United States District Court Northern District of California

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document374 Filed01/08/10 Page1 of 4
1 Kevin T. Snider, SBN 170988

Counsel of Record
2 PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
kevinsnider@pacificjustice.org
3 212 9th St. Suite 208
Oakland, CA 94607
4 Tel. (510) 834-7232
Fax (510) 834-8784
5
ATTORNEYS FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS
6
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, PAUL

T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO, CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW
11
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE
Plaintiffs, BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
12
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF
13 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PEDIATRICIANS; [PROPOSED]
ORDER
14 Plaintiff-Intervenor,
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN
15 v. SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-
INTERVENORS
16
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official Date: (To be determined by the Court)
17 capacity as Governor of California; EDMUND G. Time:
BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Attorney Location: Courtroom 6, 17th Floor
18 General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his Judge: Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker
official capacity as Director of the California
19 Trial Date: January 11, 2010
Department of Public Health and State Registrar of
20 Vital Statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official
capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information
21 & Strategic Planning for the California Department
of Public Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his
22 official capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County
of Alameda; and DEAN C. LOGAN, in his official
23 capacity as Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk for
24 the County of Los Angeles,
25 Defendants,
26 and
27 PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J.
28 KNIGHT, MARTIN F. GUTIERREZ, HAK-
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS –
CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW
1 SHING WILLIAM TAM, and MARK A.

JANSSON; and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –
2 YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA
RENEWAL,
3
Defendants-Intervenors.
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 TO THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at a date and time to be determined by the Court, or as soon
3 thereafter as the matter may be heard, before the Honorable Vaughn R. Walker, United States
4
District Court for the Northern District of California, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,
5
California, amicus curiae American College of Pediatricians (“Amicus” or “College”), will move
6
this Court for an order granting leave to participate amicus curiae in the above-captioned case in
7
support of Defendant-Intervenors.
8
9 Amicus has conferred with counsel for all parties. Counsel for the Attorney General, the
10 Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, County of Los Angeles, and Clerk Recorder of the County of
11 Alameda have consented to this motion. Counsel for the Perry Plaintiffs have not responded to the
12
request for consent. Moreover, Counsel for the Plaintiff-Intervenor City and County of San
13
Francisco has not consented to the brief.
14
I. STANDARD FOR MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
15
16 The Court has broad discretion to permit third parties to participate in an action as amicus
17 curiae. Gerritsen v. de la Madrid Hurtado, 819 F.2d 1511, 1514 n.3 (9th Cir. 1987). Participation of
18 amicus curiae may be particularly appropriate where the legal issues in a case have potential
19 ramifications beyond the parties directly involved or where amicus can offer a unique perspective
20
that may assist the Court. Sonoma Falls Devs., LLC v. Nev. Gold & Casinos, Inc., 272 F. Supp.2d
21
919, 925 (N.D. Cal. 2003).
22
II. STATEMENT OF IDENTITY AND INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE
23
24 Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of
25 pediatricians and other healthcare professionals who specialize in the care of infants, children, and
26 adolescents. The College was formed in 2002 to promote the welfare of children and the
27
preservation of the natural family, and is dedicated to ensuring all children reach their optimal
28
1
1 physical and emotional well-being. Its members believe that children are the future of our nation
2 and should be reared in the best possible family environment and supported by physicians
3
committed to ensuring their optimal health and well-being.
4
The College is dedicated to educating parents, pediatricians, policy makers, and society
5
about factors that are most likely to enhance a child’s well-being.
6
The College recognizes that the basic father-mother family unit within the context of
7
8 marriage is the optimal setting for childhood development. Its members promote this basic family
9 unit while pledging support for all children, regardless of their circumstances. Consistent with that
10 goal, the College has filed briefs amicus curiae in cases dealing with parenting and the welfare of
11
children.
12
III. REASONS WHY AMICUS CURIAE’S EXPERTISE WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO THIS COURT
13
Based on its academic and professional expertise, the College publishes position papers and
14
15 policy statements on issues affecting children, families, and society using evidenced-based medical
16 research and expert opinion to assist parents and influence childrearing. The College’s expertise
17 will be beneficial to the Court in determining whether the decision to set parameters on marriage is
18 both rational and compelling.
19
IV. CONCLUSION
20
Wherefore, American College of Pediatricians requests this Court’s leave to submit an
21
amicus brief in support of Defendant-Intervenors.
22
23 Dated: January 8, 2010.

