ILNews

Court hears arguments in same-sex marriage case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A same-sex couple  fighting to have Indiana recognize their marriage returned to court Friday to convince a judge the state’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

Chief Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana heard arguments May 2 on pending motions in Baskin et al. v. Bogan et al., 1:14-cv-0355. Lambda Legal argued on behalf of the plaintiffs and Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher argued the state’s case.

On April 10, Young granted a temporary restraining order requiring the state to acknowledge the marriage of two of the plaintiffs, Nikole Quasney and Amy Sandler. The women made an emotional appeal to the court to make the state recognize their marriage before Quasney loses her battle with stage IV ovarian cancer.

Young’s TRO instructed the Indiana State Department of Health to list Sandler as the spouse on any future death certificate for Quasney.  

After today’s arguments in the Winfield K. Denton Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Evansville, Young took under advisement the motions for summary judgment. He will rule at a later date.

Lawsuits challenging state bans on same-sex marriage have been filed across the country ever since the U.S. Supreme Court knocked down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in U.S. v. Windsor. Five lawsuits have been filed in Indiana since March.

Today, Fisher argued the Windsor decision left intact the authority of states and their legislatures to define marriage. Therefore, he contends, Indiana can legislate marriage as being between one man and one woman and can legally choose to not recognize same-sex unions granted in other states.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, now do something about this preverted anacronism

  2. William Hartley prosecutor of Wabash county constantly violates people rights. Withholds statement's, is bias towards certain people. His actions have ruined lives and families. In this county you question him or go out of town for a lawyer,he finds a way to make things worse for you. Unfair,biased and crooked.

  3. why is the State trying to play GOD? Automatic sealing of a record is immoral. People should have the right to decide how to handle a record. the state is playing GOD. I have searched for decades, then you want me to pay someone a huge price to contact my son. THIS is extortion and gestapo control. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW.

  4. I haven't made some of the best choices in the last two years I have been to marion county jail 1 and two on three different occasions each time of release dates I've spent 48 to 72 hours after date of release losing a job being denied my freedom after ordered please help

  5. Out here in Kansas, where I now work as a government attorney, we are nearing the end of a process that could have relevance in this matter: "Senate Bill 45 would allow any adult otherwise able to possess a handgun under state and federal laws to carry that gun concealed as a matter of course without a permit. This move, commonly called constitutional carry, would elevate the state to the same club that Vermont, Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming have joined in the past generation." More reading here: http://www.guns.com/2015/03/18/kansas-house-panel-goes-all-in-on-constitutional-carry-measure/ Time to man up, Hoosiers. (And I do not mean that in a sexist way.)

ADVERTISEMENT