* denotes statute establishing same-sex union as violation of state's public policy

a. Marriage consists of a contract between one man and one woman.

b. Since nothing in the statute, legislative history, court rules, case law, or public policy permitted same-sex marriage or recognized the parties' Vermont civil union as a marriage, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to dissolve the union.

c. The Supreme Judicial Court has interpreted "marriage," within Massachusetts' statutes, "as the union of one man and one woman." Adoption of Tammy, 619 N.1.2d 315 (1993). However, in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, 2003 WL 22701313 (Supreme Judicial Ct, Nov. 18, 2003), the court construed the term "marriage" to mean the voluntary union of two persons as spouses, to the exclusion of all others.

d. Although no specific language in this statute or other New Jersey marriage statutes prohibits samesex marriages, the meaning of marriage as a heterosexual institution was so firmly established that the court could not disregard its plain meaning and the clear intent of the legislature. Rutgers Council v. Rutgers State University, 689 A.2d 828 (1997).

e. Marriage is a civil contract requiring consent of parties

f. Marriage has been traditionally defined as the voluntary union of one man and one woman as husband and wife. See c.g., Fisher v. Fisher, 250 N.Y, 313, 165 N. H. 460 (1929). A basic assumption, therefore, is that one of the two parties to the union must be male and the other must be female. On the basis of this assumption, the New York courts have consistently viewed it essential to the formation of a marriage that the parties be of opposite sexes. However, in Langan v. St. Vincent Hosp., 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 673, the court found that New York's statutes did not prohibit recognition of a same-sex union nor was such a union against New York's public policy on marriage. As such, the court recognized the same-sex partner as a spouse for purposes of New York's wrongful death statute.

CRS-13

g. Iffective May 7, 2004.

h. Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age, who are otherwise capable, and solemnized in accordance with ORS 106.1

i. Men are forbidden to marry kindred.

j. Marriage, so far as its validity at law is concerned, is a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable in law of contracting is essential, and which creates the legal status of husband and wife.

JAN 07. 20041720 17

parsons of the same sex in a civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship shall not be valid or recognized in Nebraska."

The plaintifs, Nebraska organizations that have lesbian, gay, and bisexual members, contend the second sentence of Section 29 should be declared unconstitutionalasitprohibits lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons from accessing the political process to attemptfc obtain legal protections, virtually barring legal protection of any kind to same-sex relationships. Plaintif Citizens for Equal Protection is a nonprofitmembership organization whose mission is to stop discrimination based on sexual orientation through legislation and education. Plaintiff Nebraska Advocates for Justice and Equality is a nonprofit organization that was created in response to the anti-gay campaign for Initative 416. Both plaintiffs lobby for legislation that is designed to profact the needs of its members. Plaintiff ACLU is a nonprofit entily that advocates for the protection of civil liberties for all persons.

Plaintifs argue that they are unable to, at the very least, seek legislation to provide legal protections for those in same-sex relationships. In support of their argumente, plaintiffs note that they approached Senator Nancy Thompson and asked her to draft legis ation conbaring domestic partnerships and, in particular, language that relates to healin, funeral. hospital and organ donations. Senator Thompson proposed a bli on January 22, 2003, to allow both same sex and different-sex couples to make decisions regarding funeral arangements and organ donations. Filing No., Ex A Senator Thompson submited a request to Nebraska Attorney General Bruning asking him to issue an opinion as to the constitutionality of such legislation. On March 10, 2003, the Altomey General issued an opinion determining that the proposed bill would viclate Section 29. Fling No. 1, Ex B.