By: /s/ Kevin T. Snider ______________
24 KEVIN T. SNIDER
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
25 kevinsnider@pacificjustice.org
212 9th St. Suite 208
26 Oakland, CA 94607
Tel. (510) 834-7232
27 Fax (510) 834-8784
ATTORNEY FOR AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN
28 COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS
2
Case3:09-cv-02292-JW Document374-1 Filed01/08/10 Page1 of 9
1 KEVIN T. SNIDER
Counsel of Record
3
4 Oakland, CA 94607
Tel. (510) 834-7232
5 Fax (510) 834-8784
6 ATTORNEY FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS
8
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10

T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO,
12 CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW
13 Plaintiffs, PETITION AND BRIEF AMICI
CURIAE OF COLLEGE OF
14 v. AMERICAN PEDIATRICIANS IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
15 ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official
16 capacity as Governor of California; EDMUND G.
BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Attorney
17 General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his
18 Department of Public Health and State Registrar of
Vital Statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official
19 capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information
the County of Los Angeles,
23
24 Defendants,
25 and

SHING WILLIAM TAM, and MARK A.
28 JANSSON; and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –
YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA
PETITION AND BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF COLLEGE OF AMERICAN PEDIATRICIANS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
1 RENEWAL,
2 Intervenors.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PETITION AND BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF COLLEGE OF AMERICAN PEDIATRICIANS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................ ii
3 INTEREST OF AMICI ..................................................................................................................1
4 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................1
5 CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
i
PETITION AND BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF PROFESSORS OF PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS
1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
2 Amato, P., The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional
well-being of the next generation, THE FUTURE OF CHILDREN 78 (2005) ……… .........….2
3
Amato, P., & Afifi, T. D., Feeling caught between parents: Adult children’s relations with
4 parents and subjective well-being, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY 222 (2006) ........2
5 Amato, P., & Booth, A., A generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval 68
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 2000) ………… …………………….... .2
6
Aquilino, W. S., Impact of childhood family disruption on young adults’ relationships with
7 parents, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 56, 295-313 (1994) .............................2
8
Battle, J., What beats having two parents?: Educational outcomes for African-American
9 students in single- versus dual-parent families, JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES 28, 783-
801 (1998) ……… ......................................................................................................…….2
10
Blackmon, L., Clayton, O., Glenn, N., Malone-Colon, L., & Roberts, A., The consequences
11 of marriage for African Americans: A comprehensive literature review, NEW YORK:
INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES 19 (2005) ....................................................................2
12
Blankenhorn, D., The Future of Marriage 175 (2007) ....................................................................3
13
Daly, M., & Wilson, M., Homocide (4th ed. London: Transaction Publishers 2008) ....................2
14
Doherty, W.J., Kouneski, E.F. & Erickson, M.F., Responsible fathering: An overview and
15 conceptual framework, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 286 (1998)…...… ........2
16 Ellis, B. J., et al., Does father absence place daughters at special risk for early sexual activity
and teenage pregnancy?, CHILD DEVELOPMENT 818 (2003) ............................................. 3
17
Flewelling, R.L. & Bauman, K.E., Family Structure as a Predictor of Initial Substance Use
18 and Sexual Intercourse in Early Adolescence, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE
FAMILY 52, 171-81 (1990) ...................................................................................................3
