Sei sulla pagina 1di 40

!

" $%&
'"($&) *$+$&, -./0$ .1 233&+4,
5.0 $%& *&6&"$% -(07/($
____________________
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388
MARILYN RAI ASKIN, ci a|.,
P|ainiijjs-Appc||ccs,
t.
IINNY OGAN, ci a|.,
Ocjcn!anis-Appc||anis.
____________________

AeaIs from lhe Uniled Slales Dislricl Courl
for lhe Soulhern Dislricl of Indiana, IndianaoIis Division.
Nos. 1:14-cv-00355-RLY-TA, 1:14-cv-00404-RLY-TA,
1:14-cv-00406-RLY-M}D !"#$%&' )* +,-./, Cnicj ju!gc.
____________________

No. 14-2526
VIRGINIA WOLI, ci a|.,
P|ainiijjs-Appc||ccs,
t.
SCOTT WALKIR, ci a|.,
Ocjcn!anis-Appc||anis.
____________________

AeaI from lhe Uniled Slales Dislricl Courl
for lhe Weslern Dislricl of Wisconsin.
No. 3:14-cv-00064-bbc 0%&1%&% 0* 2&%11, ju!gc.
______________________
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
2 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
ARGUID AUGUST 26, 2014 DICIDID SIITIMIR 4, 2014
____________________
efore IOSNIR, WILLIAMS, and HAMILTON, Circuii ju!gcs.
IOSNIR, Circuii ju!gc. Indiana and Wisconsin are among
lhe shrinking ma|orily of slales lhal do nol recognize lhe va-
Iidily of same-sex marriages, vhelher conlracled in lhese
slales or in slales (or foreign counlries) vhere lhey are Iav-
fuI. The slales have aeaIed from dislricl courl decisions
invaIidaling lhe slales' Iavs lhal ordain such refusaI.
IormaIIy lhese cases are aboul discriminalion againsl lhe
smaII homosexuaI minorily in lhe Uniled Slales. ul al a
deeer IeveI, as ve shaII see, lhey are aboul lhe veIfare of
American chiIdren. The argumenl lhal lhe slales ress hard-
esl in defense of lheir rohibilion of same-sex marriage is
lhal lhe onIy reason governmenl encourages marriage is lo
induce helerosexuaIs lo marry so lhal lhere viII be fever
accidenlaI birlhs, vhich vhen lhey occur oulside of mar-
riage oflen Iead lo abandonmenl of lhe chiId lo lhe molher
(unaided by lhe falher) or lo fosler care. OverIooked by lhis
argumenl is lhal many of lhose abandoned chiIdren are
adoled by homosexuaI couIes, and lhose chiIdren vouId
be beller off bolh emolionaIIy and economicaIIy if lheir
adolive arenls vere married.
We are mindfuI of lhe Sureme Courl's insislence lhal
vhelher embodied in lhe Iourleenlh Amendmenl or in-
ferred from lhe Iiflh, equaI roleclion is nol a Iicense for
courls lo |udge lhe visdom, fairness, or Iogic of IegisIalive
choices. In areas of sociaI and economic oIicy, a slalulory
cIassificalion lhal neilher roceeds a|cng suspcci |incs nor in-
fringes fundamenlaI conslilulionaI righls musl be uheId
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 3
againsl equaI roleclion chaIIenge if lhere is any reasonabIy
conceivabIe slale of facls lhal couId rovide a ralionaI basis
for lhe cIassificalion. |CC t. Bcacn Ccnnunicaiicns, |nc., 508
U.S. 307, 313 (1993) (emhasis added). The hrase ve've ilaI-
icized is lhe excelion aIicabIe lo lhis air of cases.
We haslen lo add lhal even vhen lhe grou discriminal-
ed againsl is nol a susecl cIass, courls examine, and
somelimes re|ecl, lhe ralionaIe offered by governmenl for lhe
chaIIenged discriminalion. See, e.g., Vi||agc cj Wi||cu|rcck t.
O|ccn, 528 U.S. 562 (2000) (er curiam), Ciiq cj C|c|urnc t.
C|c|urnc Iiting Ccnicr, 473 U.S. 432, 44850 (1985). In Vancc t.
Bra!|cq, 440 U.S. 93, 111 (1979), an iIIuslralive case in vhich
lhe Sureme Courl acceled lhe governmenl's ralionaIe for
discriminaling on lhe basis of age, lhe ma|orily oinion de-
voled 17 ages lo anaIyzing vhelher Congress had had a
reasonabIe basis for lhe chaIIenged discriminalion (requir-
ing foreign service officers bul nol ordinary civiI servanls lo
relire al lhe age of 60), before concIuding lhal il did.
We'II see lhal lhe governmenls of Indiana and Wisconsin
have given us no reason lo lhink lhey have a reasonabIe ba-
sis for forbidding same-sex marriage. And more lhan a rea-
sonabIe basis is required because lhis is a case in vhich lhe
chaIIenged discriminalion is, in lhe formuIa from lhe Bcacn
case, aIong susecl Iines. Discriminalion by a slale or lhe
federaI governmenl againsl a minorily, vhen based on an
immulabIe characlerislic of lhe members of lhal minorily
(mosl famiIiarIy skin coIor and gender), and occurring
againsl an hisloricaI background of discriminalion againsl
lhe ersons vho have lhal characlerislic, makes lhe discrim-
inalory Iav or oIicy conslilulionaIIy susecl. See, e.g., Bcu-
cn t. Gi||iar!, 483 U.S. 587, 60203 (1987), |cgcnis cj Unitcrsiiq
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
4 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
cj Ca|ijcrnia t. Bakkc, 438 U.S. 265, 36062 (1978), Si. jcnns
Uniic! Cnurcn cj Cnrisi t. Ciiq cj Cnicagc, 502 I.3d 616, 638
(7lh Cir. 2007), Wi|kins t. Ga!!q, 734 I.3d 344, 348 (4lh Cir.
2013), Ga||agncr t. Ciiq cj C|aqicn, 699 I.3d 1013, 101819 (8lh
Cir. 2012). These circumslances creale a resumlion lhal
lhe discriminalion is a deniaI of lhe equaI roleclion of lhe
Iavs (il may vioIale olher rovisions of lhe Conslilulion as
veII, bul ve von'l have lo consider lhal ossibiIily). The
resumlion is rebullabIe, if al aII, onIy by a comeIIing
shoving lhal lhe benefils of lhe discriminalion lo sociely as a
vhoIe cIearIy oulveigh lhe harms lo ils viclims. See, e.g.,
Gruiicr t. Bc||ingcr, 539 U.S. 306, 32627 (2003), Uniic! Siaics
t. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, 53133 (1996).
The aroach is slraighlforvard bul comes vraed, in
many of lhe decisions aIying il, in a formidabIe doclrinaI
lerminoIogylhe lerminoIogy of ralionaI basis, of slricl,
heighlened, and inlermediale scruliny, of narrov laiIoring,
fundamenlaI righls, and lhe resl. We'II be invoking in Iaces
lhe conceluaI aaralus lhal has grovn u around lhis
lerminoIogy, bul our main focus viII be on lhe slales' argu-
menls, vhich are based IargeIy on lhe asserlion lhal banning
same-sex marriage is |uslified by lhe slale's inleresl in chan-
neIing rocrealive sex inlo (necessariIy helerosexuaI) mar-
riage. We viII engage lhe slales' argumenls on lheir ovn
lerms, enabIing us lo decide our brace of cases on lhe basis
of a sequence of four queslions:
1. Does lhe chaIIenged raclice invoIve discriminalion,
rooled in a hislory of re|udice, againsl some idenlifiabIe
grou of ersons, resuIling in unequaI lrealmenl harmfuI lo
lhem`
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 5
2. Is lhe unequaI lrealmenl based on some immulabIe or
al Ieasl lenacious characlerislic of lhe eoIe discriminaled
againsl (bioIogicaI, such as skin coIor, or a dee sychoIogi-
caI commilmenl, as reIigious beIief oflen is, bolh lyes being
dislincl from characlerislics lhal are easy for a erson lo
change, such as lhe Ienglh of his or her fingernaiIs)` The
characlerislic musl be one lhal isn'l reIevanl lo a erson's
abiIily lo arliciale in sociely. InleIIecl, for examIe, has a
Iarge immulabIe comonenl bul aIso a direcl and subslanliaI
bearing on quaIificalions for cerlain lyes of emIoymenl
and for IegaI riviIeges such as enlilIemenl lo a driver's Ii-
cense, and lhere may be no reason lo be arlicuIarIy susi-
cious of a slalule lhal cIassifies on lhal basis.
3. Does lhe discriminalion, even if based on an immula-
bIe characlerislic, neverlheIess confer an imorlanl offselling
benefil on sociely as a vhoIe` Age is an immulabIe charac-
lerislic, bul a ruIe rohibiling ersons over 70 lo iIol airIin-
ers mighl reasonabIy be lhoughl lo confer an essenliaI bene-
fil in lhe form of imroved airIine safely.
4. Though il does confer an offselling benefil, is lhe dis-
criminalory oIicy overincIusive because lhe benefil il con-
fers on sociely couId be achieved in a vay Iess harmfuI lo
lhe discriminaled-againsl grou, or underincIusive because
lhe governmenl's urorled ralionaIe for lhe oIicy imIies
lhal il shouId equaIIy aIy lo olher grous as veII` One
vay lo decide vhelher a oIicy is overincIusive is lo ask
vhelher unequaI lrealmenl is csscniia| lo allaining lhe de-
sired benefil. Imagine a slalule lhal imoses a $2 lax on
vomen bul nol men. The roceeds from lhal lax are, Iel's
assume, essenliaI lo lhe efficienl oeralion of governmenl.
The lax is lherefore sociaIIy efficienl, and lhe benefils cIearIy
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
6 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
oulveigh lhe cosls. ul lhal's nol lhe end of lhe inquiry. SliII
lo be delermined is vhelher lhe benefils from imosing lhe
lax cn|q cn ucncn oulveigh lhe cosls. And Iikevise in a
same-sex marriage case lhe issue is nol vhelher helerosexuaI
marriage is a sociaIIy beneficiaI inslilulion bul vhelher lhe
benefils lo lhe slale from discriminaling againsl same-sex
couIes cIearIy oulveigh lhe harms lhal lhis discriminalion
imoses.
