Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:2345

1 Paul D. Clement (DC Bar 433215) pclement@bancroftpllc.com 2 H. Christopher Bartolomucci (DC Bar 453423) 3 cbartolomucci@bancroftpllc.com Nicholas J. Nelson (DC Bar 1001696) 4 nnelson@bancroftpllc.com 5 Michael H. McGinley (DC Bar 1006943) mmcginley@bancroftpllc.com 6 7 BANCROFT PLLC 1919 M Street, N.W. 8 Suite 470 9 Washington, D.C. 20036 10 202-234-0090 (telephone) 202-234-2806 (facsimile) 11 12 Of Counsel: Kerry W. Kircher, General Counsel (DC Bar 386816) 13 Kerry.Kircher@mail.house.gov 14 William Pittard, Deputy General Counsel (DC Bar 482949) William.Pittard@mail.house.gov 15 Christine Davenport, Senior Assistant Counsel (NJ Bar 043682000) 16 Christine.Davenport@mail.house.gov Todd B. Tatelman, Assistant Counsel (VA Bar 66008) 17 Todd.Tatelman@mail.house.gov 18 Mary Beth Walker, Assistant Counsel (DC Bar 501033) MaryBeth.Walker@mail.house.gov 19 Eleni M. Roumel, Assistant Counsel (SC Bar 75763) 20 Eleni.Roumel@mail.house.gov 21 OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, 22 U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 219 Cannon House Office Building 23 Washington, D.C. 20515 24 202-225-9700 (telephone) 202-226-1360 (facsimile) 25 26 Counsel for Intervenor-Defendant Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives 27 28

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:2346

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Southern Division ) ) No. 8:12-cv-01137-CBM (AJWx) ) ) ) ) ) INTERVENOR-DEFENDANT ) BIPARTISAN LEGAL ) ADVISORY GROUP OF THE ) U.S. HOUSE OF ) REPRESENTATIVES ) NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL ) AUTHORITY ) ) Hearing: Nov. 20, 2012 ) Time: 10:00 a.m. ) Hon. Consuelo B. Marshall

MARTIN R. ARANAS, et. al., Plaintiffs, v. JANET NAPOLITANO, et al., Defendants,

11 BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUP OF THE U.S. HOUSE 12 OF REPRESENTATIVES, 13 Intervenor-Defendant. 14 15 16

Intervenor-Defendant Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of

17 Representatives (House) respectfully submits this Notice of Supplemental 18 Authority in support of its pending Motion to Dismiss (Oct. 22, 2012) (ECF No. 19 62)). In support of its argument for the application of rational basis review, the 20 House asserted that supporters of same-sex marriage have ample and increasing 21 clout in government and in the press, resulting in an active, public debate about 22 same-sex marriage in America. See Mot. at 17-19, 29-30. As a result, the issue of 23 same-sex marriage is being decided by voters, and that democratic process should 24 be allowed to continue. See id. 25 In their oppositions, Plaintiffs and the Executive Branch Defendants imply 26 that the American public cannot be relied upon to rationally debate, and decide 27 through the democratic process, the issue of same-sex marriage. See Pls. Oppn to 28

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:2347

1 Def.-Intervenors Mot. to Dismiss (Oct. 30, 2012) (ECF No. 71) (Pl. Oppn) at 2 16-17 & n.24 (gay people are today not in a position to adequately protect 3 themselves from the discriminatory wishes of a majoritarian public); see Defs. 4 Oppn to the [Houses] Mot. to Dismiss at 20-21 (Nov. 1, 2012) (ECF No. 75) 5 (Exec. Br. Oppn). Additionally, they argue that gay and lesbian people 6 continue to lack political power. Exec. Br. Oppn at 21; see Pl. Oppn at 16. 7 The most recent November 2012 election results are very illuminating with 8 respect to these issues and support the Houses argument that heightened scrutiny 9 should not apply here. In each instance where a ballot measure addressed same10 sex marriage, the proponents of same-sex marriage prevailed. In particular: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Maine voters passed a referendum, allowing the State of Maine to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples;1 Washington voters approved a referendum permitting marriage for same-sex couples;2 Maryland voters approved a referendum petition approving Marylands civil marriage law that allowed gay and lesbian couples to obtain a civil marriage license; 3 and
1