19
Harper, C., & McLanahan, S., Father absence and youth incarceration, JOURNAL OF
20 RESEARCH ON ADOLESCENCE 14, 369-397 (2002) ..............................................................2
21 Heiss, J., Effects of African American family structure on school attitude and Performance,
SOCIAL PROBLEMS 43, 246-267 (1996) ...............................................................................2
22
Lerner, R., & Nagai, A, No basis: What the studies don’t tell us about same-sex parenting.
23 Washington, DC: Marriage Law Project (2001). ................................................................3
24 Manning, W. D., & Lamb, K. A., Adolescent well-being in cohabiting, married, and single-
parent families, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY 65, 876-893 (2003) ........................2
25
Margolin, L., Child abuse by mothers’ boyfriends: Why the overrepresentation?, CHILD
26 ABUSE AND NEGLECT 16, 546 (1992) ..................................................................................2
27 McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G., Growing Up With a Single Parent: What hurts, What Helps
61(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (1994) .......................................................2
28
ii
1 Moore, Kristin Anderson et al., Marriage from a Child’s Perspective: How Does Family
Structure Affect Children and What Can We Do About It?, Child Trends Research
2 Brief at 1-2 (June 2002) .......................................................................................................1
3 Musick, K., & Mare, R. D., Family structure, intergenerational mobility, and the
reproduction of poverty: Evidence for increasing polarization?, DEMOGRAPHY 41,
4 629-648 (2004) ....................................................................................................................3
5 Nock, S. L., Sworn affidavit of Stephen Lowell Nock. Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Between Hedy Halpern et al. and the Attorney General of Canada et al.: Court File
6 No. 684/0 (2001) ................................................................................................................. 3
7 Page, M. E., & Stevens, A. H., Understanding racial differences in the economic costs of
growing up in a single-parent family, DEMOGRAPHY 42, 75-90 (2005) ..............................3
8
Popenoe, D., Life without father: Compelling new evidence that fatherhood and marriage are
9 indispensable for the good of children and society (New York: Basic 1996). ................................3
10 Rank, M. R., & Hirshl, T. A., The economic risk of childhood in America: Estimating the
probability of poverty across the formative years, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE
11 FAMILY 61, 1058-1067 (1999); see also Akerlof, G., Men without children,
ECONOMIC JOURNAL 298 (1998) ..........................................................................................3
12
Trumbull, D.A. et al., Letter to the Editor: The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and
13 Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-Being of Children: In Reply,
Pediatrics 118, 2261-64 (2006) ............................................................................................1
14
Waite, L., Does marriage matter? DEMOGRAPHY, 32, 483-507 ...9(1995) .....................................3
15
Waite, L., & Gallagher, M., The case for marriage: Why married people are happier,
16 healthier, and better off financially 134 (New York: Doubleday 2000) ............................2
17 Wilcox, W. B., et al., Why marriage matters, NEW YORK: INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES
28 (2d ed. 2005) ...................................................................................................................3
18
Wilson, M., & Daly, M., Risk of maltreatment of children living with stepparents, CHILD
19 ABUSE AND NEGLECT: BIOSOCIAL DIMENSIONS (R. Gelles & J. Lancaster eds. New
York 1987) ...........................................................................................................................2
20
Zill, N., Morrison, D. R., & Coiro, M. J., Long-term effects of parental divorce on parent-
21 child relationships, adjustment, and achievement in young adulthood, JOURNAL OF
FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY 7, 91-103 (1993)...............................................................................2
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
iii
1 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE
2 Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of