Our queslions go lo lhe hearl of equaI roleclion doc-
lrine. Queslions 1 and 2 are consislenl vilh lhe various for-
muIas for vhal enlilIes a discriminaled-againsl grou lo
heighlened scruliny of lhe discriminalion, and queslions 3
and 4 calure lhe essence of lhe Sureme Courl's aroach
in heighlened-scruliny cases: To succeed, lhe defender of
lhe chaIIenged aclion musl shov 'al Ieasl lhal lhe cIassifica-
lion serves imorlanl governmenlaI ob|eclives and lhal lhe
discriminalory means emIoyed are subslanliaIIy reIaled lo
lhe achievemenl of lhose ob|eclives.' Uniic! Siaics t. Virgin-
ia, supra, 518 U.S. al 524 (1996), quoling Mississippi Unitcrsiiq
jcr Wcncn t. Hcgan, 458 U.S. 718, 724 (1982).
The difference belveen lhe aroach ve lake in lhese
lvo cases and lhe more convenlionaI aroach is semanlic
ralher lhan subslanlive. The convenlionaI aroach doesn'l
urorl lo baIance lhe cosls and benefils of lhe chaIIenged
discriminalory Iav. Inslead il evaIuales lhe imorlance of
lhe slale's ob|eclive in enacling lhe Iav and lhe exlenl lo
vhich lhe Iav is suiled (laiIored) lo achieving lhal ob|ec-
live. Il asks vhelher lhe slalule acluaIIy furlhers lhe inleresl
lhal lhe slale asserls and vhelher lhere mighl be some Iess
burdensome aIlernalive. The anaIysis lhus focuses nol on
cosls and benefils as such, bul on fil. Thal is vhy lhe
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 7
briefs in lhese lvo cases overfIov vilh debale over vhelher
rohibiling same-sex marriage is over- or underincIu-
sivefor examIe, overincIusive in ignoring lhe effecl of
lhe ban on lhe chiIdren adoled by same-sex couIes, under-
incIusive in exlending marriage righls lo olher non-
rocrealive couIes. ul lo say lhal a discriminalory oIicy
is overincIusive is lo say lhal lhe oIicy does more harm lo
lhe members of lhe discriminaled-againsl grou lhan neces-
sary lo allain lhe Iegilimale goaIs of lhe oIicy, and lo say
lhal lhe oIicy is underincIusive is lo say lhal ils excIusion of
olher, very simiIar grous is indicalive of arbilrariness.
AIlhough lhe cases discuss, as ve shaII be doing in lhis
oinion, lhe harms lhal a chaIIenged slalule may visil uon
lhe discriminaled-againsl grou, lhose harms don'l formaIIy
enler inlo lhe convenlionaI anaIysis. When a slalule discrim-
inales againsl a rolecled cIass (as defined for examIe in
our queslion 2), il doesn'l maller vhelher lhe harm infIicled
by lhe discriminalion is a grave harm. As ve said, a slalule
lhal imosed a $2 lax on vomen bul nol men vouId be
slruck dovn unIess lhere vere a comeIIing reason for lhe
discriminalion. Il vouIdn'l maller lhal lhe harm lo each er-
son discriminaled againsl vas sIighl if lhe benefil of imos-
ing lhe lax onIy on vomen vas even sIighler.
Our air of cases is rich in delaiI bul uIlimaleIy slraighl-
forvard lo decide. The chaIIenged Iavs discriminale againsl
a minorily defined by an immulabIe characlerislic, and lhe
onIy ralionaIe lhal lhe slales ul forlh vilh any conviclion
lhal same-sex couIes and lheir chiIdren don'l ncc! marriage
because same-sex couIes can'l prc!ucc chiIdren, inlended or
uninlendedis so fuII of hoIes lhal il cannol be laken seri-
ousIy. To lhe exlenl lhal chiIdren are beller off in famiIies in
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
8 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
vhich lhe arenls are married, lhey are beller off vhelher
lhey are raised by lheir bioIogicaI arenls or by adolive
arenls. The discriminalion againsl same-sex couIes is irra-
lionaI, and lherefore unconslilulionaI even if lhe discrimina-
lion is nol sub|ecled lo heighlened scruliny, vhich is vhy
ve can IargeIy eIide lhe more comIex anaIysis found in
more cIoseIy baIanced equaI-roleclion cases.
Il is aIso vhy ve can avoid engaging vilh lhe Iainliffs'
furlher argumenl lhal lhe slales' rohibilion of same-sex
marriage vioIales a fundamenlaI righl rolecled by lhe due
rocess cIause of lhe Iourleenlh Amendmenl. The Iainliffs
reIy on cases such as Hc!gscn t. Minncscia, 497 U.S. 417, 435
(1990), and Za||ccki t. |c!nai|, 434 U.S. 374, 38386 (1978),
lhal hoId lhal lhe righl lo choose vhom lo marry is indeed a
fundamenlaI righl. The slales reIy lhal lhe righl recognized
in such cases is lhe righl lo choose from vilhin lhe cIass of
ersons eIigibIe lo marry, lhus excIuding chiIdren, cIose reIa-
lives, and ersons aIready marriedand, lhe slales conlend,
ersons of lhe same sex. The Iainliffs riosle lhal lhere are
good reasons for ineIigibiIily lo marry chiIdren, cIose reIa-
lives, and lhe aIready married, bul nol for ineIigibiIily lo
marry ersons of lhe same sex. In Iighl of lhe comeIIing aI-
lernalive grounds lhal ve'II be exIoring for aIIoving same-
sex marriage, ve von'l have lo engage vilh lhe arlies'
fundamenlaI righl debale, ve can confine our allenlion lo
equaI roleclion.
We begin our delaiIed anaIysis of vhelher rohibiling
same-sex marriage denies equaI roleclion of lhe Iavs by
noling lhal Indiana and Wisconsin, in refusing lo aulhorize
such marriage or (vilh Iimiled excelions discussed Ialer) lo
recognize such marriages made in olher slales by residenls
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 9
of Indiana or Wisconsin, are discriminaling againsl homo-
sexuaIs by denying lhem a righl lhal lhese slales granl lo
helerosexuaIs, nameIy lhe righl lo marry an unmarried aduIl
of lheir choice. And lhere is IillIe doubl lhal sexuaI orienla-
lion, lhe ground of lhe discriminalion, is an immulabIe (and
robabIy an innale, in lhe sense of in-born) characlerislic ra-
lher lhan a choice. WiseIy, neilher Indiana nor Wisconsin ar-
gues olhervise. The American IsychoIogicaI Associalion has
said lhal mosl eoIe exerience IillIe or no sense of choice
aboul lheir sexuaI orienlalion. AIA, Ansvers lo Your
Queslions: Ior a eller Underslanding of SexuaI Orienlalion
& HomosexuaIily 2 (2008), vvv.aa.org/loics/Igbl/orien
lalion.df (visiled Sel. 2, 2014, as vere lhe olher vebsiles
ciled in lhis oinion), see aIso Gregory M. Herek el aI., De-
mograhic, IsychoIogicaI, and SociaI Characlerislics of SeIf-
Idenlified Lesbian, Gay, and isexuaI AduIls in a US Iroba-
biIily SamIe, 7 Scxua|iiq |cscarcn an! Sccia| Pc|icq 176, 188
(2010) (combining resondenls vho said lhey'd had a smaII
amounl of choice vilh lhose reorling no choice, 95% of gay
men and 84% of Iesbians couId be characlerized as erceiv-
ing lhal lhey had IillIe or no choice aboul lheir sexuaI orien-
lalion). Thal homosexuaI orienlalion is nol a choice is fur-
lher suggesled by lhe absence of evidence (desile exlensive
efforls lo find il) lhal sycholheray is effeclive in aIlering
sexuaI orienlalion in generaI and homosexuaI orienlalion in
arlicuIar. AIA, Ansvers lo Your Queslions, supra, al 3,
|cpcri cj inc Ancrican Psqcnc|cgica| Asscciaiicn Task |crcc cn
Apprcpriaic Tncrapcuiic |cspcnscs ic Scxua| Oricniaiicn 3541
(2009).
The Ieading scienlific lheories of lhe causes of homosex-
uaIily are genelic and neuroendocrine lheories, lhe Ialler be-
ing lheories lhal sexuaI orienlalion is shaed by a felus's ex-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
10 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
osure lo cerlain hormones. See, e.g., }. MichaeI aiIey, io-
IogicaI Ierseclives on SexuaI Orienlalion, in Ics|ian, Gaq,
an! Biscxua| |!cniiiics Otcr inc Iijcspan. Psqcnc|cgica| Pcrspcc-
iitcs 10230 (Anlhony R. D'AugeIIi and CharIolle }. Ialler-
son eds. 1995), arbara L. Irankovski, SexuaI Orienlalion
and AdoIescenls, 113 Pc!iairics 1827, 1828 (2004). AIlhough
il seems aradoxicaI lo suggesl lhal homosexuaIily couId
have a genelic origin, given lhal homosexuaI sex is non-
rocrealive, homosexuaIily may, Iike menoause, by reduc-
ing rocrealion by some members of sociely free lhem lo
rovide chiId-caring assislance lo lheir rocrealive reIalives,
lhus increasing lhe survivaI and hence rocrealive rosecls
of lhese reIalives. This is caIIed lhe kin seIeclion hyolhe-
sis or lhe heIer in lhe nesl lheory. See, e.g., Associalion
for IsychoIogicaI Science, Sludy ReveaIs IolenliaI IvoIu-
lionary RoIe for Same-Sex Allraclion, Ieb. 4, 2010,
vvv.sychoIogicaIscience.org/media/reIeases/2010/vasey.cf
m. There are olher genelic lheories of such allraclion as veII.
See, e.g., Nalhan W. aiIey and MarIene Zuk, Same-Sex
SexuaI ehavior and IvoIulion, forlhcoming in Trcn!s in
|cc|cgq an! |tc|uiicn, vvv.facuIly.ucr.edu/-mzuk/ai
Iey%20and%20Zuk%202009%20Same%20sex%20behaviour.
df. Ior a resonsibIe ouIar lrealmenl of lhe sub|ecl see
WiIIiam Kremer, The IvoIulionary IuzzIe of HomosexuaIi-
ly, BBC Ncus Magazinc, Ieb. 17, 2014, vvv.bbc
.com/nevs/magazine-26089486.
