Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 1 of 9

(1 of 21)

Nos. 12-16995 & 12-16998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEIL S. ABERCROMBIE, Governor, State of Hawaii, Defendant-Appellant, and LORETTA J. FUDDY, Director, Department of Health, State of Hawaii, Defendant-Appellee, and HAWAII FAMILY FORUM, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII, Case No. CV 11-00734 ACK-KSC (Hon. Alan C. Kay). PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID AND GARY BRADLEY'S UNOPPOSED MOTION: (1) TO FURTHER EXTEND TIME TO FILE THEIR OPENING BRIEF; AND (2) TO RESET DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES' DEADLINE TO FILE ANSWERING BRIEFS TO THE GOVERNOR'S OPENING BRIEF John J. D'Amato J. Thomas Maloney, Jr. D'Amato & Maloney, LLP 900 Fort Street Mall, Suite 1680 Honolulu, HI 96813 (808) 546-5200; (808) 546-5203 FAX E-MAIL: jdamato@benefitslawyers.com tmaloney@benefitslawyers.com Paul Alston Clyde J. Wadsworth Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 1800 Honolulu, HI 96813 (808) 524-1800; (808) 524-4591 FAX E-MAIL: palston@ahfi.com cwadsworth@ahfi.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY
881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 2 of 9

(2 of 21)

PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID AND GARY BRADLEY'S UNOPPOSED MOTION: (1) TO FURTHER EXTEND TIME TO FILE THEIR OPENING BRIEF; AND (2) TO RESET DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES' DEADLINE TO FILE ANSWERING BRIEFS TO THE GOVERNOR'S OPENING BRIEF Plaintiffs-Appellants NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY (collectively, "Plaintiffs-Appellants") respectfully move this Court, pursuant to Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rule 31-2.2(b) of the Rules of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: (1) to extend by 30 days the time for Plaintiffs-Appellants to file their Opening Brief; and (2) to reset the deadline for Defendant-Appellee Loretta J. Fuddy ("Director Fuddy") and Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee Hawaii Family Forum ("HFF") to file their Answering Briefs in response to Defendant-Appellant Neil S. Abercrombie's ("Governor Abercrombie") previously filed Opening Brief to the date that their Answering Briefs in response to Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief will be due. Currently, Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief must be filed by November 22, 2013. For the reasons more fully described below and in the attached Declaration, Plaintiffs-Appellants ask the Court to extend the time to file their Opening Brief by 30 days to December 22, 2013. None of the parties opposes Plaintiffs-Appellants' motion. HFF's position of non-opposition is without prejudice to its currently pending motions to dismiss Governor Abercrombie's appeal and to strike his Opening Brief. In summary, during the past two weeks, the Hawai`i Senate and
881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 3 of 9

(3 of 21)

House passed similar versions of a bill providing marriage equity to same-sex couples. The Hawai`i Senate is expected on Tuesday, November 12, 2013 to agree to the House version of the bill, and Governor Abercrombie is expected to sign the bill into law shortly thereafter. By its terms, the new law will take effect on December 2, 2013. Barring any action that would alter the law's effectiveness, the current appeal will likely be rendered moot. Accordingly, Plaintiffs-Appellants seek the requested extension to preserve the resources of the parties and the Court. In addition, under the current briefing schedule, the requested 30-day extension, if granted, could result in Director Fuddy and HFF having to file their Answering Briefs in response to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief which was filed on October 18, 2013 before Plaintiffs-Appellants file their Opening Brief. Hence, it would also preserve resources to reset the deadline for Director Fuddy and HFF to file their Answering Briefs in response to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief to the date that their Answering Briefs in response to Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief will be due.1

This case is calendared before the same merits panel as Sevcik v. Sandoval, No. 12-17688 (Dkt. 11, No. 12-17668), but the two cases have not been formally consolidated or otherwise joined for briefing purposes. Plaintiffs-Appellants here are not seeking to alter the current briefing schedule in Sevcik.

