Lambda Legal Denounces Indiana AG’s Efforts to Stay Gay Marriage Ruling

Indiana-Attorney-General-Greg-ZoellerOn Friday, Lambda Legal denounced Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller [pictured] for appealing a court ruling ordering the state to recognize the out-of-state marriage of Niki Quasney and Amy Sandler and protect Sandler’s rights to care Quasney, who is near death from ovarian cancer.

“This is a shameful display of cruelty towards a loving couple with two children whose marriage is vital as they battle an aggressive cancer and fight to be together,” said Camilla Taylor, Marriage Project Director for Lambda Legal. “This is one family in all of Indiana. Their marriage doesn’t harm anyone in Indiana, it simply protects them and their children.”

The AP reports:

The Indiana attorney general's office said in court documents that recognition of the couple's marriage now could raise false hopes for others because courts might eventually uphold the state's gay marriage ban.

"The traditional definition of marriage has been around for a long time. Its validity is hotly contested, but the outcome of these legal disputes is uncertain," the state said in its request for a stay.

[U.S. District Judge Richard] Young's order "cannot conclusively resolve the legality of same-sex marriages," the state said, and added that the best course of action would to be to wait for a final decision.


  1. peck says

    I suppose the AG may be correct in stating that the ultimate outcome of marriage equality is still uncertain, simply because the SCOTUS has yet to make a ruling on the merits.

    To the best of my recollection, all courts in which the matter has been tried have found in favor of marriage equality.

    Does anyone know if any court has ruled against equality, or any judge on a court of appeals who has written a dissent from a ruling in our favor?

  2. woody says

    interesting retro 70s look there, and he probably doesn’t even know it. add a huckapoo shirt and he’d fit right in with david cassidy and bobby sherman

  3. Joe in Ct says

    This actually helps the cause. Most people, except the most extreme opponents of gay marriage, will see this as cruel, unacceptable and unnecessary. These Christian bigots have to be stopped.

  4. Lymis says

    “To the best of my recollection, all courts in which the matter has been tried have found in favor of marriage equality.”

    In the recent past, true. There are historical precedents for it getting shot down, some of which continue to be cited as precedent (though generally, not successfully.)

    Certainly no court has ruled against it since the Windsor decision took down the federal part of DOMA.

  5. Steven Jaeger says

    @Peck, I don’t believe that the supremes have to take a case if all the appellate courts agree. I think that’s what they are hoping to avoid. Some state may try to appeal to the supremes, but I think the majority will probably want to avoid touching it, Scalia and his mute ventriloquists dummy might if one hit’s their individual circuits and one of the states in their circuits appeal. The trouble is Scalia and Thomas control TX,LA, MS, AL, GA and FL. So be prepared for a state appeal from one of those to Scalia and/or Thomas.

Leave A Reply