Election Results, Me. Dept of the Secy of State, available at 19 http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/prior1st.htm; see also Democracy and Gay 20 Marriage, Wall St. J., Nov. 9, 2012, at A12, available at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323894704578104953714796998 21 .html (Whatever ones views [of same-sex marriage], the process is itself a 22 victory. A contentious issue is working its way through the political system and being resolved in a manner that both sides can accept as legitimate. This ought to 23 give pause to judges who want to legislate a premature social consensus from the . 24 bench 2 . . .). November 6, 2012 General Election Results, Wash. Secy of State, 25 available at http://vote.wa.gov/results/current/Export.html. 3 Unofficial 2012 Presidential General Election Results for all State 26 Questions, Md. State Bd. of Elections, available at 27 (Continued . . .) 28 2

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:2348

1 2 3 4

Minnesota voters rejected a ballot measure that would have amended the state constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized.4 These election results strongly support the Houses position that the

5 democratic process should be allowed to work, and that courts should avoid 6 judicially constitutionalizing the issue of same sex marriage. See, e.g., Washington 7 v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 735, 117 S. Ct. 2258, 138 L. Ed. 2d 772 (1997); 8 Smelt v. Cnty. of Orange, 447 F.3d 673, 681 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Windsor v. 9 United States, Nos. 12-2335 & 12-2435, -- F.3d --, 2012 WL 4937310, at *31, *34 10 (Straub, J., concurring in part & dissenting in part). 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 http://elections.state.md.us/elections/2012/results/general/gen_qresults_2012_4_00 _1.html. 4 23 Results for Constitutional Amendments, Office of the Minn. Secy of State, 24 available at http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/ENR/Results/AmendmentResultsStatewide/1. 5 25 Kerry W. Kircher, as ECF filer of this document, attests that concurrence 26 in the filing of the document has been obtained from signatory H. Christopher Bartolomucci. 27 28 3 Respectfully submitted, H. Christopher Bartolomucci 5 /s/ H. Christopher Bartolomucci Paul D. Clement Nicholas J. Nelson Michael H. McGinley BANCROFT PLLC 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 470 Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: (202) 234-0090 Facsimile: (202) 234-2806 cbartolomucci@bancroftpllc.com

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:2349

1 2 3 4 5 Of Counsel:

Counsel for Intervenor-Defendant the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives 6

6 Kerry W. Kircher, General Counsel 7 William Pittard, Deputy General Counsel Christine Davenport, Senior Assistant Counsel 8 Todd B. Tatelman, Assistant Counsel 9 Mary Beth Walker, Assistant Counsel Eleni M. Roumel, Assistant Counsel 10 11 OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 12 219 Cannon House Office Building 13 Washington, D.C. 20515 Telephone: (202) 225-9700 14 Facsimile: (202) 226-1360 15 November 19, 2012 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which speaks for the House in litigation matters, currently is comprised of the Honorable John A. Boehner, Speaker of the House, the Honorable Eric Cantor, Majority Leader, the Honorable Kevin McCarthy, Majority Whip, the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Leader, and the Honorable Steny H. Hoyer, Democratic Whip. The Democratic Leader and Democratic Whip have declined to support the position taken by the Group on the merits of DOMA Section 3s constitutionality in this case.
6

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:2350

1 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on November 19, 2012, I electronically filed and served the

3 following Intervenor-Defendant Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. 4 House Of Representatives Notice of Supplemental Authority with the Clerk of 5 Court using the CM/ECF system, which provided an electronic notice and 6 electronic link of the same to all attorneys of record through the Courts CM/ECF 7 system: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Julie Greenwald Marzouk, Esq. Monica Nikole Ashiku, Esq. PUBLIC LAW CENTER 601 Civic Center Drive West Santa Ana, CA 92701 jgreenwald@publiclawcenter.org mashiku@publiclawcenter.org Beatrice Ann M. Pangilinan, Esq. ASIAN LAW ALLIANCE 184 Jackson Street San Jose, CA 95112 bpangilinan@asianlawalliance.org Gary H. Manulkin, Esq. Reyna M. Tanner, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF MANULKIN & BENNETT 10175 Slater Avenue, Suite 111 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Peter A. Schey, Esq. Carlos Holguin, Esq. CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 256 South Occidental Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90057 pschey@centerforhumanrights.org crholguin@centerforhumanrights.org

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 108

Filed 11/19/12 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:2351

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

gmanulkin@mgblaw.com reynatanner@yahoo.com Jesi J. Carlson, Esq. Timothy Michael Belson, Esq. Lana L. Vahab, Esq. Katherine E.M. Gottel, Esq. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 jesi.j.carlson@usdoj.gov timothy.m.belsan@usdoj.gov lana.vahab@usdoj.gov kate.goettel@usdoj.gov /s/ Eleni M. Roumel Eleni M. Roumel