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 4 of 9

(4 of 21)

RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs-Appellants have challenged the constitutionality of Hawai`i's exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage. In the District Court, Plaintiffs-Appellants sought a declaration that their exclusion from marriage denies them equal protection and due process as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiffs-Appellants also sought to enjoin state officials from denying same-sex couples access to marriage. In an Order dated August 8, 2012, the District Court, among other things, granted Director Fuddy's motion for summary judgment, granted HFF's motion for summary judgment, and denied Plaintiffs-Appellants and Governor Abercrombie's motions for summary judgment. Governor Abercrombie is aligned with Plaintiffs-Appellants in this case and similarly argued that Hawai`i law limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is unconstitutional. Two appeals were noticed on September 7, 2012 (one by PlaintiffsAppellants and another by Governor Abercrombie) and this Court consolidated both of the appeals on October 29, 2012. HFF filed a motion to stay proceedings on October 10, 2012 (Dkt. 11, No. 12-16995), and a motion to further stay proceedings on December 13, 2012 (Dkt. 23, No. 12-16995), pending the Supreme Court's disposition of Perry v. Brown, 671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2012), vacated sub. nom. Hollingsworth v.

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 5 of 9

(5 of 21)

Perry, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013), and Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012), aff'd, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013). By Orders dated October 17, 2012 (Dkt. 15, No. 12-16995) and December 31, 2012 (Dkt. 24, No. 12-16995), this Court granted HFF's motions and stayed this case until March 5, 2013. On December 11, 2012, Plaintiffs-Appellants in Sevcik moved this Court to place that appeal on the same briefing schedule as Jackson and requested that the cases be heard together before the same merits panel. (Dkt. 7, No. 12-17668.) On December 13, 2012, this Court issued an Order construing that motion "as a motion to assign appeal nos. 12-17668, 12-16995, and 12-16998 [the Sevcik and Jackson appeals] to the same panel that will consider the merits of the appeals." (Dkt. 8, No. 12-17668.) On January 7, 2013, this Court issued an Amended Order granting the motion, calendaring Sevcik before the same merits panel as Jackson, and staying proceedings in Jackson and Sevcik until April 1, 2013. (Dkt. 11, No. 12-17668.) On March 19, 2013, Appellee HFF filed a motion to further stay proceedings in Jackson and Sevcik until the Supreme Court issued its decisions in Hollingsworth and Windsor. (Dkt. 27, No. 12-16995.) On March 26, 2013, this Court granted HFF's motion, stayed Jackson and Sevcik until July 18, 2013, and set August 19, 2013 (among other dates) as the due date for the Opening

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 6 of 9

(6 of 21)

Briefs, in the absence of a motion for further appropriate relief. (Dkt. No. 28, No. 12-16995.) On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its decisions in Hollingsworth and Windsor. On June 27, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants and Governor Abercrombie in Jackson and Plaintiffs-Appellants in Sevcik each filed streamlined requests for a 30-day extension of time to file their respective Opening Briefs. (Dkt. 29, 31, No. 12-16995.) Those requests were approved and a September 18, 2013 due date for Appellants' Opening Briefs was set. (Dkt. 30, 32, No. 12-16995.) On August 20, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants and Governor Abercrombie filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time to October 18, 2013 to file the Opening Briefs in Jackson and Sevcik, based on their belief that a special session of the Hawai`i Legislature would likely be called in early September 2013 to address the issue of marriage equity. (Dkt. 33, No. 12-16995.) On August 21, 2013, this Court granted the motion in Jackson and set October 18, 2013 as the due date for Appellants' Opening Briefs. (Dkt. 34, No. 12-16995.) Plaintiffs-Appellants in Sevcik subsequently moved for the same extension, which was also granted. (Dkt. 17, 18, No. 12-17668.) On September 9, 2013, Governor Abercrombie called the Hawai`i Legislature into special session beginning October 28, 2013 to address the issue

