User:MarkGT/sandbox

Baskin v. Bogan
No. 1:14-CV-0355
Court	United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Full case name	Marilyn Baskin and Esther Fuller; et. al, Plaintiffs, v. Penny Bogan, in her official capacity as Boone County Clerk; et. al, Defendants.* *Decided with Fujii v. Pence and Lee v. Pence, No. 1:14-CV-0404 and 1:14-CV-0406.
Decided	June 25, 2014
Citation(s)	2014 WL 2884868
Case history
Prior action(s)	Interlocutory appeal of injunction lodged sub nom. Baskin v. Zoeller, No. 14-2037 (7th Cir. May 9, 2014), preliminary injunction granted, 2014 WL 1814064 (S.D. Ind. May 8, 2014), temporary restraining order granted, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54036 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 10, 2014).
Subsequent action(s)	Interlocutory appeal sub nom. Baskin v. Zoeller dismissed as moot, No. 14-2037 (7th Cir. Jul. 14, 2014), expedited review ordered, No. 14-2386 (7th Cir. Jun. 30, 2014), emergency stay pending appeal ordered, No. 14-2386 (7th Cir. Jun. 27, 2014), notice of appeal filed (S.D. Ind. Jun. 25, 2014).
Holding
Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage violates both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; the state had no rational basis for instituting such a ban.
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting	Richard L. Young, U.S.D.J.

Five same-sex marriage lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana in March 2014. The cases are:

• Love v. Pence, docket number 4:14-CV-0015, filed on March 7;
• Baskin v. Bogan, docket number 1:14-CV-0355, filed on March 13; and
• Fujii v. Pence, docket number 1:14-CV-0404,
• Bowling v. Pence, docket number 1:14-CV-0405, and
• Lee v. Pence, docket number 1:14-CV-0406, with these three filed on March 14.

The lead Indiana case on same-sex marriage is Baskin v. Bogan, filed in the Southern District of Indiana by Lambda Legal on behalf on three same-sex couples, all women. Defendants are Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller and three county clerks, with one of the county clerks, Penny Bogan, in her official capacity, as the first-named defendant. The case was assigned to Chief Judge Richard L. Young.

Preliminary injunction

Baskin took precedence over the other Indiana marriage cases, because Nikole Quasney, one of the plaintiffs, is terminally ill with ovarian cancer. As to her and her partner, Judge Young granted immediate relief, issuing a 28-day duration emergency order on April 10 and, after oral arguments on May 8 on a motion for summary judgment, a preliminary injunction directing the state parties to recognize the validity of the Quasney's Massachusetts marriage. In doing so, the court temporarily withdrew the motion for as to the rest of the plaintiffs, with Judge Young reasoning it makes a stronger case for the terminally ill couple while also allowing the rest a resolution on the merits without causing undue confusion in case of an appeal.

The state did file an interlocutory appeal of this limited injunction on May 9, 2014, and this portion of the case is currently being briefed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit under the name of Baskin v. Zoeller, where it is docketed as No. 14-2037.

District court ruling

On June 25, 2014, the U.S. district court ruled as to the case of the remaining plaintiffs in Baskin, as well as the cases of Fujii and Lee. District Judge Richard L. Young found in favor of the plaintiff couples, granting them summary judgment and striking down Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage, while removing the state's governor from the lawsuit. Judge Young commented:

In less than a year, every Federal District Court to consider the issue has reached the same conclusion in thoughtful and thorough opinions–laws prohibiting the celebration and recognition of same-sex marriages are unconstitutional ... It is clear that the fundamental right to marry shall not be deprived to some individuals based solely on the person they choose to love. In time, Americans will look at the marriage of couples such as plaintiffs, and refer to it simply as a marriage–not a same-sex marriage. These couples, when gender and sexual orientation are taken away, are in all respects like the family down the street. The Constitution demands that we treat them as such.

In finding Indiana's scheme unconstitutional, the judge found that the ban violated the Fourteenth Amendment under both due process and equal protection theories; the state had no rational basis for instituting such ban:

Defendants point to the one extremely limited difference between opposite-sex and same-sex couples, the ability of the couple to naturally and unintentionally procreate, as justification to deny same-sex couples a vast array of rights. The connection between these rights and responsibilities and the ability to conceive unintentionally is too attenuated to support such a broad prohibition.

The district court did not immediately issue a stay, and Indiana clerks began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the day of the ruling. As many as 800-1,000 marriage licenses may have issued in Indiana between the time Judge Young's opinion was filed on Wednesday, and the time the 7th Circuit brought license issuance to a halt on Friday. Many of the couples have married. It may be anticipated that their marriages will be recognized by the federal government.

Dismissal of related case

Judge Young also dismissed Love v. Pence for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction on June 25, 2014. He explained that, in that specific case, the only named defendant was Indiana Governor Mike Pence, and "...the injuries of which the Plaintiffs complain are not fairly traceable to him, and cannot be redressed by him"; the governor cannot "issue executive decrees telling other elected officials how to do their jobs when it comes to laws affecting marriage."

Seventh Circuit appeal and stay

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller appealed the District Court's decisions in Baskin v. Bogan, Fujii (appealed sub nom. Fujii v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Dep't of Revenue), and Lee (appealed sub nom. Abbott v. Lee.) On June 27, 2014, the Seventh Circuit sua sponte consolidated the cases for briefing and disposition, and docketed under appellate case numbers 14-2386, 14-2387, and 14-2388 respectively. On the same day, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit, U.S. Circuit Judges Richard Posner, Ann Claire Williams, and David F. Hamilton, granted an emergency stay of the prevailing same-sex marriage cases for the duration of their appeal. On July 2, the same panel granted a motion for one couple's marriage to be recognized immediately because one plaintiff's terminal illness, allowing Amy Sandler and Niki Quasney to become the first same-sex couple legally married in Indiana.The Seventh Circuit had set a briefing schedule to be completed on September 19, 2014.

Dismissal of interlocutory appeal

As the Baskin plaintiffs had received a favorable final ruling in U.S. district court that was appealed to the Seventh Circuit (No. 14-2386), the previous interlocutory appeal pending there (No. 14-2037) was in essence duplicate litigation. On a joint motion from the plaintiffs and defendants agreeing to such, on July 14, 2014, the circuit court dismissed this appeal.

Seventh Circuit consolidation and argument

On motion from the plaintiffs, the Seventh Circuit ordered another consolidation, this time combining Baskin and its companion cases with a similar case on appeal from the Western District of Wisconsin, Wolf v. Walker. The circuit court also expedited proceedings by abandoning its previous briefing schedule and ordering completion of this matter by August 5. On July 11, 2014, the state defendants filed a motion in the circuit court to have the case heard en banc, i.e. by all of its ten judges rather than by the usual three-judge panel. However, on July 14, 2014, the Seventh Circuit released an order in Baskin, Fujii, Lee and Walker, scheduling a date for oral arguments before a three-judge panel. Oral arguments will be heard on August 13, 2014 in Chicago.