3 pediatricians and other healthcare professionals who specialize in the care of infants, children, and
4
adolescents. The College was formed in 2002 to promote the welfare of children and the preservation
5
of the natural family, and is dedicated to ensuring all children reach their optimal physical and
6
emotional well-being. Its members believe that children are the future of our nation and should be
7
8 reared in the best possible family environment and supported by physicians committed to ensuring
9 their optimal health and well-being.
10 Our mission, as the American College of Pediatricians, is to enable all children to reach their
11
optimal physical and emotional health and well-being. Because the basic father-mother family unit,
12
within the context of marriage, is the optimal setting for childhood development, we work to promote
13
it and expect societal forces and families to do so as well—even if it means placing the needs of
14
children above the desires of adults.
15
16 DISCUSSION
17
Traditional marriage, as the union of a man and a woman, is a unique and natural institution
18
from which new life arises and in which new life naturally flourishes. Because only the union of a
19
man and a woman can create children, society always has and always will depend upon traditional
20
marriage to provide for future generations. A child raised by his or her married, natural parents
21
receives protection and nurturance by the natural affection and attachment of the biological mother
22
and father.1
23
Our view of the importance of traditional marriage to childhood health and well-being is
24
25 1
See Trumbull, D.A. et al., Letter to the Editor: The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic
26 Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-Being of Children: In Reply, Pediatrics 118, 2261-64
(2006); see also Kristin Anderson Moore, et al., Marriage from a Child’s Perspective: How Does
27 Family Structure Affect Children and What Can We Do About It?, Child Trends Research Brief
at 1-2 (June 2002), available at http://www.childtrends.org/files/MarriageRB602.pdf.
28
1
1 supported by a broad array of empirical evidence. Studies have consistently shown that family
2 structure matters to the well-being of children, with children from traditional, intact families—those
3 consisting of a married mother and father and their biological children—faring better than those
4 raised in non-intact families headed by single, step, or cohabiting parents on a number of
5 measurements related to physical and emotional health and well-being.2 For example, children raised
6 in intact families are:
7 more likely to enjoy a close relationship with their parents;3
8 more likely to succeed academically and professionally;4
9 less likely to suffer from child abuse5;
10 less likely to engage in delinquent, criminal, and other forms of anti-social behavior6;
11 2
We note that some researchers treat as ―intact‖ families consisting of a married mother and
12 father and children adopted during infancy. The prevalence of such families is sufficiently
small that their inclusion does not impede drawing conclusions about the importance of
13 married,
3
biological parents.
See Amato, P., & Afifi, T. D., Feeling caught between parents: Adult children’s relations
14 with parents and subjective well-being, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY 222 (2006);
Aquilino, W. S., Impact of childhood family disruption on young adults’ relationships with
15 parents, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 56, 295-313 (1994); Zill, N., Morrison, D.
R., & Coiro, M. J., Long-term effects of parental divorce on parent-child relationships,
16 adjustment, and achievement in young adulthood, JOURNAL OF FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY 7, 91-103
(1993). This is particularly so with respect to fathers. See Amato, P., & Booth, A., A
17 generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval 68 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press 2000); Doherty, W.J., Kouneski, E.F. & Erickson, M.F., Responsible
18 fathering: An overview and conceptual framework, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY
286 (1998).
4
19 Amato, P., The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional
well-being of the next generation, THE FUTURE OF CHILDREN 78 (2005); Battle, J., What beats
20 having two parents?: Educational outcomes for African-American students in single- versus
dual-parent families, JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES 28, 783-801 (1998); Heiss, J., Effects of
21 African American family structure on school attitude and Performance, SOCIAL PROBLEMS 43,
246-267 (1996); McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G., Growing Up With a Single Parent: What
22 hurts,
5
What Helps 61(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (1994).
See Daly, M., & Wilson, M., Homocide (4th ed. London: Transaction Publishers 2008);
23 Margolin, L., Child abuse by mothers’ boyfriends: Why the overrepresentation?, CHILD ABUSE
AND NEGLECT 16, 546 (1992); Wilson, M., & Daly, M., Risk of maltreatment of children living
24 with stepparents, CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT: BIOSOCIAL DIMENSIONS (R. Gelles & J.
Lancaster eds. New York 1987).
6
25 See Blackmon, L., Clayton, O., Glenn, N., Malone-Colon, L., & Roberts, A., The