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 7 of 9

(7 of 21)

of marriage equity and, accordingly, on September 19, 2013, PlaintiffsAppellants moved to extend the time to file their Opening Brief by 35 days to November 22, 2013. (Dkt. 35, No. 12-16995.) On September 26, 2013, this Court granted the motion and set November 22, 2013 as the due date for Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief. (Dkt. 37, No. 12-16995.) ARGUMENT AND REQUEST FOR RELIEF The Hawai`i Senate and House, on October 30 and November 8, 2013, respectively, passed similar versions of a bill providing marriage equity to same-sex couples. (See Declaration of Clyde J. Wadsworth 10.a and Exs. A and B.) The Hawai`i Senate is expected to agree to the House version of the bill on Tuesday, November 12, 2013, and Governor Abercrombie is expected to sign the bill into law shortly thereafter. (Wadsworth Decl. Ex. B.) By its terms, the new law will take effect on December 2, 2013. (Id.) Barring any action that would alter the law's effectiveness, the current appeal in Jackson will likely be rendered moot. In their prior motions, Plaintiffs-Appellants sought a 30-day and then a 35-day extension of time to file their Opening Brief based on their belief that a special session of the Hawai`i Legislature would be called to address the issue of marriage equity. (Dkt. 33, Ex. A; Dkt. 35, Ex. A.) Now that that has occurred and a marriage equity bill with an early December effective date is

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 8 of 9

(8 of 21)

expected to be signed into law the reasons for the prior extension apply with equal force to this request. Plaintiffs-Appellants seek the right to marry. After the new marriage equity bill is signed into law, barring any action that would alter its effectiveness, the current appeal will likely be rendered moot. (See Wadsworth Decl. 10.b.) Plaintiffs-Appellants seek the requested 30-day extension to ensure that the new law is signed and becomes effective, thereby preserving the resources of the parties and the Court with respect to this appeal. (See Wadsworth Decl. 10.c.) In addition, under the current briefing schedule, the requested 30-day extension, if granted, could result in Director Fuddy and HFF having to file their Answering Briefs in response to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief which was filed on October 18, 2013 before Plaintiffs-Appellants file their Opening Brief. If the Court grants the requested extension, it would further preserve resources by resetting the deadline for Director Fuddy and HFF to file their Answering Briefs in response to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief to the date that their Answering Briefs in response to PlaintiffsAppellants' Opening Brief will be due. COUNSEL'S POSITIONS On November 8, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants communicated via

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-1

Page: 9 of 9

(9 of 21)

e-mail with all other counsel in this case about their: (1) requested 30-day extension of time to file their Opening Brief; and (2) proposal that Director Fuddy and HFF's deadline to file their Answering Briefs to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief be reset to the date that their Answering Briefs to Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief will be due. Governor Abercrombie, Director Fuddy and HFF each stated that they do not oppose the requested 30-day extension and the proposal to reset the Answering Brief deadline. HFF further stated that it maintains its motion to dismiss the Governor's appeal and motion to strike his Opening Brief. CONCLUSION For these reasons, this Court should: (1) extend by 30 days the time for Plaintiffs-Appellants to file their Opening Brief; and (2) reset, as requested, the deadline for Director Fuddy and HFF to file their Answering Briefs in response to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief. Dated: Honolulu, Hawai`i, November 11, 2013.

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth PAUL ALSTON CLYDE J. WADSWORTH JOHN J. D'AMATO J. THOMAS MALONEY, JR. Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-2

Page: 1 of 5

(10 of 21)

Nos. 12-16995 & 12-16998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEIL S. ABERCROMBIE, Governor, State of Hawaii, Defendant-Appellant, and LORETTA J. FUDDY, Director, Department of Health, State of Hawaii, Defendant-Appellee, and HAWAII FAMILY FORUM, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII, Case No. CV 11-00734 ACK-KSC (Hon. Alan C. Kay). DECLARATION OF CLYDE J. WADSWORTH Pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(b), I, Clyde J. Wadsworth, declare that: 1. I am an attorney with the law firm of Alston Hunt Floyd &

Ing, co-counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY (collectively, "Plaintiffs-Appellants") in this matter. 2. Unless otherwise stated, I make this Declaration based on my

personal knowledge and am competent to testify as to the matters set forth herein.
881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-2

Page: 2 of 5

(11 of 21)

3.

