Sevcik v. Sandoval

Sevcik v. Sandoval is a federal case seeking to overturn Nevada's same-sex marriage constitutional ban.

The case was filed on April 10, 2012, in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. It was initially assigned to Judge Roger L. Hunt. On April 19, the case was reassigned to Chief Judge Robert C. Jones.

District Court
The plaintiffs in the case are eight same-sex couples. Four of them wish to marry within Nevada, and four are already married outside Nevada and wish for the state to recognize their relationships as marriages, rather than as domestic partnerships.

The defendants are the Governor of Nevada and three officials whose duties include issuing marriage licenses, two for counties and one for a city.

On May 15, 2012, shortly after the case was filed, the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage sought to intervene to defend the ban, citing concerns that the state and clerks may not be able to mount a proper defense. The plaintiffs opposed their intervention, especially since the intervenors' proposed schedule would add at least an extra year to the timetable that the plaintiffs and defendants had agreed to. The judge granted the Coalition's request to join the case, but rejected their proposed schedule.

On August 10, 2012, the court scheduled oral arguments for November 26. On September 17, after each party (other than Clerks Alba and Harvey) filed their respective motions for summary judgment, the court cancelled oral arguments and declared that a judgment on the pleadings would be issued.

That judgment was issued on November 26, 2012. The Equal Protection claims were dismissed due to Baker v. Nelson, and summary judgment was granted to the defendants and intervenor defendants on the remaining claims.

Appeals
On December 3, 2012, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit. On December 7, 2012, the Coalition filed a petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court denied the petition on June 27, 2013, the day after deciding US v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry.

In the Ninth Circuit, the plaintiffs filed a motion to have this case and Hawaii's Jackson v. Abercrombie appeal heard by the same panel of judges and follow the same schedule, including hearing the two cases on the same day. The Coalition opposed having the cases heard together, two parties in Jackson felt the motion was unnecessary because the Ninth Circuit would likely recognize the similarities in the cases and hear them together anyway, and all other parties in both cases either expressed no opinion or agreed with the motion. The Court granted the motion on January 7, 2013.

Both cases were stayed while the U.S. Supreme Court considered Windsor and Perry. After those cases were decided, the schedule was postponed further by the plaintiffs. As it currently stands, the plaintiffs' opening brief is due on October 18, the response briefs from the defendants is due on November 18, and the plaintiffs may file a reply brief within 14 days of the response brief, most likely December 2.

District Court

 * 2012-04-10: #1: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-05-03: #29: by all parties
 * 2012-05-18: #34: by Defendant Clerk Alba
 * 2012-05-18: #35: by Defendant Clerk Harvey
 * 2012-04-19: #27: Case reassigned to Chief Judge Robert C. Jones
 * 2012-05-15: #30: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-05-29: #37: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-05-29: #38: by Defendant Clerk-Recorder Glover
 * 2012-06-01: #40: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-06-08: #42: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-08-02: #63: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-06-11: #45: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-07-03: #59: Hearing scheduled for 2012-08-06 (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-26: #61: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-08-07: #64: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-08-09: #65: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-08-10: #67:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-08-29: #69: [restricted through 2012-11-27]
 * 2012-05-17: #32: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-06-01: #41: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-06-14: #49: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-06-14: #50: 
 * 2012-06-21: #51: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-06-25: #53: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-02: #56: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-07-02: #57: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-07-03: #59:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-03: #59: Hearing scheduled for 2012-08-06 (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-26: #61: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-08-10: #67: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-17: #89: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-18: #91: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-18: #92: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-05-18: #33: by Defendant Clerk-Recorder Glover
 * 2012-06-01: #41: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-06-11: #46: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-06-25: #53: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-06-27: #54: by Defendant Clerk-Recorder Glover
 * 2012-07-03: #59:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-03: #59: Hearing scheduled for 2012-08-06 (multi-listed)
 * 2012-07-26: #61: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-08-10: #67: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-17: #89: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-18: #91: {scribd|106310345|Motion for Clarification}} (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-18: #92: (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-06-01: #39: by all parties
 * 2012-06-08: #43: by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-06-12: #48: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-08-09: #66:
 * 2012-08-23: #68: by Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-08-28: #70:, hearing scheduled for 2012-09-18 unless parties agree to a schedule before then
 * 2012-09-14: #88: by all parties
 * 2012-09-17: #90:
 * 2012-06-29: #55: pending resolution of Motion to Intervene (#30) by Proposed Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-07-02: #58: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-07-03: #59:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-10: #72: by Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-09-10: #73, 75-84: Appencides, , , , , , , , , , and
 * 2012-09-27: #93: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-22: #94:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-26: #98: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-10: #74: by Defendant Clerk-Recorder Glover
 * 2012-09-27: #93: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-22: #94:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-26: #98: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-10: #85: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-09-27: #93: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-22: #94:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-10-26: #98: by Plaintiffs (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-09-10: #86: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-09-10: #87: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-10-25: #95: by Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-10-31: #99: by Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-10-25: #96: by Defendant Governor Sandoval
 * 2012-10-25: #97: by Defendant Clerk-Recorder Glover
 * 2012-11-08: #100: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-11-09: #101: by Intervenor Defendants Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-11-26: #102:  (multi-listed)
 * 2012-12-03: #103:  (closing the case)
 * 2012-12-03: #104: to Ninth Circuit by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-12-03: #106: by Plaintiffs
 * 2012-12-04: #108: from Ninth Circuit
 * 2012-12-07: #109: to Supreme Court by Supreme Court
 * 2013-07-10: #110: by Supreme Court

