ILNews

7th Circuit grants motion recognizing marriage of same-sex couple in Indiana

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an order compelling the state of Indiana to recognize the marriage of one same-sex couple.

Lambda Legal filed a motion on June 30 for an emergency stay to require Indiana to recognize the marriage of Niki Quasney and Amy Sandler. The motion asked the Circuit Court to lift for this one couple only a June 27 order that stayed the decision by a federal court which overturned Indiana’s ban on same-sex marriage.

The Indiana attorney general’s office had filed a response to the motion, arguing the marriage should not be legalized because Indiana law did not allow for hardship exceptions.

Quasney is terminally ill and has been pushing for Indiana to recognize her marriage so Sandler is considered her legal spouse, making her entitled to all of Quasney’s benefits. The U.S. District Court issued an order in May compelling the state to recognize their marriage. When the 7th Circuit issued a stay June 27 in Baskin v. Bogan, their marriage was no longer recognized.

The 7th Circuit issued an order Tuesday that the state recognize the marriage of Quasney and Sandler on an emergency basis.

Lamdba Legal, again, declared victory.  

“It is time for the State of Indiana to leave Niki and Amy in peace and not subject them and their marriage to any more stress and uncertainty as this case proceeds,” said Lambda Legal attorney Paul Castillo. “We’re thrilled that the court ruled in favor of this family as Niki battles stage four ovarian cancer.”



 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • should they move out of State anyway?
    One of them is dying of cancer and probably should move to Colorado anyway to use canabis oil in an attempt to destroy the cancer. Check out Rick Simpson oil website for more information.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have had an ongoing custody case for 6 yrs. I should have been the sole legal custodial parent but was a victim of a vindictive ex and the system biasedly supported him. He is an alcoholic and doesn't even have a license for two yrs now after his 2nd DUI. Fast frwd 6 yrs later my kids are suffering poor nutritional health, psychological issues, failing in school, have NO MD and the GAL could care less, DCS doesn't care. The child isn't getting his ADHD med he needs and will not succeed in life living this way. NO one will HELP our family.I tried for over 6 yrs. The judge called me an idiot for not knowing how to enter evidence and the last hearing was 8 mths ago. That in itself is unjust! The kids want to be with their Mother! They are being alienated from her and fed lies by their Father! I was hit in a car accident 3 yrs ago and am declared handicapped myself. Poor poor way to treat the indigent in Indiana!

  2. The Indiana DOE released the 2015-2016 school grades in Dec 2016 and my local elementary school is a "C" grade school. Look at the MCCSC boundary maps and how all of the most affluent neighborhoods have the best performance. It is no surprise that obtaining residency in the "A" school boundaries cost 1.5 to 3 times as much. As a parent I should have more options than my "C" school without needing to pay the premium to live in the affluent parts of town. If the charter were authorized by a non-religious school the plaintiffs would still be against it because it would still be taking per-pupil money from them. They are hiding behind the guise of religion as a basis for their argument when this is clearly all about money and nothing else.

  3. This is a horrible headline. The article is about challenging the ability of Grace College to serve as an authorizer. 7 Oaks is not a religiously affiliated school

  4. Congratulations to Judge Carmichael for making it to the final three! She is an outstanding Judge and the people of Indiana will benefit tremendously if/when she is chosen.

  5. The headline change to from "religious" to "religious-affiliated" is still inaccurate and terribly misleading.

ADVERTISEMENT