I make this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs-Appellants'

Unopposed Motion: (1) to Further Extend Time to file Their Opening Brief; and (2) to Reset Defendants-Appellees' Deadline to File Answering Briefs to the Governor's Opening Brief. 4. Currently, Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief in this case is

due on November 22, 2013. 5. The Opening Briefs were first due on December 17, 2012.

As set forth in the accompanying Motion, this case and Sevcik were subsequently stayed until April 1, 2013. On March 26, 2013, the Court further stayed this case and Sevcik until July 18, 2013, and set August 19, 2013, as the due date for the Opening Briefs, in the absence of a motion for further appropriate relief. 6. On June 27, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants and Defendant-

Appellant Abercrombie ("Governor Abercrombie") in Jackson and PlaintiffsAppellants in Sevcik filed streamlined requests for a 30-day extension of time to file their respective Opening Briefs. Those requests were approved and a September 18, 2013 due date for Appellants' Opening Briefs was set. 7. On August 20, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants and Governor

Abercrombie filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time to October 18, 2013 based on their belief that a special session of the Hawai`i Legislature would likely be called in early September 2013 to address the issue of marriage

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-2

Page: 3 of 5

(12 of 21)

equity. On August 21, 2013, this Court granted the motion in Jackson and set October 18, 2013 as the due date for Appellants' Opening Briefs. Plaintiffs-Appellants in Sevcik subsequently moved for the same extension, which was also granted. 8. On September 9, 2013, Governor Abercrombie called the

Hawai`i Legislature into special session beginning October 28, 2013 to address the issue of marriage equity and, accordingly, on September 19, 2013, Plaintiffs-Appellants moved to extend the time to file their Opening Brief by 35 days to November 22, 2013. On September 26, 2013, this Court granted the motion and set November 22, 2013 as the due date for Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief. 9. Plaintiffs-Appellants now ask the Court to extend by thirty

days the time for Appellants to file their Opening Brief to December 22, 2013. 10. ing reasons: a. The Hawai`i Senate and House, on October 30 and The requested extension is necessary for the follow-

November 8, 2013, respectively, passed similar versions of a bill providing marriage equity to same-sex couples. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct copy of an article entitled "State Senate passes gay marriage bill, sending it to the House," published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-2

Page: 4 of 5

(13 of 21)

October 30, 2013. Attached hereto as Exhibit "B" is a true and correct copy of an article entitled "Senate will accept House version," published by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser on November 10, 2013. b. Plaintiffs-Appellants seek the right to marry. After the

new marriage equity bill is signed into law, barring any action that would alter its effectiveness, the current appeal will likely be rendered moot. c. Plaintiffs-Appellants seek the requested 30-day

extension to ensure that the new law is signed and becomes effective, thereby preserving the resources of the parties and the Court with respect to this appeal. 11. Plaintiffs-Appellants have exercised diligence with respect

to their Opening Brief and in filing this motion as soon as it was deemed necessary. Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief will be filed within the time requested. 12. On November 8, 2013, I communicated via e-mail with all

other counsel in this case about Plaintiff-Appellants': (1) requested 30-day extension of time to file their Opening Brief; and (2) proposal that Director Fuddy and HFF's deadline to file their Answering Briefs to Governor Abercrombie's Opening Brief be reset to the date that their Answering Briefs to Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opening Brief will be due. Governor Abercrombie, Director Fuddy and HFF each stated that they do not oppose the requested

881147 \ 11035-1

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-2

Page: 5 of 5

(14 of 21)

30-day extension and the proposal to reset the Answering Brief deadline as requested. HFF further stated that it maintains its motion to dismiss the Governor's appeal and motion to strike his Opening Brief. 13. The court reporter is not in default with regard to any

designated transcripts. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Honolulu, Hawai`i, on November 11, 2013.

