Lawyers propose method of arguing marriage cases at Supreme Court

(Washington) Counsel representing all plaintiffs from the Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee marriage lawsuits have submitted a proposal to the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that argument time be divided equally among the cases from the four states.

The Court previously allocated 45 minutes each to petitioners and respondents to question 1: “Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?,” and 30 minutes each to petitioners and respondents to question 2: “Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?”.

The proposal requests that two segments of 15 minutes each be allotted on Question 1 to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Kentucky and Michigan cases (in addition to the 15 minutes that the U.S. Solicitor General has requested on that question) and that two segments of 15 minutes each be allotted on Question 2 to plaintiffs’ counsel in the Ohio and Tennessee cases.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights and private counsel partners representing couples from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee issued the following statement:

“We have an incredible wealth of talent available to argue on behalf of same-sex couples’ freedom to marry and right to have their marriages recognized in all fifty states.  Each of the attorneys who argue will stand on the shoulders of thousands in the movement who worked for decades for this day to arrive and will have the best minds helping them prepare. We look forward to this historic opportunity for advocates from each case to present our compelling arguments to the Court and to share this defining moment with our entire community and the nation.”

The petitioner couples' request to the Supreme Court regarding oral arguments is available at: http://tinyurl.com/lpmz3ja.

More information about Bourke v. Beshear and Love v. Beshear, on the ACLU’s case page here: www.tinyurl.com/kqyk4gv

More information about Deboer v.Snyder on GLAD’s case page here: www.tinyurl.com/lnmmcf3

More information about Henry v. Hodges on Lambda Legal’s case page here: www.tinyurl.com/of6f83f

More information about Obergefell v. Hodges on ACLU’s case page here: www.tinyurl.com/pztjyj7

More information about Tanco v. Haslam, on NCLR’s case page here: www.tinyurl.com/ocsa47f

The Gayly – March 18, 2015 @ 1:45pm.