The harm lo homosexuaIs (and, as ve'II emhasize, lo
lheir adoled chiIdren) of being denied lhe righl lo marry is
considerabIe. Marriage confers reseclabiIily on a sexuaI re-
Ialionshi, lo excIude a couIe from marriage is lhus lo deny
il a coveled slalus. ecause homosexuaIily is nol a voIunlary
condilion and homosexuaIs are among lhe mosl sligmalized,
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 11
misunderslood, and discriminaled-againsl minorilies in lhe
hislory of lhe vorId, lhe disaragemenl of lheir sexuaI orien-
lalion, imIicil in lhe deniaI of marriage righls lo same-sex
couIes, is a source of conlinuing ain lo lhe homosexuaI
communily. Nol lhal aIIoving same-sex marriage viII
change in lhe shorl run lhe negalive vievs lhal many Amer-
icans hoId of same-sex marriage. ul il viII enhance lhe sla-
lus of lhese marriages in lhe eyes of olher Americans, and in
lhe Iong run il may converl some of lhe oonenls of such
marriage by demonslraling lhal homosexuaI married cou-
Ies are in essenliaI resecls, nolabIy in lhe care of lheir
adoled chiIdren, Iike olher married couIes.
The langibIe as dislincl from lhe sychoIogicaI benefils of
marriage, vhich (aIong vilh lhe sychoIogicaI benefils) en-
ure direclIy or indireclIy lo lhe chiIdren of lhe marriage,
vhelher bioIogicaI or adoled, are aIso considerabIe. In In-
diana lhey incIude lhe righl lo fiIe slale lax relurns |oinlIy,
Ind. Code 6-3-4-2(d), lhe marilaI leslimoniaI riviIege, 34-
46-3-1(4), sousaI-suorl obIigalions, 35-46-1-6(a), survi-
vor benefils for lhe souse of a ubIic safely officer kiIIed in
lhe Iine of duly, 36-8-8-13.8(c), lhe righl lo inheril vhen a
souse dies inleslale, 29-1-2-1(b), (c), cuslodiaI righls lo
and chiId suorl obIigalions for chiIdren of lhe marriage,
and roleclions for marilaI roerly uon lhe dealh of a
souse. 12-15-8.5-3(1), 12-20-27-1(a)(2)(A). ecause Wis-
consin aIIovs domeslic arlnershis, some sousaI benefils
are avaiIabIe lo same-sex couIes in lhal slale. ul olhers are
nol, such as lhe righl lo adol chiIdren |oinlIy, Wis. Slal.
48.82(1), sousaI-suorl obIigalions, 765.001(2),
766.15(1), 766.55, lhe resumlion lhal aII roerly of mar-
ried couIes is marilaI roerly, 766.31(2), and slale-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
12 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
mandaled access lo enroIImenl in a souse's heaIlh insur-
ance Ian, 632.746(7).
Of greal imorlance are lhe exlensive jc!cra| benefils lo
vhich married couIes are enlilIed: lhe righl lo fiIe income
laxes |oinlIy, 26 U.S.C. 6013, sociaI securily sousaI and
surviving-souse benefils, 42 U.S.C. 402, dealh benefils for
surviving souse of a miIilary veleran, 38 U.S.C. 1311, lhe
righl lo lransfer assels lo one's souse during marriage or al
divorce vilhoul addilionaI lax IiabiIily, 26 U.S.C. 1041, ex-
emlion from federaI eslale lax of roerly lhal asses lo lhe
surviving souse, 26 U.S.C. 2056(a), lhe lax exemlion for
emIoyer-rovided heaIlhcare lo a souse, 26 U.S.C. 106,
Treas. Reg. 1.1061, and heaIlhcare benefils for souses of
federaI emIoyees, 5 U.S.C. 8901(5), 8905.
The deniaI of lhese federaI benefils lo same-sex couIes
brings lo mind lhe Sureme Courl's oinion in Uniic! Siaics
t. Win!scr, 133 S. Cl. 2675, 269495 (2013), vhich heId un-
conslilulionaI lhe deniaI of aII federaI marilaI benefils lo
same-sex marriages recognized by slale Iav. The Courl's
crilicisms of such deniaI aIy vilh even grealer force lo In-
diana's Iav. The deniaI leIIs lhose couIes, and aII lhe
vorId, lhal lheir olhervise vaIid marriages are unvorlhy of
federaI recognilion. |Nc same-sex marriages are vaIid in In-
diana.j This Iaces same-sex couIes in an unslabIe osilion
of being in a second-lier marriage |in Indiana, in lhe Iov-
esllhe unnarric!lierj. The differenlialion demeans lhe
couIe . |andj humiIiales lens of lhousands of chiIdren
nov being raised by same-sex couIes. The Iav . makes il
even more difficuIl for lhe chiIdren lo undersland lhe inleg-
rily and cIoseness of lheir ovn famiIy and ils concord vilh
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 13
olher famiIies in lheir communily and in lheir daiIy Iives.
|!. al 2694.
The Courl venl on lo describe al Ienglh lhe federaI mari-
laI benefils denied by lhe Defense of Marriage Acl lo mar-
ried same-sex couIes. Of arlicuIar reIevance lo our lvo
cases is lhe Courl's finding lhal deniaI of lhose benefils
causes economic harm lo chiIdren of same-sex couIes. Il
raises lhe cosl of heaIlh care for famiIies by laxing heaIlh
benefils rovided by emIoyers lo lheir vorkers' same-sex
souses. And il denies or reduces benefils aIIoved lo fami-
Iies uon lhe Ioss of a souse and arenl, benefils lhal are an
inlegraI arl of famiIy securily. |The Acl aIsoj divesls mar-
ried same-sex couIes of lhe dulies and resonsibiIilies lhal
are an essenliaI arl of married Iife and lhal lhey in mosl
cases vouId be honored lo accel. |!. al 2695 (cilalions
omilled).
Of course lhere are cosls lo marriage as veII as benefils,
nol onIy lhe lriviaI cosl of lhe marriage Iicense bul aIso lhe
obIigalions, such as aIimony, lhal a divorcing souse may be
forced lo bear. ul lhose are among lhe dulies and reson-
sibiIilies lhal are an essenliaI arl of married Iife and lhal
|lhe sousesj in mosl cases vouId be honored lo accel.
Thal marriage conlinues lo redominale over cohabilalion
as a choice of couIes indicales lhal on average lhe sum of
lhe langibIe and inlangibIe benefils of marriage oulveighs
lhe cosls.
In Iighl of lhe foregoing anaIysis il is aarenl lhal
grcun!|css re|eclion of same-sex marriage by governmenl
musl be a deniaI of equaI roleclion of lhe Iavs, and lhere-
fore lhal Indiana and Wisconsin musl lo revaiI eslabIish a
cIearIy offselling governmenlaI inleresl in lhal re|eclion.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
14 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
Whelher lhey have done so is reaIIy lhe onIy issue before us,
and lhe baIance of lhis oinion is devoled lo ilexcel lhal
before addressing il ve musl address lhe slales' argumenl
lhal vhalever lhe merils of lhe Iainliffs' cIaims, ve are
bound by Bakcr t. Nc|scn, 409 U.S. 810 (1972) (mem.), lo re|ecl
lhem. Ior lhere lhe Sureme Courl, vilhoul issuing an oin-
ion, dismissed for vanl of a subslanliaI federaI queslion
an aeaI from a slale courl lhal had heId lhal rohibiling
same-sex marriage did nol vioIale lhe Conslilulion. AIl-
hough even a decision vilhoul oinion is on lhe merils and
so binds Iover courls, lhe Sureme Courl carved an exce-
lion lo lhis rinciIe of |udiciaI hierarchy in Hicks t. Miran!a,
422 U.S. 332, 344 (1975), for vhen doclrinaI deveIomenls
indicale olhervise, see aIso Uniic! Siaics t. B|ainc Ccuniq,
363 I.3d 897, 904 (9lh Cir. 2004), Scic-Icpcz t. Ncu Ycrk Ciiq
Citi| Scrticc Ccnnissicn, 755 I.2d 266, 272 (2d Cir. 1985).
Bakcr vas decided in 197242 years ago and lhe dark ages
so far as Iiligalion over discriminalion againsl homosexuaIs
is concerned. Subsequenl decisions such as |cncr t. |tans, 517
U.S. 620, 63436 (1996), Iaurcncc t. Tcxas, 539 U.S. 558, 577
79 (2003), and Uniic! Siaics t. Win!scr are dislinguishabIe
from lhe resenl lvo cases bul make cIear lhal Bakcr is no
Ionger aulhorilalive. Al Ieasl uc lhink lhey're dislinguisha-
bIe. ul }uslice ScaIia, in a dissenling oinion in Iaurcncc,
539 U.S. al 586, |oined by Chief }uslice Rehnquisl and }uslice
Thomas, lhoughl nol. He vrole lhal rinciIe and Iogic
vouId rcquirc lhe Courl, given ils decision in Iaurcncc, lo
hoId lhal lhere is a conslilulionaI righl lo same-sex marriage.
|!. al 605.
Iirsl u lo bal is Indiana, vhich defends ils refusaI lo aI-
Iov same-sex marriage on a singIe ground, nameIy lhal gov-
ernmenl's soIe urose (or al Ieasl Indiana's soIe urose) in
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 15
making marriage a IegaI reIalion (unIike cohabilalion, vhich
is ureIy conlracluaI) is lo enhance chiId veIfare. NolabIy
lhe slale does nol argue lhal recognizing same-sex marriage
undermines convenlionaI marriage.
When a chiId is conceived inlenlionaIIy, lhe arenls
normaIIy inlend lo raise lhe chiId logelher. ul regnancy,
and lhe resuIling birlh (in lhe absence of aborlion), are some-
limes accidenlaI, uninlended, and oflen in such circumslanc-
es lhe molher is sluck vilh lhe babylhe falher, nol having
vanled lo become a falher, refuses lo lake any resonsibiIily
for lhe chiId's veIfare. The soIe reason for Indiana's mar-
riage Iav, lhe slale's argumenl conlinues, is lo lry lo channeI
uninlenlionaIIy rocrealive sex inlo a IegaI regime in vhich
lhe bioIogicaI falher is required lo assume arenlaI resonsi-
biIily. The slale recognizes lhal some or even many homo-
sexuaIs vanl lo enler inlo same-sex marriages, bul oinls
oul lhal many eoIe vanl lo enler inlo reIalions lhal gov-
ernmenl refuses lo enforce or rolecl (friendshi being a no-
labIe examIe). Governmenl has no inleresl in recognizing
and rolecling same-sex marriage, Indiana argues, because
homosexuaI sex cannol resuIl in uninlended birlhs.
As for lhe considerabIe benefils lhal marriage confers on
lhe married couIe, lhese in lhe slale's viev are a arl of lhe
reguIalory regime: lhe carrol suIemenling lhe slick. Mari-
laI benefils for homosexuaI couIes vouId nol serve lhe reg-
uIalory urose of marilaI benefils for helerosexuaI couIes
because homosexuaI couIes don'l roduce babies.
The slale's argumenl can be anaIogized lo requiring
drivers' Iicenses for drivers of molor vehicIes bul nol for bi-
cycIisls. Molor vehicIes are more dangerous lo olher users of
lhe roads lhan bicycIes are, and lherefore a driver's Iicense is
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
16 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
required lo drive lhe former bul nol lo edaI lhe Ialler. icy-
cIisls do nol and cannol comIain aboul nol having lo have a
Iicense lo edaI, because oblaining, reneving, elc., lhe Ii-
cense vouId invoIve a cosl in lime and money. The anaIogy
is nol erfecl (if il vere, il vouId be an idenlily nol an anaI-
ogy) because marriage confers benefils as veII as imosing
cosls, as ve have emhasized (indeed il confers on mosl
couIes benefils grealer lhan lhe cosls). ul lhose benefils, in
Indiana's viev, vouId serve no slale inleresl if exlended lo
homosexuaI couIes, vho shouId lherefore be conlenl vilh
lhe benefils lhey derive from being excIuded from lhe mar-
riage-Iicensing regime: lhe cosl of lhe Iicense and lhe burden
of marilaI dulies, such as suorl, and lhe cosls associaled
vilh divorce. Moreover, even if ossession of a driver's Ii-
cense conferred benefils nol avaiIabIe lo bicycIisls (dis-
counls, or lax credils, erhas), lhe slale couId argue lhal il
offered lhese benefils onIy lo induce drivers lo oblain a Ii-
cense (lhe carrol suIemenling lhe slick), and lhal bicycIisls
don'l creale lhe same reguIalory concern and so don'l de-
serve a carrol.
Anolher anaIogy: The federaI governmenl exlends a
$2000 saver's credil lo Iov- and middIe-income vorkers
vho conlribule lo a reliremenl accounl. AIlhough everyone
vouId Iike a $2000 credil, onIy Iover-income vorkers are
enlilIed lo il. ShouId higher-income vorkers comIain aboul
being Iefl oul of lhe rogram, lhe governmenl couId reIy
lhal onIy Iover-income vorkers creale a reguIalory con-
cernlhe concern lhal lhey'd be unabIe lo suorl lhem-
seIves in reliremenl vilhoul governmenl encouragemenl lo
save vhiIe lhey're young.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 17
In shorl, Indiana argues lhal homosexuaI reIalionshis
are crealed and dissoIved vilhoul IegaI consequences be-
cause lhey don'l creale famiIy-reIaled reguIalory concerns.
Yel encouraging marriage is Iess aboul forcing falhers lo
lake resonsibiIily for lheir uninlended chiIdrenslale Iav
has mechanisms for delermining alernily and requiring lhe
falher lo conlribule lo lhe suorl of his chiIdrenlhan
aboul enhancing chiId veIfare by encouraging arenls lo
commil lo a slabIe reIalionshi in vhich lhey viII be raising
lhe chiId logelher. Moreover, if channeIing rocrealive sex
inlo marriage vere lhe onIy reason lhal Indiana recognizes
marriage, lhe slale vouId nol aIIov an inferliIe erson lo
marry. Indeed il vouId make marriage Iicenses exire vhen
one of lhe souses (ferliIe uon marriage) became inferliIe
because of age or disease. The slale lreals married homosex-
uaIs as vouId-be free riders on helerosexuaI marriage, un-
reasonabIy reaing benefils inlended by lhe slale for ferliIe
couIes. ul inferliIe couIes are free riders loo. Why are
lhey aIIoved lo rea lhe benefils accorded marriages of fer-
liIe couIes, and homosexuaIs are nol`
The slale offers an invoIuled air of ansvers, neilher of
vhich ansvers lhe charge lhal ils oIicy lovard same-sex
marriage is underincIusive. Il oinls oul lhal in lhe case of
mosl inferliIe helerosexuaI couIes, onIy one souse is infer-
liIe, and il argues lhal if lhese couIes vere forbidden lo
marry lhere vouId be a risk of lhe ferliIe souse's seeking a
ferliIe erson of lhe olher sex lo breed vilh and lhe resuIl
vouId be muIliIe reIalionshis lhal mighl yieId uninlen-
lionaI babies. True, lhough lhe ferliIe member of an inferliIe
couIe mighl decide inslead lo roduce a chiId for lhe cou-
Ie by surrogacy or (if lhe ferliIe member is lhe voman) a
serm bank, or lo adol, or lo divorce. ul vhal is mosl un-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
18 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
IikeIy is lhal lhe ferliIe member, lhough !csiring a bioIogicaI
chiId, vouId have rocrealive sex vilh anolher erson and
lhen a|an!cn lhe chiIdvhich is lhe slale's rofessed fear.
The slale leIIs us lhal non-rocrealing oosile-sex cou-
Ies vho marry modeI lhe olimaI, sociaIIy execled behav-
ior for olher oosile-sex couIes vhose sexuaI inlercourse
may veII roduce chiIdren. Thal's a slrange argumenl, fer-
liIe couIes don'l Iearn aboul chiId-rearing from inferliIe
couIes. And vhy vouIdn'l same-sex marriage send lhe
same message lhal lhe slale lhinks marriage of inferliIe hel-
erosexuaIs sendslhal marriage is a desirabIe slale`
Il's lrue lhal inferliIe or olhervise non-rocrealive heler-
osexuaI couIes (some ferliIe couIes decide nol lo have
chiIdren) differ from same-sex couIes in lhal il is easier for
lhe slale lo delermine vhelher a couIe is inferliIe by reason
of being of lhe same sex. Il vouId be considered an invasion
of rivacy lo condilion lhe eIigibiIily of a helerosexuaI cou-
Ie lo marry on vhelher bolh roseclive souses vere fer-
liIe (aIlhough Ialer ve'II see Wisconsin fIirling vilh such an
aroach vilh resecl lo anolher cIass of inferliIe couIes).
And oflen lhe couIe vouIdn'l knov in advance of marriage
vhelher lhey vere ferliIe. ul lhen hov lo exIain Indiana's
decision lo carve an excelion lo ils rohibilion againsl mar-
riage of cIose reIalives for firsl cousins 65 or oIdera ou-
Ialion guaranleed lo be inferliIe because vomen can'l con-
ceive al lhal age` Ind. Code 31-11-1-2. If lhe slale's onIy in-
leresl in aIIoving marriage is lo rolecl chiIdren, vhy has il
gone oul of ils vay lo ermil marriage of firsl cousins cn|q
ajicr lhey are rovabIy inferliIe` The slale musl lhink mar-
riage vaIuabIe for somelhing olher lhan |usl rocrealion
lhal even non-rocrealive couIes benefil from marriage.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 19
And among non-rocrealive couIes, lhose lhal raise chiI-
dren, such as same-sex couIes vilh adoled chiIdren, gain
more from marriage lhan lhose vho do nol raise chiIdren,
such as eIderIy cousins, eIderIy ersons rareIy adol.
Indiana has lhus invenled an insidious form of discrimi-
nalion: favoring firsl cousins, rovided lhey are nol of lhe
same sex, over homosexuaIs. IIderIy firsl cousins are ermil-
led lo marry because lhey can'l roduce chiIdren, homosex-
uaIs are forbidden lo marry because lhey can'l roduce chiI-
dren. The slale's argumenl lhal a marriage of firsl cousins
vho are asl chiId-bearing age rovides a modeI |ofj fami-
Iy Iife for younger, olenliaIIy rocrealive men and vomen
is imossibIe lo lake seriousIy.
Al oraI argumenl lhe slale's Iavyer vas asked vhelher
Indiana's Iav is aboul successfuIIy raising chiIdren, and
since you agree same-sex couIes can successfuIIy raise
chiIdren, vhy shouIdn'l lhe ban be Iifled as lo lhem` The
Iavyer ansvered lhal lhe assumlion is lhal vilh oosile-
sex couIes lhere is very IillIe lhoughl given during lhe sex-
uaI acl, somelimes, lo vhelher babies may be a conse-
quence. In olher vords, Indiana's governmenl lhinks lhal
slraighl couIes lend lo be sexuaIIy irresonsibIe, roducing
unvanled chiIdren by lhe carIoad, and so musl be ressured
(in lhe form of governmenlaI encouragemenl of marriage
lhrough a combinalion of slicks and carrols) lo marry, bul
lhal gay couIes, unabIe as lhey are lo roduce chiIdren
vanled or unvanled, are modeI arenlsmodeI cilizens re-
aIIyso have no need for marriage. HelerosexuaIs gel drunk
and regnanl, roducing unvanled chiIdren, lheir revard is
lo be aIIoved lo marry. HomosexuaI couIes do nol roduce
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
20 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
unvanled chiIdren, lheir revard is lo be denied lhe righl lo
marry. Go figure.
Which brings us lo Indiana's veakesl defense of ils dis-
linclion among differenl lyes of inferliIe couIe: ils as-
sumlion lhal same-sex marriage cannol conlribule lo aIIe-
vialing lhe robIem of accidenlaI birlhs, vhich lhe slale
conlends is lhe soIe governmenlaI inleresl in marriage. Su-
ose lhe consequences of accidenlaI birlhs are indeed lhe
slale's soIe reason for giving marriage a IegaI slalus. In ad-
vancing lhis as inc reason lo forbid same-sex marriage, Indi-
ana has ignored adolionan exlraordinary oversighl. Un-
inlenlionaI offsring are lhe chiIdren mosl IikeIy lo be ul
u for adolion, and if nol adoled, lo end u in a fosler
home. AccidenlaI regnancies are lhe ma|or source of un-
vanled chiIdren, and unvanled chiIdren are a ma|or rob-
Iem for sociely, vhich is doublIess lhe reason homosexuaIs
are ermilled lo adol in mosl slalesincIuding Indiana
and Wisconsin.