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth CLYDE J. WADSWORTH

881147 \ 11035-1

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/229943741.html

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-3

Page: 1 of 2

(15 of 21)

State Senate passes gay marriage bill, sending it to the House Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser
State Senate passes gay marriage bill, sending it to the House By Star-Advertiser & Associated Press

StarAdvertiser.com

POSTED: 11:40 a.m. HST, Oct 30, 2013 LAST UPDATED: 01:31 a.m. HST, Oct 31, 2013 Ads by GoogleWindows XP Driver Updates Windows XP Drivers Latest Download. Microsoft Certified. (Recommended) Windows-XP.DriverUpdate.netHonolulu Tub Refinishing Don't replace bathtub. We restore to new! No odor or nasty chemicals. www.ecotubsolutions.comGolden Nugget In Vegas Get Swept Off Your Feet With Our Specials. Make Reservations Today! www.GoldenNugget.com The state Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to approve a gay marriage bill, shifting the focus of the debate to the state House, where the vote could be closer. The Senate vote was 20 to 4. Sen. Clayton Hee, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary and Labor Committee, framed the vote in the historical context of interracial marriage and Hawaii's decision to legalize abortion. "This is a defining moment in all of our careers and we should embrace it," Hee told his colleagues. Senate Minority Leader Sam Slom, the lone Republican in the Senate, said there was no urgency to hold a special session on gay marriage. He said the issue does not compare to previous special sessions on the Hawaii Superferry or the response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Slom, who believes the public should decide the issue through a constitutional amendment, said the vote is not historic. "Hysteric it may be," he said. If the House amends the bill, as it likely, it would have to come back before the Senate for review before moving to Gov. Neil Abercrombie for his signature. A joint House committee hearing scheduled for Thursday was expected to keep lawmakers working while trick-or-treaters celebrate Halloween. House Majority Leader Scott Saiki says it's likely the chamber will amend the bill to change religious exemptions. The Senate bill currently exempts ministers and other clergy from having to perform gay wedding ceremonies, but not for-profit businesses. "The House committees recognize that there is still a lot of public concern about the scope of the exemptions," Saiki said. The Halloween joint hearing between the House judiciary and finance committees is expected to last until midnight, then carry over to Friday if there are still people wanting to testify. Because of the high public interest, the committees waived a 24-hour deadline on submitting testimony,
Page 1 of 2

EXHIBIT A

Nov 11, 2013 06:31:06PM MST

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/229943741.html

Case: 12-16995 11/11/2013 promising to accept testimony before and during ID: the8857701 hearing.

DktEntry: 113-3

Page: 2 of 2

(16 of 21)

A Senate committee hearing on Monday packed a rotating crowd through a 200-seat basement auditorium, with speakers getting as much as two minutes each to make their case. Even more people watched the hearings unfold on monitors in the Capitol rotunda, and the hearing was carried live on public access television and the websites of TV news outlets. -----For the Senate same-sex marriage vote breakdown, check out the Star-Advertiser's "Political Radar" blog at http://bit.ly/16n6bSV. 1,000 people attend Veterans Day service Large, dangerous surf could hit north shores starting Tuesday Maui restaurant worker suffers minor burns in stove fire Standhardinger named Big West Player of the Week U.S. Postal Service wins Amazon Sunday deliveries Target to open earlier on Thanksgiving Developer gets $120M loan for Kakaako high rise Murder suspect to make initial appearance in District Court Obama pays tribute to 107-year-old WWII veteran Typhoon-hit victims in Philippines plead for aid
Copyright (c) Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Page 2 of 2

Nov 11, 2013 06:31:06PM MST

Senate will accept House version - Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser Case: 12-16995 11/11/2013 ID: 8857701 DktEntry: 113-4

Page 1 of 4 Page: 1 of 4 (17 of 21)

Senate will accept House version - Hawaii News Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Senate will accept House version

StarAdvertiser.com

Hawaii and Illinois are poised to be the 15th and 16th states to allow gay couples to wed By Derrick DePledge POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Nov 10, 2013 LAST UPDATED: 02:29 a.m. HST, Nov 10, 2013

The state Senate on Tuesday will agree to the state House's version of a same-sex marriage bill and send it to Gov. Neil Abercrombie for his signature. Sen. Clayton Hee (D, Heeia-Laie-Waialua), chairman of the Senate Judiciary and Labor Committee, said Saturday that he would recommend that the Senate accept the House's changes to the bill, which expanded a religious exemption to protect religious freedom.