Ninth Circuit

 * 2012-12-03: #1: Appeal filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants
 * 2012-12-05: #3: Notice of petition for writ of certiorari before judgment, by Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2013-07-10: #16: by Supreme Court
 * 2012-12-11: #7: by Plaintiffs-Appellants
 * 2012-12-12: [#21] by Jackson v. Abercrombie Defendant-Appellant Governor Abercrombie
 * 2012-12-21: #9: by Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-12-28: #10: by Plaintiffs-Appellants
 * 2013-01-07: #11: 
 * 2013-12-13: [#23] by Jackson Appellee Hawaii Family Forum
 * 2013-01-24: #13: 
 * 2013-08-22: #17: by Plaintiffs-Appellants
 * 2013-08-23: #18: . New deadlines:
 * 2013-10-18: Appellants' opening brief due
 * 2013-11-18: Appellees' response briefs due
 * 2013-12-02: Appellants' reply briefs due (or 14 days after response briefs are filed, if earlier)
 * ...several additional items to be added soon...
 * Amicus briefs filed in support of the plaintiffs
 * 2013-10-23: #21:
 * 2013-10-24: #22:
 * 2013-10-25: #24:
 * 2013-10-25: #25:
 * 2013-10-25: #26:
 * 2013-10-25: #27:
 * 2013-10-25: #28:
 * 2013-10-25: #29:
 * 2013-10-25: #30:
 * 2013-10-25: #31:
 * 2013-10-25: #32:
 * 2013-10-25: #35:
 * 2013-10-25: #37:
 * 2013-10-25: #38:
 * 2013-10-25: #39:
 * 2013-10-25: #40:
 * 2013-10-25: #41:
 * ...several additional items to be added soon...
 * Amicus briefs filed in support of Nevada:
 * 2014-01-22: #114: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 114 Amicus Center for Urban Renewal and Education.pdf|Center for Urban Renewal and Education]]
 * 2014-01-24: #118: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 118 Amicus Marriage Law Foundation.pdf|Marriage Law Foundation]]
 * 2014-01-27: #119: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 119 Amicus Robert P. George.pdf|Robert P. George]]
 * 2014-01-27: #120: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 120 Amicus Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.pdf|Institute for Marriage and Public Policy]]
 * 2014-01-27: #121: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 121 Amicus Helen M. Alvaré.pdf|Helen M. Alvaré]]
 * 2014-01-27: #123: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 123 Amicus Pacific Justice Institute.pdf|Pacific Justice Institute]]
 * 2014-01-28: #135: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 135 Amicus Concerned Women for America.pdf|Concerned Women for America]]
 * 2014-01-28: #137: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 137 Amicus ADF.pdf|ADF]]
 * 2014-01-28: #138: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 138 Amicus 11 States.pdf|11 States]]
 * 2014-01-28: #139: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 139 Amicus Social Science Professors.pdf|Social Science Professors]]
 * 2014-01-28: #140: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 140 Amicus Paul McHugh.pdf|Paul McHugh]]
 * 2014-01-28: #141: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 141 Amicus Liberty Counsel.pdf|Liberty Counsel]]
 * 2014-01-28: #143: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 143 Amicus Church Groups.pdf|Church Groups]]
 * 2014-01-28: #144: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 144 Amicus Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.pdf|Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence]]
 * 2014-01-28: #142: by Clerk Glover
 * 2014-01-30: #149: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 149 Order withdrawing Clerk's Brief.pdf|Order withdrawing Clerk's Brief]]
 * 2014-01-28: #143: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 143 Amicus Church Groups.pdf|Church Groups]]
 * 2014-01-28: #144: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 144 Amicus Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.pdf|Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence]]
 * 2014-01-28: #142: by Clerk Glover
 * 2014-01-30: #149: [[Media:Sevcik v. Sandoval 149 Order withdrawing Clerk's Brief.pdf|Order withdrawing Clerk's Brief]]

Supreme Court

 * 2012-12-05: by Petitioner Coalition for the Protection of Marriage
 * 2012-12-07:
 * 2013-02-06: by Respondents (Plaintiffs)
 * 2013-02-13: by Petitioner
 * 2013-03-15: Considered at conference, no action
 * 2013-06-26: Considered at conference
 * 2013-06-27: