving and committed couples who want the benefits and security that marriage provides,” said Jacob Sussman, lead counsel for plaintiffs in General Synod of the United Church of Christ vs. Cooper and partner at Tin Fulton Walker & Owen.

General Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Cooper challenges the constitutionality of marriage laws in North Carolina – including Amendment One – that ban marriage between same-sex couples and make it illegal for clergy to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples within their congregations.

Plaintiffs in the legal challenge include same-sex couples and four national religious denominations – the United Church of Christ, the Alliance of Baptists, the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists and the Central Conference of American Rabbis –  in addition to Episcopalian, Jewish and Baptist clergy from across North Carolina. The Plaintiffs are represented by the law firms of Tin Fulton Walker & Owen and Arnold & Porter LLP.

The North Carolina Attorney General’s office, representing the State in the case, has requested that the Court grant a stay, or if it does not, that the Court deny the Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. If granted, a stay could mean that all proceedings in this case would be halted. Similar motions to stay have been granted in other North Carolina cases challenging Amendment One as courts are hesitant to rule on this issue until they hear the outcome of another marriage equality case, Bostic v. Rainey, which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is now considering.

The Campaign for Southern Equality, which promotes LGBT equality across the South, is coordinating a public education campaign accompanying the case. Supporting documents and profiles of the Plaintiffs in General Synod of the UCC v. Cooper can be found at http://www.amendmentonechallenge.org.

Based in the South, the Campaign for Southern Equality is a national effort to assert the full humanity and equality of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in American life and to increase public support for LGBT rights.
http://www.southernequality.org