The state Capitol was at full capacity Wednesday as House lawmakers considered the gay-marriage bill. People on both sides of the debate gathered in the Capitol rotunda chanting their positions on the measure into the early evening.

Abercrombie is expected to sign the bill into law shortly after he receives it from the Senate. If Abercrombie signs the bill before Nov. 20, Hawaii would be the 15th state plus the District of Columbia to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry. Gov. Pat Quinn of Illinois has announced that he would sign a same-sex marriage bill into law at a ceremony in Chicago on Nov. 20. "There are very few opportunities to participate in government in decisions that define your career, and this is one of those decisions that will define the careers of all of the members in the Legislature," Hee told reporters at a news conference at the state Capitol with Senate Majority Leader Brickwood Galuteria (D, Kakaako-McCully-Waikiki). "Although Hawaii was not the first to enact same-sex marriage, what shouldn't be lost is Hawaii was the first -- in the Baehr v. Lewin lawsuit -- that started the same-sex marriage discussion nationally." The state Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that denying same-sex couples marriage licenses was a violation of equal protection under the state Constitution. The court's ruling influenced Congress to approve the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which restricted marriage to heterosexual couples, and prompted Hawaii voters in 1998 to approve a constitutional

EXHIBIT B
http://www.staradvertiser.com/newspremium/20131110_Senate_will_accept_House_vers... 11/11/2013

Senate will accept House version - Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser Case: 12-16995 11/11/2013 ID: 8857701 DktEntry: 113-4

Page 2 of 4 Page: 2 of 4 (18 of 21)

amendment that gave the state Legislature the power to define marriage as between a man and a woman. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal Defense of Marriage Act was an unconstitutional violation of due process and equal protection, allowing same-sex couples who are legally married to receive federal benefits. The court left it up to the states to decide whether to legalize gay marriage. Abercrombie responded to the court's ruling by calling the Legislature into special session. The House approved the bill late Friday in a 30-19 vote after overcoming procedural maneuvers to delay action. Hee predicted that the Senate vote on Tuesday would be 21-4 if all senators are available to vote. Galuteria announced that security procedures for the Senate floor session on Tuesday would be similar to Friday's House session, when advocates for and opponents of gay marriage were separated outside the state Capitol. Under the bill, gay couples could get married in Hawaii as soon as Dec. 2. Clergy would have the right to refuse to perform gay weddings. Churches and other religious organizations would be able to decline to provide goods, services and facilities for gay weddings and celebrations if it violates religious beliefs. Rep. Bob McDermott (R, Ewa Beach-Iroquois Point), who opposes gay marriage, sent Abercrombie a letter on Friday stating that he would seek a temporary restraining order in Circuit Court to prevent the state from issuing marriage licences to gay couples. McDermott contends that the 1998 constitutional amendment that gave the Legislature the power to define marriage as between heterosexual couples trumps any statutory change to the law. He insists that another vote by the people is necessary to redefine marriage. Judge Karl Sakamoto has said he would hear McDermott's challenge after the bill becomes law. "That's the last hope we have," McDermott said. "That's it." Rep. Marcus Oshiro (D, Wahiawa-Whitmore-Poamoho) and other House lawmakers had exhorted the Senate to take more time to review the House version. Late Friday, in a speech on the House floor, Oshiro said that if the bill was not improved he would leave the special session with a taste like someone had stuffed something "vile" down his throat. "There is no need to rush," Oshiro said. Some in both the House and Senate said privately that technical changes to the bill suggested by Rep. Sharon Har (D, Kapolei-Makakilo) as "friendly amendments" had some merit. But Oshiro and Har, who both voted against the bill, had put House leadership on the defensive with relentless attacks against the bill and the process, moves that were interpreted as strategic attempts to delay action.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/newspremium/20131110_Senate_will_accept_House_vers... 11/11/2013