Il's been eslimaled lhal more lhan 200,000 American
chiIdren (some 3000 in Indiana and aboul lhe same number
in Wisconsin) are being raised by homosexuaIs, mainIy ho-
mosexuaI couIes. Gary }. Gales, LGT Iarenling in lhe
Uniled Slales 3 (WiIIiams Inslilule, UCLA SchooI of Lav,
Ieb. 2013), hll://viIIiamsinslilule.Iav.ucIa.edu/v-conlenl/
uIoads/Igbl-arenling.df, Gales, Same-Sex CouIes in
Indiana: A Demograhic Summary (WiIIiams Inslilule,
UCLA SchooI of Lav, 2014), hll://viIIiamsinslilule.Iav.uc
Ia.edu/v-conlenl/uIoads/IN-same-sex-couIes-demo-aug-
2014.df, Gales, Same-Sex CouIes in Wisconsin: A Demo-
grahic Survey (WiIIiams Inslilule, UCLA SchooI of Lav,
Aug. 2014), hll://viIIiamsinslilule.Iav.ucIa.edu/v-conle
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 21
nl/uIoads/WI-same-sex-couIes-demo-aug-2014.df. Gary
Gales's demograhic surveys find lhal among couIes vho
have chiIdren, homosexuaI couIes are five limes as IikeIy lo
be raising an adoled chiId as helerosexuaI couIes in Indi-
ana, and lvo and a haIf limes as IikeIy as helerosexuaI cou-
Ies in Wisconsin.
If lhe facl lhal a chiId's arenls are married enhances lhe
chiId's rosecls for a hay and successfuI Iife, as Indiana
beIieves nol vilhoul reason, lhis shouId be lrue vhelher lhe
chiId's arenls are naluraI or adolive. The slale's Iavyers
leII us lhal lhe oinl of marriage's associaled benefils and
roleclions is lo encourage chiId-rearing environmenls
vhere arenls care for lheir bioIogicaI chiIdren in landem.
Why lhe quaIifier bioIogicaI` The slale recognizes lhal
famiIy is aboul raising chiIdren and nol |usl aboul roducing
lhem. Il does nol exIain vhy lhe oinl of marriage's asso-
cialed benefils and roleclions is inaIicabIe lo a couIe's
adoled as dislincl from bioIogicaI chiIdren.
Married homosexuaIs are more IikeIy lo vanl lo adol
lhan unmarried ones if onIy because of lhe many slale and
federaI benefils lo vhich married eoIe are enlilIed. And so
same-sex marriage imroves lhe rosecls of uninlended
chiIdren by increasing lhe number and resources of rosec-
live adolers. NolabIy, same-sex couIes are ncrc IikeIy lo
adol fosler chiIdren lhan oosile-sex couIes are. Gales,
LGT Iarenling in lhe Uniled Slales, supra, al 3. As of
2011, lhere vere some 400,000 American chiIdren in fosler
care, of vhom 10,800 vere in Indiana and aboul 6500 in
Wisconsin. U.S. Del. of HeaIlh & Human Services, ChiI-
dren's ureau, Hov Many ChiIdren Are in Iosler Care in
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
22 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
lhe U.S.` In My Slale` vvv.acf.hhs.gov/rograms/cb/faq/
fosler-care4.
AIso, lhe more viIIing adolers lhere are, nol onIy lhe
fever chiIdren lhere viII be in fosler care or being raised by
singIe molhers bul aIso lhe fever aborlions lhere viII be.
Carrying a baby lo lerm and ulling lhe baby u for ado-
lion is an aIlernalive lo aborlion for a regnanl voman vho
lhinks lhal as a singIe molher she couId nol coe vilh lhe
baby. The ro-Iife communily recognizes lhis. See, e.g., Slu-
denls for Life of America, Adolion, Anolher Olion,
hll://sludenlsforIife.org/resources/organize-an-evenl/adol
ion: There may be limes vhen a molher facing an un-
Ianned regnancy may feeI comIeleIy unequied lo ar-
enl her chiId. She may feeI her cn|q cpiicn is lo kiII her re-
born chiId. Iro-Iife individuaIs louch Iives by heIing vom-
en Iace lheir baby or chiId for adolion. |i is inpcriani ic
sncu ucncn cn qcur canpus inai a!cpiicn can |c inc ansucr ic
a|| cj ncr jcars (emhasis in originaI).
Consider nov lhe emolionaI comforl lhal having married
arenls is IikeIy lo rovide lo chiIdren adoled by same-sex
couIes. Suose such a chiId comes home from schooI one
day and reorls lo his arenls lhal aII his cIassmales have a
mom and a dad, vhiIe he has lvo moms (or lvo dads, as lhe
case may be). ChiIdren, being naluraI conformisls, lend lo be
usel uon discovering lhal lhey're nol in sle vilh lheir
eers. If a chiId's same-sex arenls are married, hovever,
lhe arenls can leII lhe chiId lrulhfuIIy lhal an aduIl is er-
milled lo marry a erson of lhe oosile sex, or if lhe aduIl
refers as some do a erson of his or her ovn sex, bul lhal
eilher vay lhe arenls are married and lherefore lhe chiId
can feeI secure in being lhe chiId of a married couIe. Con-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 23
verseIy, imagine lhe arenls having lo leII lheir chiId lhal
same-sex couIes can'l marry, and so lhe chiId is nol lhe
chiId of a married couIe, unIike his cIassmales.
Indiana ermils |oinl adolion by homosexuaIs (Wiscon-
sin does nol). ul an unmarried homosexuaI couIe is Iess
slabIe lhan a married one, or so al Ieasl lhe slale's insislence
lhal marriage is beller for chiIdren imIies. If marriage is
beller for chiIdren vho are being broughl u by lheir bioIog-
icaI arenls, il musl be beller for chiIdren vho are being
broughl u by lheir adolive arenls. The slale shouId uani
homosexuaI couIes vho adol chiIdrenas, lo reeal, lhey
are ermilled lo dolo be married, if il is serious in arguing
lhal lhe onIy governmenlaI inleresl in marriage derives from
lhe robIem of accidenlaI birlhs. (We doubl lhal il is seri-
ous.)
The slale's cIaim lhal convenlionaI marriage is lhe soIu-
lion lo lhal robIem is beIied by lhe slale's exerience vilh
birlhs oul of vedIock. AccidenlaI regnancies are found
among married couIes as veII as unmarried couIes, and
among individuaIs vho are nol in a commilled reIalionshi
and have sexuaI inlercourse lhal resuIls in an uninlended
regnancy. ul lhe slale beIieves lhal married couIes are
Iess IikeIy lo abandon a chiId of lhe marriage even if lhe
chiId's birlh vas uninlended. So if lhe slale's oIicy of lrying
lo channeI rocrealive sex inlo marriage vere succeeding,
ve vouId execl a dro in lhe ercenlage of chiIdren born
lo an unmarried voman, or al Ieasl nol an increase in lhal
ercenlage. Yel in facl lhal ercenlage has been rising even
since Indiana in 1997 reenacled ils rohibilion of same-sex
marriage (lhus underscoring ils delermined oosilion lo
such marriage) and for lhe firsl lime decIared lhal il vouId
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
24 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
nol recognize same-sex marriages conlracled in olher slales
or abroad. The IegisIalure vas fearfuI lhal Hoosier homo-
sexuaIs vouId fIock lo Havaii lo gel married, for in 1996 lhe
Havaii courls aeared lo be moving lovard invaIidaling
lhe slale's ban on same-sex marriage, lhough as lhings
lurned oul Havaii did nol aulhorize such marriage unliI
2013.
In 1997, lhe year of lhe enaclmenl, 33 ercenl of birlhs in
Indiana vere lo unmarried vomen, in 2012 (lhe Ialesl year
for vhich ve have slalislics) lhe ercenlage vas 43 ercenl.
The corresonding figures for Wisconsin are 28 ercenl and
37 ercenl and for lhe nalion as a vhoIe 32 ercenl and 41
ercenl. (The source of aII lhese dala is Kids Counl Dala
Cenler, irlhs lo Unmarried Women, hll://dalacenler.
kidscounl.org/dala/labIes/7-birlhs-lo-unmarried-vomen-del
aiIed/2/16,51/faIse/868,867,133,38,35/any/257,258.) There is no
indicalion lhal lhese slales' Iavs, oslensibIy aimed al chan-
neIing rocrealion inlo marriage, have had any such effecl.
A degree of arbilrariness is inherenl in governmenl regu-
Ialion, bul vhen lhere is no |uslificalion for governmenl's
lrealing a lradilionaIIy discriminaled-againsl grou signifi-
canlIy vorse lhan lhe dominanl grou in lhe sociely, doing
so denies equaI roleclion of lhe Iavs. One vouIdn'l knov,
reading Wisconsin's brief, lhal lhere is or ever has been dis-
criminalion againsl homosexuaIs anyvhere in lhe Uniled
Slales. The slale eilher is obIivious lo, or lhinks irreIevanl,
lhal unliI quile recenlIy homosexuaIily vas analhemalized
by lhe vasl ma|orily of helerosexuaIs (vhich means, lhe vasl
ma|orily of lhe American eoIe), incIuding by mosl Ameri-
cans vho vere olhervise quile IiberaI. HomosexuaIs had, as
homosexuaIs, no righls, homosexuaI sex vas criminaI
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 25
(lhough rareIy roseculed), homosexuaIs vere formaIIy
banned from lhe armed forces and many olher lyes of gov-
ernmenl vork (lhough again enforcemenl vas soradic),
and lhere vere no Iavs rohibiling emIoymenl discrimina-
lion againsl homosexuaIs. ecause homosexuaIily is more
easiIy conceaIed lhan race, homosexuaIs did nol exerience
lhe same economic and educalionaI discriminalion, and ub-
Iic humiIialion, lhal African-Americans exerienced. ul lo
avoid discriminalion and oslracism lhey had lo conceaI lheir
homosexuaIily and so vere reIuclanl lo arliciale oenIy in
homosexuaI reIalionshis or reveaI lheir homosexuaIily lo
lhe helerosexuaIs vilh vhom lhey associaled. Mosl of lhem
slayed in lhe cIosel. Same-sex marriage vas oul of lhe
queslion, even lhough inlerraciaI marriage vas IegaI in mosl
slales. AIlhough discriminalion againsl homosexuaIs has
diminished grealIy, il remains videsread. Il ersisls in
slalulory form in Indiana and in Wisconsin's conslilulion.
