Bourke v. Beshear & Love v. Beshear
On April 28, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard an oral argument in this case seeking the freedom to marry in Kentucky, along with similar cases from Ohio, Michigan and Tennessee. The Supreme Court granted review of the out-of-step ruling from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals on January 16. A ruling is expected by June 2015, which could bring the freedom to marry nationwide.
Review was granted in a petition for a writ of certiori filed in these cases on November 17 by Fauver Law Office, Clay Daniel Walton & Adams, the American Civil Liberties Union and Stanford Law School's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. The state of Kentucky agreed in their brief that the Supreme Court should take up the case.
The petition sought review of a November 6 ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, which reversed a lower court ruling in these federal cases seeking the freedom to marry in Kentucky and respect for marriages legally performed in other states in Kentucky. The out-of-step decision ignored nearly 50 pro-marriage rulings since June 2013. Now, it's time for the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn this decision and rule in favor of the freedom to marry nationwide.
On July 26, 2013, private lawyers from Fauver Law Office, later joined by Clay Daniel Walton & Adams, in Louisville, KY filed a federal lawsuit in the 6th Circuit on behalf of four same-sex couples arguing that Kentucky's anti-marriage laws violate the due process and equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution.
On February 12, 2014, U.S. District Judge John G. Heyburn II ruled that Kentucky must respect the marriages of same-sex couples legally performed in other states. He said, "It is clear that Kentucky’s laws treat gay and lesbian persons differently in a way that demeans them."
On Friday, February 14, two additional couples filed a motion to intervene in the case seeking the freedom to marry in Kentucky. The couples - Timothy Love & Lawrence Ysunza and Maurice Blanchard & Dominque James - want to marry in their home states of Kentucky. On February 26, Judge Heyburn ruled that the other couples were permitted to join the suit, now also referred to as Love v. Beshear.
Judge Heyburn finalized his ruling on February 27 and on February 28, granted the state's request for a 21-day stay in the ruling. On March 4, the Attorney General announced he would not appeal the ruling, which was quickly followed by a statement from the Governor, who said he would be seeking outside counsel to appeal the decision.
On July 1, Judge Heyburn ruled in favor of two intervening couples who sought the freedom to marry in the state. All plaintiffs in the case are represented by private counsel from Clay Daniel Walton & Adams and Fauver Law Office.
On August 6, the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit heard oral arguments in the appeal of this case, in which a federal judge ordered the state to respect the marriages of same-sex couples legally performed in other states. Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway rightly declared that the state's ban on same-sex couples from marrying is indefensible, and that he would not seek appeal, so the appeal is being led by KY Gov. Beshear.
On November 6, the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled to uphold marriage discrimination, one of just a few anti-marriage decisions since June 2013. The decision was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted review in January 2015 and heard an oral argument on April 28, 2015.
Kentucky Equality Federation v. Beshear
On April 16, 2015, a circuit judge ruled in favor of the freedom to marry in this case, but put the ruling on hold pending the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bourke v. Beshear & Love v. Beshear.
On September 10, 2013, private lawyers filed a lawsuit in state court on behalf of the Kentucky Equality Federation against the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The lawsuit seeks to achieve equal rights and protections for same-sex couples and their families in Kentucky, arguing that the 2004 amendment to the Kentucky Constitution violates the Constitution.
- SCOTUS GRANTS REVIEW
- SUPREME COURT DOCKET (14-574): 'Love and Bourke v. Beshear'
- RESPONSE IN SUPPORT OF CERTIORARI: 'Love and Bourke v. Beshear'
- PETITION FOR CERTIORARI: 'Love and Bourke v. Beshear'
- RULING: 6th Circuit Appeals Court in 'Bourke/Love v. Beshear'
- RULING: 'Love v. Beshear'
- APPELLEES' BRIEF: 'Bourke v. Beshear' to 6th Circuit Appeals Court
- APPELLANTS' BRIEF: 'Bourke v. Beshear' to 6th Circuit Appeals Court
- STAY ORDERED: 'Bourke v. Beshear'
- APPEAL: 'Bourke v. Beshear'
- MOTION FILED: For Summary Judgement in 'Love v. Beshear'
- MOTION FILED TO INTERVENE: 'Love v. Beshear'
- RULING: 'Bourke v. Beshear'
- MOTION FILED: For Summary Judgment in 'Bourke v. Beshear'
- INITIAL COMPLAINT: 'Bourke & Deleon v. Beshear'
- MEET THE PLAINTIFFS: 'Bourke & Deleon v. Beshear'
- INITIAL COMPLAINT: 'Kentucky Equality Federation v. Beshear'
- RULING: 'Kentucky v. Clary'
- MOTION FILED: For Invocation of Marital Privilege, 'Kentucky v. Clary'
- BACKGROUND: The Freedom to Marry in Kentucky