consequences of marriage for African Americans: A comprehensive literature review, NEW
26 YORK: INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES 19 (2005); Manning, W. D., & Lamb, K. A.,
Adolescent well-being in cohabiting, married, and single-parent families, JOURNAL OF
27 MARRIAGE AND FAMILY 65, 876-893 (2003); Harper, C., & McLanahan, S., Father absence and
youth incarceration, JOURNAL OF RESEARCH ON ADOLESCENCE 14, 369-397 (2002); Waite, L.,
28 & Gallagher, M., The case for marriage: Why married people are happier, healthier, and
(Continued)
2
1 less likely to experience poverty—and transmit that experience to their children7;
2 less likely to engage in early sexual activity and experience teenage pregnancy; 8
3 less likely to engage in substance abuse;9
4 less likely to experience negative health outcomes, including suicide (and early mortality in
5 general).10
6 This is only a small sampling of the evidence supporting the benefits to the child of being raised
7 in an intact family. Traditional marriage is a powerful ―pro-child social institution.‖11
8 Evidence about the effect of same-sex parenting on child development is much less developed.
9 This is not surprising given the novelty of the idea; it is simply too early to tell what impact same-sex
10 parenting has on children, particularly as they grow into adolescence and adulthood. Many
11 supporters of same-sex marriage claim that research shows that children raised by same-sex couples
12 fare just as well as children raised by their married, biological parents. The studies they rely on,
13 however, ―suffer critical flaws such as nonlongitudinal design, inadequate sample size, biased sample
14 selection, lack of proper controls, and failure to account for confounding variables.‖12
15
(Cont’d)
16 better off financially 134 (New York: Doubleday 2000); Popenoe, D., Life without father:
Compelling new evidence that fatherhood and marriage are indispensable for the good of
17 children
7
and society (New York: Basic 1996).
See Page, M. E., & Stevens, A. H., Understanding racial differences in the economic costs of
18 growing up in a single-parent family, DEMOGRAPHY 42, 75-90 (2005); Musick, K., & Mare, R.
D., Family structure, intergenerational mobility, and the reproduction of poverty: Evidence for
19 increasing polarization?, DEMOGRAPHY 41, 629-648 (2004); Rank, M. R., & Hirshl, T. A., The
economic risk of childhood in America: Estimating the probability of poverty across the
20 formative years, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 61, 1058-1067 (1999); see also
Akerlof, G., Men without children, ECONOMIC JOURNAL 298 (1998).
8
21 See Ellis, B. J., et al., Does father absence place daughters at special risk for early sexual
activity and teenage pregnancy?, CHILD DEVELOPMENT 818 (2003).
9
22 See Flewelling, R.L. & Bauman, K.E., Family Structure as a Predictor of Initial Substance
Use and Sexual Intercourse in Early Adolescence, JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 52,
23 171-81
10
(1990).
Wilcox, W. B., et al., Why marriage matters, NEW YORK: INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES
24 28
11
(2d ed. 2005); Waite, L., Does marriage matter? DEMOGRAPHY, 32, 483-507 ...9(1995).
Blankenhorn, D., The Future of Marriage 175 (2007).
12
25 Trumbull, D.A. et al., Letter to the Editor: The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic
Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-Being of Children: In Reply, Pediatrics 118, 2261-64
26 (2006); See also, Nock, S. L., Sworn affidavit of Stephen Lowell Nock. Ontario Superior Court of
Justice. Between Hedy Halpern et al. and the Attorney General of Canada et al.: Court File No. 684/0
27 (2001); Lerner, R., & Nagai, A, No basis: What the studies don’t tell us about same-sex parenting.
Washington, DC: Marriage Law Project (2001).
28
3
1 Even if these studies were sound, however, we would still support sustaining the traditional
2 definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. For heterosexual marriage to be effective,
3 it must be socially encouraged and legally advocated. The institution thus deserves society’s privilege
4 and protection, and changing its nature from the unique union of a man and a woman to a partnership
5 of any two adults may weaken it, leading to more children being exposed to the risks of being raised
6 in non-intact homes. As advocates for what is best for children, we support the people of California
7 in their decision to preserve traditional marriage.
8
CONCLUSION
9
10 For heterosexual marriage to be effective, it must be socially encouraged and legally advocated.
11 The institution thus deserves society’s privilege and protection, and changing its nature from the
12 unique union of a man and a woman to a partnership of any two adults may weaken it, leading to
13 more children being exposed to the risks of being raised in non-intact homes. As advocates for what
14 is best for children, we support the people of California in their decision to preserve traditional
15 marriage.
16
Dated: January 8, 2010
17
Respectfully submitted,
18
/s/ Kevin T. Snider_____________
19
KEVIN T. SNIDER
21 212 9th St. Suite 208
Oakland, CA 94607
22 Tel. (510) 834-7232
Fax (510) 834-8784
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document374-2 Filed01/08/10 Page1 of 3