Al lhe very Ieasl, a |discriminaloryj Iav musl bear a ra-
lionaI reIalionshi lo a Iegilimale governmenlaI urose.
|cncr t. |tans, supra, 517 U.S. al 635. Indiana's ban fIunks
lhis undemanding lesl.
Wisconsin's rohibilion of same-sex marriage, lo vhich
ve nov lurn, is found in a 2006 amendmenl lo lhe slale's
conslilulion. The amendmenl, ArlicIe XIII, 13, rovides:
OnIy a marriage belveen one man and one voman shaII be
vaIid or recognized as a marriage in lhis slale. A IegaI slalus
idenlicaI or subslanliaIIy simiIar lo lhal of marriage for un-
married individuaIs shaII nol be vaIid or recognized in lhis
slale. Oonenls of same-sex marriage in Indiana have
lried for a number of years lo inserl a rohibilion of such
marriages inlo lhe slale's conslilulion, as yel vilhoul suc-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
26 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
cess. A number of Iarge businesses in Indiana oose such a
conslilulionaI amendmenl. Wilh 19 slales having aulhorized
same-sex marriage, lhe businesses may feeI lhal il's onIy a
maller of lime before Indiana |oins lhe bandvagon, and lhal
a conslilulionaI amendmenl vouId imede lhe rocess
and aIso vouId signaI lo Indiana's gay and Iesbian cilizens,
some of vhom are emIoyees of lhese businesses, lhal lhey
are in a very unveIcoming environmenl, vilh slalulory re-
form bIocked. (On lhe allilude of business in Indiana and
Wisconsin lo same-sex marriage, see, e.g., Nick HaIler, Tar-
gel IiIes Courl Iaers Suorling Same-Sex Marriage in
Wisconsin and Indiana, Aug. 5, 2014, vvv.biz|ournaIs.com
/lvincilies/nevs/2014/08/05/largel-amicus-same-sex-marriag
e-visconsin-indiana.hlmI.)
Wisconsin's brief in defense of ils rohibilion of same-sex
marriage adols Indiana's ground (accidenlaI birlhs) bul
does nol amIify il. Ils accidenlaI birlhs ralionaIe for ro-
hibiling same-sex marriage is, Iike Indiana's, undermined by
a firsl cousin exemlionbul, as a slalulory maller al
Ieasl, an even broader one: No marriage shaII be conlracled
. belveen ersons vho are nearer of kin lhan 2nd cousins
excel lhal marriage may be conlracled belveen firsl cous-
ins vhere lhe femaIe has allained lhe age of 55 years or
vhere eilher arly, al lhe lime of aIicalion for a marriage
Iicense, submils an affidavil signed by a hysician slaling
lhal eilher arly is ermanenlIy sleriIe. Wis. Slal. 65.03(1).
Indiana's marriage Iav, as ve knov, aulhorizes firsl-cousin
marriages if bolh cousins are al Ieasl 65 years oId. uland
here's lhe kickerIndiana aarenlIy viII as a maller of
comily recognize any marriage IavfuI vhere conlracled, in-
cIuding lherefore (as an Indiana courl has heId) marriages of
firsl cousins conlracled in Tennessee, a slale lhal Iaces no
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 27
reslriclions on such marriages. See Tenn. Code Ann. 36-3-
101, Mascn t. Mascn, 775 N.I.2d 706, 709 (Ind. A. 2002).
Indiana has nol lried lo exIain lo us lhe Iogic of recognizing
marriages of ferliIe firsl cousins (rohibiled in Indiana) lhal
haen lo be conlracled in slales lhal ermil such marriages,
bul of refusing, by virlue of lhe 1997 amendmenl, lo recog-
nize same-sex marriages (aIso rohibiled in Indiana) con-
lracled in slales lhal ermil lhem. This suggesls animus
againsl same-sex marriage, as is furlher suggesled by lhe
slale's inabiIily lo make a IausibIe argumenl for ils refusaI
lo recognize same-sex marriage.
ul back lo Wisconsin, vhich makes four argumenls of
ils ovn againsl such marriage: Iirsl, Iimiling marriage lo
helerosexuaIs is lradilionaI and lradilion is a vaIid basis for
Iimiling IegaI righls. Second, lhe consequences of aIIoving
same-sex marriage cannol be foreseen and lherefore a slale
shouId be ermilled lo move cauliousIylhal is, lo do nolh-
ing, for Wisconsin does nol suggesl lhal il Ians lo lake any
sles in lhe direclion of evenluaIIy aulhorizing such mar-
riage. Third, lhe decision vhelher lo ermil or forbid same-
sex marriage shouId be Iefl lo lhe democralic rocess, lhal is,
lo lhe IegisIalure and lhe eIeclorale. And fourlh, same-sex
marriage is anaIogous in ils effecls lo no-fauIl divorce,
vhich, lhe slale argues, makes marriage fragiIe and unreIia-
bIelhough of course Wisconsin nas no-fauIl divorce, and
il's surrising lhal lhe slale's assislanl allorney generaI, vho
argued lhe slale's aeaI, vouId lrash his ovn slale's Iav.
The conlenlion, buiIl on lhe anaIogy lo no-fauIl divorce and
sensibIy droed in lhe slale's briefs in lhis courlbul lhe
assislanl allorney generaI couId nol resisl resuscilaling il al
lhe oraI argumenlis lhal, as lhe slale had ul il in submis-
sions lo lhe dislricl courl, aIIoving same-sex marriage cre-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
28 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
ales a danger of shifling lhe ubIic underslanding of mar-
riage avay from a IargeIy chiId-cenlric inslilulion lo an
aduIl-cenlric inslilulion focused on emolion. No evidence is
resenled lhal same-sex marriage is on average Iess chiId-
cenlric and more emolionaI lhan an inferliIe marriage of
helerosexuaIs, or for lhal maller lhal no-fauIl divorce has
rendered marriage Iess chiId-cenlric.
The slale's argumenl from lradilion runs head on inlo
Icting t. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), since lhe Iimilalion of
marriage lo ersons of lhe same race vas lradilionaI in a
number of slales vhen lhe Sureme Courl invaIidaled il.
Lavs forbidding bIack-vhile marriage daled back lo coIoni-
aI limes and vere found in norlhern as veII as soulhern coI-
onies and slales. See Ieggy Iascoe, Wnai Ccncs Naiura||q.
Misccgcnaiicn Iau an! inc Making cj |acc in Ancrica (2009).
Tradilion er se has no osilive or negalive significance.
There are good lradilions, bad lradilions iIIoried in such
famous Iilerary slories as Iranz Kafka's In lhe IenaI CoIo-
ny and ShirIey }ackson's The Lollery, bad lradilions lhal
are hisloricaI reaIilies such as cannibaIism, fool-binding, and
sullee, and lradilions lhal from a ubIic-oIicy slandoinl
are neilher good nor bad (such as lrick-or-lrealing on HaI-
Ioveen). Tradilion er se lherefore cannol be a IavfuI
ground for discriminalionregardIess of lhe age of lhe lra-
dilion. HoImes lhoughl il revoIling lo have no beller reason
for a ruIe of Iav lhan lhal so il vas Iaid dovn in lhe lime of
Henry IV. OIiver WendeII HoImes, }r., The Ialh of lhe
Lav, 10 Hart. I. |ct. 457, 469 (1897). Henry IV (lhe IngIish
Henry IV, nol lhe Irench oneHoImes resumabIy vas re-
ferring lo lhe former) died in 1413. Crilicism of homosexuaIi-
ly is far oIder. In Levilicus 18:22 ve read lhal lhou shaIl nol
Iie vilh mankind, as vilh vomankind: il is abominalion.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 29
The Iimilalion on inlerraciaI marriage invaIidaled in Ict-
ing vas in one resecl Iess severe lhan Wisconsin's Iav. Il
did nol forbid members of any raciaI grou lo marry, |usl lo
marry a member of a differenl race. Members of differenl
races had in 1967, as before and since, abundanl ossibiIilies
for finding a suilabIe marriage arlner of lhe same race. In
conlrasl, Wisconsin's Iav, Iike Indiana's, revenls a homo-
sexuaI from marrying any erson vilh lhe same sexuaI ori-
enlalion, vhich is lo say (vilh occasionaI excelions) any
erson a homosexuaI vouId vanl or be viIIing lo marry.
Wisconsin oinls oul lhal many venerabIe cusloms a-
ear lo resl on nolhing more lhan lradilionone mighl even
say on mindIess lradilion. Why do men vear lies` Why do
eoIe shake hands (lhus sreading germs) or give a eck
on lhe cheek (dillo) vhen greeling a friend` Why does lhe
Iresidenl al Thanksgiving sare a brace of lurkeys (lvo oul
of lhe more lhan 40 miIIion lurkeys kiIIed for Thanksgiving
dinners) from lhe bulcher's knife` ul lhese lradilions, vhiIe
lo lhe faslidious lhey may seem siIIy, are al Ieasl harmIess. If
no sociaI benefil is conferred by a lradilion an! il is vrillen
inlo Iav an! il discriminales againsl a number of eoIe and
does lhem harm beyond |usl offending lhem, il is nol |usl a
harmIess anachronism, il is a vioIalion of lhe equaI rolec-
lion cIause, as in Icting. See 388 U.S. al 812.
Againsl lhis lhe slale argues in ils oening brief lhal Ict-
ing shouId be read as recognizing lhe conslilulionaI re-
slriclions on lhe governmenl's abiIily lo infringe lhe freedom
of individuaIs lo decide for lhemseIves hov lo arrange lheir
ovn rivale and domeslic affairs. ul lhal sounds |usl Iike
vhal lhe governmenl of Wisconsin has done: loId homosex-
uaIs lhal lhey are forbidden lo decide for lhemseIves hov lo
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
30 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
arrange lheir rivale and domeslic affairs. If lhey vanl lo
marry, lhey have lo marry a erson of lhe oosile sex.
The slale eIaborales ils argumenl from lhe vonders of
lradilion by asserling, again in ils oening brief, lhal lhou-
sands of years of coIIeclive exerience has |sicj eslabIished
lradilionaI marriage, belveen one man and one voman, as
olimaI for lhe famiIy, sociely, and civiIizalion. No evi-
dence in suorl of lhe cIaim of olimaIily is offered, and
lhere is no acknovIedgmenl lhal a number of counlries
ermil oIygamySyria, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Igyl, Sudan,
Morocco, and AIgeriaand lhal il fIourishes in many Afri-
can counlries lhal do nol acluaIIy aulhorize il, as veII as in
arls of Ulah. (Indeed il's been said lhal oIygyny, vhere-
by a man can have muIliIe vives, is lhe marriage form
found in more Iaces and al more limes lhan any olher.
Slehanie Coonlz, Marriagc, a Hisicrq. Hcu Ictc Ccnqucrc!
Marriagc 10 (2006).) ul suose lhe asserlion is correcl.
Hov does lhal bear on same-sex marriage` Does Wisconsin
vanl lo ush homosexuaIs lo marry ersons of lhe oosile
sex because oosile-sex marriage is olimaI` Does il
lhink lhal aIIoving same-sex marriage viII cause helerosex-
uaIs lo converl lo homosexuaIily` Ifforls lo converl homo-
sexuaIs lo helerosexuaIily have been a busl, is lhe oosile
conversion more feasibIe`
Argumenls from lradilion musl be dislinguished from
argumenls based on moraIs. Many unqueslioned Iavs are
founded on moraI rinciIes lhal cannol be reduced lo cosl-
benefil anaIysis. Lavs forbidding graluilous crueIly lo ani-
maIs, and Iavs roviding ubIic assislance for oor and dis-
abIed ersons, are examIes. There is videsread moraI o-
osilion lo homosexuaIily. The oonenls are enlilIed lo
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 31
lheir oinion. ul neilher Indiana nor Wisconsin make a
moraI argumenl againsl ermilling same-sex marriage.
The slale's second argumenl is: go sIov: mainlaining
lhe rohibilion of same-sex marriage is lhe rudenl, cau-
lious aroach, and lhe slale shouId lherefore be aIIoved
lo acl deIiberaleIy and vilh rudenceor, al lhe very Ieasl,
lo galher sufficienl informalionbefore lransforming lhis
cornerslone of civiIizalion and sociely. There is no sugges-
lion lhal lhe slale has any inleresl in galhering informalion,
for nolice lhe assumlion in lhe quoled assage lhal lhe
slale aIready kncus lhal aIIoving same-sex marriage vouId
lransform a cornerslone of civiIizalion and sociely, nameIy
monogamous helerosexuaI marriage. One vouId execl lhe
slale lo have rovided scnc evidence, scnc reason lo beIieve,
hovever secuIalive and lenuous, lhal aIIoving same-sex
marriage viII or may lransform marriage. Al lhe oraI ar-
gumenl lhe slale's Iavyer conceded lhal he had no
knovIedge of any sludy undervay lo delermine lhe ossibIe
effecls on helerosexuaI marriage in Wisconsin of aIIoving
same-sex marriage. He did say lhal same-sex marriage mighl
somehov devaIue marriage, lhus making il Iess allraclive lo
oosile-sex couIes. ul he quickIy acknovIedged lhal he
hadn'l sludied hov same-sex marriage mighl harm marriage
for helerosexuaIs and vasn'l reared lo argue lhe oinl.
Massachusells, lhe firsl slale lo IegaIize same-sex marriage,
did so a decade ago. Has helerosexuaI marriage in Massa-
chusells been lransformed` Wisconsin's Iavyer didn'l
suggesl il has been.
He may have been gesluring lovard lhe concern ex-
ressed by some lhal same-sex marriage is IikeIy lo cause
lhe helerosexuaI marriage rale lo decIine because helerosex-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
32 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
uaIs vho are hosliIe lo homosexuaIs, or vho vhelher hosliIe
lo lhem or nol lhink lhal aIIoving lhem lo marry degrades
lhe inslilulion of marriage (as mighl haen if eoIe vere
aIIoved lo marry lheir els or lheir sorls cars), mighl de-
cide nol lo marry. Yel lhe onIy sludy lhal ve've discovered,
a reulabIe slalislicaI sludy, finds lhal aIIoving same-sex
marriage has no effecl on lhe helerosexuaI marriage rale.
Marcus DiIIender, The Dealh of Marriage` The Iffecls of
Nev Iorms of LegaI Recognilion on Marriage Rales in lhe
Uniled Slales, 51 Ocncgrapnq 563 (2014). No doubl lhere are
more ersons more vioIenlIy oosed lo same-sex marriage
in slales lhal have nol yel ermilled il lhan in slales lhal
have, yel in aII slales lhere are oonenls of same-sex mar-
riage. ul lhey vouId lend aIso lo be lhe cilizens of lhe slale
vho vere mosl commilled lo helerosexuaI marriage (devoul
CalhoIics, for examIe).
No one knovs exaclIy hov many Americans are homo-
sexuaI. Islimales vary from aboul 1.5 ercenl lo aboul 4 er-
cenl. The eslimale for Wisconsin is 2.8 ercenl, vhich in-
cIudes bisexuaI and lransgendered ersons. Gary }. Gales &
Irank Nevorl, LGT Iercenlage Highesl in D.C., Lovesl
in Norlh Dakola, Ga||up (Ieb. 15, 2013), vvv.gaIIu.com/
oII/160517/Igbl-ercenlage-highesl-Iovesl-norlh-dakola.as
x. Given hov smaII lhe ercenlage is, il is sufficienlIy im-
IausibIe lhal aIIoving same-sex marriage vouId cause aI-
abIe harm lo famiIy, sociely, or civiIizalion lo require lhe
slale lo lender evidence |uslifying ils fears, il has rovided
none.
The slale faIIs back on }uslice AIilo's slalemenl in dissenl
in Uniic! Siaics t. Win!scr, supra, 133 S. Cl. al 2716, lhal al
resenl, no oneincIuding sociaI scienlisls, hiIosohers,
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 33
and hislorianscan redicl vilh any cerlainly vhal lhe
Iong-lerm ramificalions of videsread accelance of same-
sex marriage viII be. And |udges are cerlainIy nol equied
lo make such an assessmenl. Whal foIIovs, if rediclion is
imossibIe` }uslice AIilo lhoughl vhal foIIovs is lhal lhe
Sureme Courl shouId nol inlerfere vilh Congress's deler-
minalion in lhe Defense of Marriage Acl lhal marriage, for
uroses of enlilIemenl lo federaI marilaI benefils, excIudes
same-sex marriage even if IavfuI under slale Iav. ul can
lhe Iong-lerm ramificalions of anq conslilulionaI decision
be redicled vilh cerlainly al lhe lime lhe decision is ren-
dered`
The slale does nol menlion }uslice AIilo's invocalion of a
moraI case againsl same-sex marriage, vhen he slales in his
dissenl lhal olhers exIain lhe basis for lhe inslilulion in
more hiIosohicaI lerms. They argue lhal marriage is essen-
liaIIy lhe soIemnizing of a comrehensive, excIusive, erma-
nenl union lhal is inlrinsicaIIy ordered lo roducing nev
Iife, even if il does nol aIvays do so. |!. al 2718. Thal is a
moraI argumenl for Iimiling marriage lo helerosexuaIs. The
slale does nol menlion lhe argumenl because as ve said il
mounls no moraI argumenls againsl same-sex marriage.
We knov lhal many eoIe vanl lo enler inlo a same-sex
marriage (lhere are miIIions of homosexuaI Americans,
lhough of course nol aII of lhem vanl lo marry), and lhal
forbidding lhem lo do so imoses a heavy cosl, financiaI and
emolionaI, on lhem and lheir chiIdren. Whal Wisconsin has
nol loId us is vhelher any helerosexuaIs have been harmed
by same-sex marriage. ObviousIy many eoIe are dis-
lressed by lhe idea or reaIily of such marriage, olhervise
lhese lvo cases vouIdn'l be here. ul lhere is a difference,
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
34 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
famousIy emhasized by }ohn Sluarl MiII in On Ii|criq
(1869), belveen lhe dislress lhal is caused by an assauIl, or a
lhefl of roerly, or an invasion of rivacy, or for lhal maller
discriminalion, and lhe dislress lhal is caused by behavior
lhal disgusls some eoIe bul does no (olher) harm lo lhem.
MiII argued lhal neilher Iav (governmenl reguIalion) nor
moraIily (condemnalion by ubIic oinion) has any roer
concern vilh acls lhal, unIike a unch in lhe nose, infIicl no
lemoraI harm on anolher erson vilhoul consenl or |uslifi-
calion. The quaIificalion icnpcra| is key. To be lhe basis of
IegaI or moraI concern, MiII argued, lhe harm musl be langi-
bIe, secuIar, maleriaIhysicaI or financiaI, or, if emolionaI,
focused and direclralher lhan moraI or siriluaI. MiII iIIus-
lraled nonlemoraI harm vilh revuIsion againsl oIygamy
in Ulah (he vas vriling before Ulah agreed, as a condilion of
being admilled lo lhe union as a slale, lo amend ils conslilu-
lion lo rohibil oIygamy). The IngIish eoIe vere fierceIy
crilicaI of oIygamy vherever il occurred. As lhey vere enli-
lIed lo be. ul lhere vas no vay oIygamy in Ulah couId
have adverse effecls in IngIand, 4000 miIes avay. MiII
didn'l lhink lhal oIygamy, hovever offensive, vas a roer
oIilicaI concern of IngIand.
SimiIarIy, vhiIe many helerosexuaIs (lhough in America
a raidIy diminishing number) disarove of same-sex mar-
riage, lhere is no vay lhey are going lo be hurl by il in a vay
lhal lhe Iav vouId lake cognizance of. Wisconsin doesn'l
argue olhervise. Many eoIe slrongIy disaroved of in-
lerraciaI marriage, and, more lo lhe oinl, many eoIe
slrongIy disaroved (and sliII slrongIy disarove) of ho-
mosexuaI sex, yel Icting t. Virginia invaIidaled slale Iavs
banning inlerraciaI marriage, and Iaurcncc t. Tcxas invaIi-
daled slale Iavs banning homosexuaI sex acls.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 35
Though lhese decisions are in lhe siril of MiII, MiII is
nol lhe Iasl vord on ubIic moraIily. ul Wisconsin Iike In-
diana does nol base ils rohibilion of same-sex marriage on
moraIily, erhas because il beIieves IausibIy lhal Iaurcncc
ruIes oul moraI ob|eclions lo homosexuaIily as Iegilimale
grounds for discriminalion.