Senate will accept House version - Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser Case: 12-16995 11/11/2013 ID: 8857701 DktEntry: 113-4

Page 3 of 4 Page: 3 of 4 (19 of 21)

If the Senate were to reject the House's version, the House and Senate would have had to go into a conference committee, which would have prolonged the debate and would have likely jeopardized the chances a bill would pass. Hee defended the process and the special session. The Senate held an 11-hour hearing on the bill, while the House hearing took a record 56 hours of public testimony over five days. "Anybody who has been around this building during the legislative session understands that this bill would not get near the kind of focus or attention but for the special session," Hee said. Both Hee and Rep. Karl Rhoads (D, Chinatown-Iwilei-Kalihi), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, personally preferred a narrower religious exemption but agreed to an expansion in an effort to get the legislation passed. The House also chose to remove a section of the bill on parentage rights after hearing concerns from Native Hawaiians about how ancestry would be recorded for the children of same-sex couples. "I would frame it more as a reaction to what we heard in our hearings," Rhoads said of the changes. House lawmakers had expected that a leadership divide that still smoldered after House Speaker Joseph Souki (D, Waihee-Waiehu-Wailuku) took over in January with a coalition of progressive Democrats and minority Republicans would be exposed during the special session. McDermott and other Republicans who oppose gay marriage sought to dissolve the coalition after failing to persuade Souki to replace Rep. Cynthia Thielen (R, Kailua-Kaneohe) on the House Judiciary Committee. Thielen was the only Republican to vote for the bill. While many in the Legislature anticipated that McDermott and other conservatives would lead the charge against gay marriage, few expected that Oshiro, who lost power when the new coalition took control, would be the agent of obstruction. Oshiro insisted that he was motivated by improving the bill and ensuring a fair process, not undermining House leadership. But many House lawmakers were privately baffled by Oshiro's tactics given his history on equal rights. In April 2010, on the last day of the session, then-House Majority Leader Blake Oshiro proposed suspending the House rules and reviving a civil-unions bill that had been indefinitely postponed. The bill was technically flawed -- it said it would take effect in January 2010 and had other defects -- but lawmakers wanted to pass the bill anyway in the interest of advancing equality. Marcus Oshiro pointed out at the time that the bill was "inartfully drafted" but he did not stand in the way of Blake Oshiro's extraordinary maneuver.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/newspremium/20131110_Senate_will_accept_House_vers... 11/11/2013

Senate will accept House version - Hawaii News - Honolulu Star-Advertiser Case: 12-16995 11/11/2013 ID: 8857701 DktEntry: 113-4

Page 4 of 4 Page: 4 of 4 (20 of 21)

In February 2011, Oshiro voted again to pass a civil-unions bill that was technically flawed and would have to be corrected by lawmakers a year later. He inserted written remarks into the House journal outlining the potential problems with the bill's language. "But, as imperfect this measure may be, I will not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good," Oshiro wrote.
Copyright (c) Honolulu Star-Advertiser

http://www.staradvertiser.com/newspremium/20131110_Senate_will_accept_House_vers... 11/11/2013

Case: 12-16995

11/11/2013

ID: 8857701

DktEntry: 113-5

Page: 1 of 1

(21 of 21)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on November 11, 2013. I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system. Dated: Honolulu, Hawai`i, November 11, 2013.

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth PAUL ALSTON CLYDE J. WADSWORTH JOHN J. D'AMATO J. THOMAS MALONEY, JR. Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants NATASHA N. JACKSON, JANIN KLEID and GARY BRADLEY

881147 \ 11035-1