Counsel of Record
3 212 9th St. Suite 208
Oakland, CA 94607
4 Tel. (510) 834-7232
Fax (510)
5
Garland Nagy
6 COOPER & KIRK
7 ATTORNEYS FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS
8
9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO, CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW
11
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION
Plaintiffs, FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF
12
AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN
13 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-
14 Plaintiff-Intervenor, INTERVENORS
15 v. Date: (To be determined by the Court)

Time:
16 Location: Courtroom 6, 17th Floor
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official Judge: Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker
17 capacity as Governor of California; EDMUND G.
BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Attorney Trial Date: January 11, 2010
18 General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his
19 Department of Public Health and State Registrar of
20 Vital Statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official
capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information
25 Defendants,
26 and

28
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF
OF AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS –

YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA
3 RENEWAL,
4 Defendants-Intervenors.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 Good cause appearing, the Motion of Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians for
2 leave to file a brief in support of Defendant-Intervenors is hereby GRANTED.

3
Dated: _____________ ___, 2010.
4
5
HON. VAUGHN R. WALKER
6 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 1

PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
2 kevinsnider@pacificjustice.org
3 Oakland, CA 94607
Tel. (510) 834-7232
4 Fax (510) 834-8784
5 ATTORNEY FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS
8
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER,
11 PAUL T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J.
ZARRILLO, CASE NO. 09-CV-2292 VRW
12
DECLARATION OF SERVICE
13 Plaintiffs,
14 v.
15 ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official

capacity as Governor of California; EDMUND
16 G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as
17 Attorney General of California; MARK B.
HORTON, in his official capacity as Director of
18 the California Department of Public Health and
State Registrar of Vital Statistics; LINETTE
19 SCOTT, in her official capacity as Deputy
Director of Health Information & Strategic
20
Planning for the California Department of Public
21 Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his official
capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County of
22 Alameda; and DEAN C. LOGAN, in his official
capacity as Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk for
24 Defendants,
25 and
1 YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA

RENEWAL,
2
Defendant-Intervenors.
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 DECLARATION OF SERVICE
2 I, Kevin T. Snider, declare as follows:

3 I am employed in the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years and am not a party
to this action; my business address is 212 9th St. Suite 208, Oakland, CA 94607.
4
On January 8, 2010, I served the following document(s):
5
6 1. Motion for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians;
7 2. [PROPOSED] Order; and
8 3. Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Defendant-Intervenors

9 on the parties stated below by the following means of service:
10
Kenneth C. Mennemeier Gordon Burns
11 Andrew W. Stroud Tamar Pachter
MENNEMEIER, GLASSMAN & STROUD LLP OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
12 980 9th Street, Suite 1700 GENERAL
Sacramento, CA 95814-2736 1300 I Street, Suite 125
13 kcm@mgslaw.com P.O Box. 944255
gosling@mgslaw.com Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
14 aknight@mgslaw.com Gordon.Burns@doj.ca.gov
stroud@mgslaw.com Tamar.Pachter@doj.ca.gov
15 lbailey@mgslaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant Attorney General
16 Attorneys for the Administration Defendants Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
17
Dennis J. Herrera Elizabeth M. Cortez
18 Therese M. Stewart Judy W. Whitehurts
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNSEL
19 City Hall, Room 234 648 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
One Dr. Carlon B. Goodlett Place 500 West Temple Street
20 San Francisco, California 94102-4682 Los Angeles, CA 90012-2713
therese.stewart@sfgov.org jwhitehurst@counsel.lacounty.gov
21 erin.bernstein@sfgov.org
vince.chhabria@sfgov.org Attorneys for Defendant Dean C. Logan
22 danny.chou@sfgov.org Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, County
ronald.flynn@sfgov.org of Los Angeles
23 mollie.lee@sfgov.org
Christine.van.aken@sfgov.org
24 catheryn.daly@sfgov.org
25 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor City and County

of San Francisco
26
27
28
1 Richard E. Winnie Ted Olson

Brian E. Washington Matthew McGill
2 Claude F. Kolm Amir Tayrani
Manuel F. Martinez GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
3 THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNSEL 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
1221 Oak Street, Suite 450 Washington, DC 20036-5306
4 Oakland, California 94612 T: (202) 955-8500
Brian.washington@acgov.org F: (202) 467-0539
5 Claude.kolm@acgov.org TOlson@gibsondunn.com
Manuel.martinez@acgov.org MMcGill@gibsondunn.com
6 Judith.martinez@acgov.org ATayrani@gibsondunn.com
7 Attorneys for Defendant Patrick O’Connell Theodore Boustrous, Jr.

Clerk Recorder of the County of Alameda Christopher Dusseault
8 Theane Kapur
9 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

333 South Grand Avenue
10 Los Angeles, CA 90072-1512
T: (213) 229-7000
11 F: (213) 229-7520
TBoutrous@gibsondunn.com
12 CDusseault@gibsondunn.com
TKapur@gibsondunn.com
13 SMalzahn@gibsondunn.com
14 Ethan Dettmer
Enrique Monagas
15 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
555 Mission Street, Suite 3000
16 San Francisco, CA 94105
T: (415) 393-8200
17 F: (415) 393-8306
EDettmer@gibsondunn.com
18 SPiepmeier@gibsondunn.com
EMonagas@gibsondunn.com
19 RJustice@gibsondunn.com
MJanky@gibsondunn.com
20
Theodore Uno
21 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900
22 Oakland, CA 94612
T: (510) 874-1000
23 F: (510) 874-1460
jgoldman@bsfllp.com
24 tuno@bsfllp.com
brichardson@bsfllp.com
25 rbettan@bsfllp.com
jischiller@bsfllp.com
26
Attorneys for Plaintiff Kristin M. Perry
27
28
1 James A Campbell
15100 N. 90th Street
2 Scottsdale, AZ 85260
(480)444-0020
3
480-444-0028 (fax)
4 jcampbell@telladf.org
5 Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenor

6 Timothy D Chandler
Alliance Defense Fund
7
101 Parkshore Dr., Suite 100
8 Folsom, CA 95630
916-932-2850
9 tchandler@telladf.org
11
Matthew Albert Coles
12 ACLU LGBT & AIDS Project
125 Broad St.
13 New York, NY 10004
212-549-2624
14 mcoles@aclu.org
15
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor
16
Charles J. Cooper
17 Cooper & Kirk
1523 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
18 Washington, DC 20036
19 202-220-9600
202-220-9601 (fax)
20 ccooper@cooperkirk.com

22
Jon Warren Davidson
23 Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund
3325 Wilshire Blvd Ste 1300
24 Los Angeles, CA 90010
(213) 382-7600, ext. 229
25 jdavidson@lambdalegal.org
26
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor
27
James Dixon Esseks
28 ACLU Foundation
1 2 Charlton St #14H
New York, NY 10014
2 212-549-2623
jesseks@aclu.org
3
4 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor
5 Jeremy Michael Goldman

Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
6 1999 Harrison Street
Suite 900
7
Oakland, CA 94612
8 510-874-1000
510-874-1460 (fax)
9 jgoldman@bsfllp.com
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff
11
Charles Salvatore LiMandri
12 Law Offices of Charles S. LiMandri
P.O. Box 9120
13 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
(858) 759-9930
14 (858) 759-9938 (fax)
15 cslimandri@limandri.com
16 Attorneys for Plaintiff
17 Andrew Perry Pugno

Law Offices of Andrew P Pugno
18 101 Parkshore Dr #100
19 Folsom, CA 95630-4726
andrew@pugnolaw.com
20
Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenor
21
Terry Lee Thompson
22
Terry L. Thompson, Attorney at Law
23 P.O. Box 1346
Alamo, CA 94507
24 925/855-1507
tl_thompson@earthlink.net
25
Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenor
26
27
BY ELECTRONIC FILING: I caused the foregoing document to be filed electronically with the
28 Clerk of Court through ECF, and ECF will send an e-notice of the electronic filing to the attorneys
1 of record at the email addresses listed above.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this
2 Declaration was executed in Oakland on January 8, 2010.
3
5 s/ Kevin T. Snider_____________
KEVIN T. SNIDER
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

United States District Court Northern District of California

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

United States District Court Northern District of California

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document374 Filed01/08/10 Page1 of 4

1 Kevin T. Snider, SBN 170988

10 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, PAUL

27 PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS

1 SHING WILLIAM TAM, and MARK A.

1 TO THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

24 Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of

23 Dated: January 8, 2010.

6 ATTORNEY FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS

11 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, PAUL

26 PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS

2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................ ii

3 INTEREST OF AMICI ..................................................................................................................1

1 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE

2 Amicus Curiae American College of Pediatricians is a national medical association of

9 their optimal health and well-being.

4 raised in non-intact families headed by single, step, or cohabiting parents on a number of

6 in intact families are:

7 more likely to enjoy a close relationship with their parents;3

8 more likely to succeed academically and professionally;4

9 less likely to suffer from child abuse5;

1 less likely to experience poverty—and transmit that experience to their children7;

3 less likely to engage in substance abuse;9

7 in an intact family. Traditional marriage is a powerful ―pro-child social institution.‖11

7 in their decision to preserve traditional marriage.

1 Kevin T. Snider, SBN 170988

7 ATTORNEYS FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS

10 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER, PAUL

15 v. Date: (To be determined by the Court)

27 PROPOSITION 8 OFFICIAL PROPONENTS

1 KNIGHT, MARTIN F. GUTIERREZ, HAK-

2 leave to file a brief in support of Defendant-Intervenors is hereby GRANTED.

1 Kevin T. Snider, SBN 170988

5 ATTORNEY FOR PROPOSED AMICUS CURIAE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRICIANS

15 ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official

1 YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA

2 I, Kevin T. Snider, declare as follows:

7 2. [PROPOSED] Order; and

8 3. Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Defendant-Intervenors

25 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor City and County

1 Richard E. Winnie Ted Olson

7 Attorneys for Defendant Patrick O’Connell Theodore Boustrous, Jr.

9 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

5 Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenor

21 Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenor

4 Attorneys for Plaintiff-Intervenor

5 Jeremy Michael Goldman

16 Attorneys for Plaintiff

17 Andrew Perry Pugno

1 of record at the email addresses listed above.

Você também pode gostar