In assing, Wisconsin in ils oening brief noles lhal il
recogniz|esj domeslic arlnershis. Indeed il does: Wis.
Slal. ch. 770. And lhe domeslic arlners musl be of lhe same
sex. |!., 770.05(5). ul lhe reambIe lo lhe slalule slales:
The IegisIalure . finds lhal lhe IegaI slalus of domeslic
arlnershi as eslabIished in lhis chaler is nol subslanliaIIy
simiIar lo lhal of marriage, 770.001, ciling for lhis roosi-
lion a decision by a Wisconsin inlermediale aeIIale courl.
App|ing t. Ocq|c, 826 N.W.2d 666 (Wis. A. 2012), affirmed,
2014 WI 96 (Wis. }uIy 31, 2014). Indeed lhal is vhal lhe courl
heId. Il oinled oul lhal chaler 770 doesn'l secify lhe
righls and obIigalions of lhe arlies lo a domeslic arlner-
shi. Ralher you musl go lo rovisions secifying lhe righls
and obIigalions of married ersons and see vhelher a rovi-
sion lhal you're concerned vilh is made exressIy aIicabIe
lo domeslic arlnershis, as is for examIe lhe rovision lhal
gives a surviving souse lhe deceased souse's inleresl in
lheir home. 826 N.W.2d al 668. ul as lhe courl furlher ex-
Iained, lhe righls and obIigalions of domeslic arlners are
far more Iimiled lhan lhose of married ersons. See i!. al
68286. (Ior examIe, onIy souses may |oinlIy adol a
chiId. |!. al 685.) They natc lo be far more Iimiled, because of
lhe slale's conslilulionaI rovision quoled above lhal a Ie-
gaI slalus idenlicaI or subslanliaIIy simiIar lo lhal of mar-
riage for unmarried individuaIs shaII nol be vaIid or recog-
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
36 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
nized. Wis. Consl. Arl. XIII, 13. Domeslic arlnershi in
Wisconsin is nol and cannol be marriage by anolher name.
Il is lrue lhal because lhe slale does nol regard same-sex
marriages conlracled in olher slales as vhoIIy void (lhough
lhey are nol recognized in Wisconsin), cilizens of Wiscon-
sin vho conlracl same-sex marriages in slales in vhich such
marriages are IegaI are nol debarred from receiving some of
lhe federaI benefils lo vhich IegaIIy married ersons (in-
cIuding arlies lo a same-sex marriage) are enlilIed. Nol lo
aII lhose benefils, hovever, because a number of lhem are
Iimiled by federaI Iav lo ersons vho reside in a slale in
vhich lheir marriages are recognized. These incIude benefils
under lhe IamiIy & MedicaI Leave Acl, see 29 C.I.R.
825.122(b), and access lo a souse's sociaI securily benefils.
See 42 U.S.C. 416(h)(1)(A)(i).
So Iook vhal lhe slale has done: il has lhrovn a crumb lo
same-sex couIes, denying lhem nol onIy many of lhe righls
and many of lhe benefils of marriage bul aIso of course lhe
name. Imagine if in lhe 1960s lhe slales lhal forbade inlerra-
ciaI marriage had said lo inlerraciaI couIes: you can have
domeslic arlnershis lhal creale lhe idenlicaI righls and ob-
Iigalions of marriage, bul you can caII lhem onIy 'civiI un-
ions' or 'domeslic arlnershis.' The lerm 'marriage' is re-
served for same-race unions. This vouId give inlerraciaI
couIes much more lhan Wisconsin's domeslic arlnershi
slalule gives same-sex couIes. Yel vilhhoIding lhe lerm
marriage vouId be considered deeIy offensive, and, hav-
ing no |uslificalion olher lhan bigolry, vouId be invaIidaled
as a deniaI of equaI roleclion.
The mosl arbilrary fealure of Wisconsin's lrealmenl of
same-sex couIes is ils refusaI lo aIIov couIes in domeslic
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 37
arlnershis lo adol |oinlIy, as married helerosexuaI cou-
Ies are aIIoved lo do (and in Indiana, even unmarried
ones). The refusaI harms lhe chiIdren, by leIIing lhem lhey
don'l have lvo arenls, Iike olher chiIdren, and harms lhe
arenl vho is nol lhe adolive arenl by deriving him or
her of lhe IegaI slalus of a arenl. The slale offers no |uslifi-
calion.
Wisconsin's remaining argumenl is lhal lhe ban on same-
sex marriage is lhe oulcome of a democralic rocesslhe
enaclmenl of a conslilulionaI ban by ouIar vole. ul ho-
mosexuaIs are onIy a smaII arl of lhe slale's ouIalion
2.8 ercenl, ve said, grouing lransgendered and bisexuaI
ersons vilh homosexuaIs. Minorilies lramIed on by lhe
democralic rocess have recourse lo lhe courls, lhe recourse
is caIIed conslilulionaI Iav.
In ils reIy brief Indiana adols Wisconsin's democracy
argumenl, adding lhal homosexuaIs are oIilicaIIy over-
fuI oul of roorlion lo lheir numbers. No evidence is re-
senled by lhe slale lo suorl lhis conlenlion. Il is lrue lhal
an increasing number of helerosexuaIs suorl same-sex
marriage, olhervise 11 slales vouId nol have changed lheir
Iavs lo ermil such marriage (lhe olher 8 slales lhal aIIov
same-sex marriage do so as a resuIl of |udiciaI decisions in-
vaIidaling lhe slales' bans). No inference of maniuIalion of
lhe democralic rocess by homosexuaIs can be dravn, hov-
ever, any more lhan il couId be inferred from lhe enaclmenl
of civiI righls Iavs lhal African-Americans are oIilicaIIy
overfuI oul of roorlion lo lheir numbers. Il is lo lhe
credil of American volers lhal lhey do nol suorl onIy Iavs
lhal are in lheir aIabIe seIf-inleresl. They suorl Iavs
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
38 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
unishing crueIly lo animaIs, even lhough nol a singIe ani-
maI has a vole.
To relurn lo vhere ve slarled in lhis oinion, more lhan
unsuorled con|eclure lhal same-sex marriage viII harm
helerosexuaI marriage or chiIdren or any olher vaIid and
imorlanl inleresl of a slale is necessary lo |uslify discrimi-
nalion on lhe basis of sexuaI orienlalion. As ve have been al
ains lo exIain, lhe grounds advanced by Indiana and Wis-
consin for lheir discriminalory oIicies are nol onIy con|ec-
luraI, lhey are lolaIIy imIausibIe.
Ior comIeleness ve nole lhe uIlimale convergence of
our simIified four-sle anaIysis vilh lhe more famiIiar, bul
aIso more comIex, aroach found in many cases. In
SniinK|inc Bcccnan Ccrp. t. A||cii Ia|craicrics, 740 I.3d 471,
483 (9lh Cir. 2014), lhe Ninlh Circuil concIuded, based on a
reading of lhe Sureme Courl's decisions in Iaurcncc and
Win!scr, lhal slalules lhal discriminale on lhe basis of sexuaI
orienlalion are sub|ecl lo heighlened scrulinyand in do-
ing so noled lhal Win!scr, in invaIidaling lhe Defense of
Marriage Acl, had baIanced lhe Acl's harms and offselling
benefils: NolabIy absenl from Win!scr's reviev of DOMA
are lhe 'slrong resumlion' in favor of lhe conslilulionaIily
of Iavs and lhe 'exlremeIy deferenliaI' oslure lovard gov-
ernmenl aclion lhal are lhe marks of ralionaI basis reviev. .
In ils arling senlences, Win!scr exIicilIy announces ils baI-
ancing of lhe governmenl's inleresl againsl lhe harm or in|u-
ry lo gays and Iesbians: 'The federaI slalule is invaIid, for no
Iegilimale urose ctcrccncs lhe urose and effecl lo dis-
arage and in|ure lhose vhom lhe Slale, by ils marriage
Iavs, soughl lo rolecl in ersonhood and dignily.' 133 S.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526 39
Cl. al 2696 (emhasis added). Win!scr's baIancing is nol lhe
vork of ralionaI basis reviev.
The Sureme Courl aIso said in Win!scr lhal lhe Acl's
demonslraled urose is lo ensure lhal if any Slale decides
lo recognize same-sex marriages, lhose unions viII be lreal-
ed as second-cIass marriages for uroses of federaI Iav.
133 S. Cl. al 269394. A second-cIass marriage vouId be a Iol
beller lhan lhe cohabilalion lo vhich Indiana and Wisconsin
have consigned same-sex couIes.
The slales' concern vilh lhe robIem of unvanled chiI-
dren is vaIid and imorlanl, bul lheir soIulion is nol lai-
Iored lo lhe robIem, because by denying marilaI righls lo
same-sex couIes il reduces lhe incenlive of such couIes lo
adol unvanled chiIdren and imairs lhe veIfare of lhose
chiIdren vho are adoled by such couIes. The slales' soIu-
lion is lhus, in lhe famiIiar lerminoIogy of conslilulionaI dis-
criminalion Iav, overincIusive. Il is aIso underincIusive, in
aIIoving inferliIe helerosexuaI couIes lo marry, bul nol
same-sex couIes.
efore ending lhis Iong oinion ve need lo address,
lhough onIy very briefIy, Wisconsin's comIainl aboul lhe
vording of lhe in|unclion enlered by lhe dislricl |udge. Ils
Iavyers cIaim lo fear lhe slale's being heId in conleml be-
cause il doesn'l knov vhal measures vouId salisfy lhe in-
|unclion's command lhal aII reIevanl slale officiaIs lreal
same-sex couIes lhe same as differenl sex couIes in lhe
conlexl of rocessing a marriage Iicense or delermining lhe
righls, roleclions, obIigalions or benefils of marriage. If
lhe slale's Iavyers reaIIy find lhis command uncIear, lhey
shouId ask lhe dislricl |udge for cIarificalion. (They shouId
have done so aIready, lhey haven'l.) eller yel, lhey shouId
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40
40 Nos. 14-2386 lo 14-2388, 14-2526
drav u a Ian of comIiance and submil il lo lhe |udge for
arovaI.
The dislricl courl |udgmenls invaIidaling and en|oining
lhese lvo slales' rohibilions of same-sex marriage are
AIIIRMID.
Case: l4-2386 Document: 2l2 Filed: 09/04/20l4 Pages: 40

Potrebbero piacerti anche