Unprecedented Support for Marriage Equality in CA
Senior Counsel
Jennifer C. Pizer is Senior Counsel for Lambda Legal and co-counsel on the California marriage equality lawsuit. She is a leading voice for ending marriage discrimination against lesbian and gay couples and co-drafted AB 205, California’s comprehensive “Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003,” as well as subsequent bills to clarify and expand the rights of registered domestic partners in California.
In a show of broad, mainstream support for the marriage equality legal battle in California, 30 friend-of-the-court briefs, presented by more than 500 organizations, were submitted to the state's supreme court. The groups included scores of religious, civil rights and child advocacy organizations, along with California's largest city governments, bar associations and leading legal scholars.
Read the friend-of-the-court briefs.
Case History:
- February 2004 Officials of the city and county of San Francisco conclude it violates the California Constitution to withhold marriage licenses from same-sex couples; from mid-February to mid-March, San Francisco issues licenses and performs marriages for roughly 4,000 same-sex couples.
- February 2004 Conservative religious legal groups file two lawsuits against San Francisco demanding court orders to stop the marriages; Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the ACLU are given permission to join those cases on behalf of same-sex couples who wish to marry and Equality California.
- February 2004 Gay activists Robin Tyler and Troy Perry and their respective life partners sue Los Angeles County demanding marriage licenses; we are given permission to intervene in this case on behalf of Equality California.
- March 2004 The California Supreme Court orders San Francisco to stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples until it has been decided in court whether the state constitution guarantees lesbian and gay couples' right to marry as it does for heterosexual couples. Lambda Legal and co-counsel immediately file our own lawsuit against the state seeking the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout California.
- June 2004 The California Judicial Council orders that the six active cases in the state courts concerning marriage for same-sex couples be gathered into one judicial proceeding in the trial court in San Francisco; along with co-counsel, we are participating in four of those cases.
- March 2005 In a historic ruling, the California state trial court says that, under the state's constitution, lesbian and gay couples must be allowed to marry.
- November 2005 Lambda Legal, NCLR and ACLU file briefs in the California Court of Appeal urging the court to uphold lower court's ruling.
- July 2006 Oral arguments made before California Court of Appeals.
- October 2006 In a 2–1 decision, California Court of Appeal rules that California may continue to bar same-same couples from marriage.
- November 2006 Petitions are filed asking California Supreme Court to reverse the Court of Appeal decision.
- December 2006 The California Supreme Court unanimously agrees to review the intermediate appellate decision.
- April – August 2007 Lambda Legal, NCLR and the ACLU file multiple briefs explaining why denying lesbian and gay couples the freedom to marry is unconstitutional. We also file a supplemental brief requested by the California Supreme Court addressing four additional questions. In addition, we reply to the briefs filed by the state and the conservative religious legal groups on these questions.
- September 2007 A broad array of mainstream civil rights, religious, community and professional groups, along with leading legal scholars and bar associations, plus California’s largest cities and many others file an unprecedented 30 friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of more than 500 organizations supporting marriage equality.
Briefs Filed with the California Supreme Court:
Respondent's Opening Brief on the Merits of a California Law Denying Same-Sex Couples the Right to Marry
This brief charges that the California state law barring same-sex couples from marriage discriminates based on sexual orientation and sex and violates the fundamental right to marry, which is protected by the California Constitution's guarantees of privacy, intimate association and due process.
Respondents' Consolidated Reply Brief on the Merits
This brief replies to the briefs filed by the State of California, Governor Schwarzenegger, the Proposition 22 Legal Defense Fund and the Campaign for California Families and demonstrates why it violates the rights of privacy, due process, intimate association, expression and equality under the California Constitution to deny same-sex couples the freedom to marry.
Respondents Consolidated Answer Brief Regarding Justiciability
Brief filed in the California Supreme Court explaining why right-wing religious groups should not be allowed to participate as parties in our litigation seeking the right to marry for same-sex couples.
Respondents' Consolidated Supplemental Reply
This brief responds to the answers offered by the State of California, Governor Schwarzenegger, the Proposition 22 Legal Defense Fund and the Campaign for California Families to the Supreme Court’s four supplemental questions.
Respondents' Supplemental Brief
This brief responds to four questions posed by the California Supreme Court, including what the differences are between domestic partnership and marriage; what the fundamental right to marry protects; whether the name of marriage could be changed; and the impact, if any, of the federal Full Faith and Credit and Privileges and Immunities Clauses on this case.
