Ctr. For Inquiry, Inc. v. Clerk, Marion Circuit Court
| Decision Date | 30 November 2012 |
| Docket Number | 1: 12-cv-00623-SEB-DML |
| Parties | CENTER FOR INQUIRY, INC., REBA BOYD WOODEN, JOHN KIEL, and MICHELLE LANDRUM, Plaintiffs, v. CLERK, MARION CIRCUIT COURT, and PROSECUTOR, MARION COUNTY, INDIANA, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Indiana |
On June 11, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint [Docket No. 1] seeking both a preliminary injunction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, and permanent injunctive relief. See also Docket No. 16. The Center for Inquiry, Inc. ("CFI"), Reba Boyd Wooden, John Kiel, and Michelle Landrum seek to bar Defendants, the Clerk of the Marion Circuit Court ("the Clerk") and the Marion County Prosecutor ("the Prosecutor"), from enforcing Indiana Code § 31-11-6-1 against Plaintiffs on constitutional grounds. With the parties' consent, the Court advanced the hearing on preliminary injunctive relief to include final consideration of the merits. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2) (). The parties appeared before theCourt on October 22, 2012 to present evidence and oral argument. The Court now enters its findings of fact and conclusions of law, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52. Having considered the parties' briefing, documentary evidence, arguments, as well as the controlling principles of law, for the reasons explicated herein, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' request for permanent injunctive relief. A final judgment shall enter accordingly.
Our nation's High Court has historically recognized marriage as a "vital personal right[] essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness," Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967), "fundamental to the very existence and survival of the [human] race," Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942), and even "the most important relation in life." Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978) (quoting Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205 (1888)). Because marriage is also "a social relation subject to [each] [s]tate's police power," Loving, 388 U.S. at 8, the requirements for what constitutes a legally valid marriage differ from state to state. Couples who wish to marry in Indiana and be recognized as spouses under Indiana law must clear two hurdles: licensure and solemnization. Ind. Code §§ 31-11-4-1, -3, -13. Procedurally, the couple must first procure a marriage license from the clerk of the circuit court of either individual's county of residence, or, if neither individual resides in Indiana, from the clerk of the circuit court of the county where the marriage will be solemnized. Id. § 31-11-4-3. Every marriagelicense issued in Indiana must include two certificates of marriage attached to it: one marked "Original," and the other marked "Duplicate." Id. § 31-11-4-15.
After securing the required license, individuals who intend to marry one another must present their marriage license to an individual who is authorized by Indiana Code § 31-11-6-1 ("the Solemnization Statute") to solemnize marriages. Ind. Code § 31-11-4-13. Pursuant to the Solemnization Statute, the authority to solemnize marriage is vested in the following categories of persons or entities:
Id. § 31-11-6-1. The individual who "solemnizes" the marriage has three related responsibilities: (1) completing the original and duplicate marriage certificates; (2) presenting the original certificate to the couple; and (3) "[n]ot later than thirty (30) days after the date of the marriage," filing the duplicate certificate and the actual marriage license with the clerk of the circuit court who issued the couple's license. Id. § 31-11-4-16. Under Indiana law, anyone who discharges these duties without authority todo so under the Solemnization Statute commits a Class B misdemeanor. Id. § 31-11-6-1.
Plaintiff CFI is an international not-for-profit group headquartered in New York. The organization, which has existed in its present form since 1978, claims a membership of approximately 24,000 in the United States. Its mission is "to foster a purely secular society based on science." Pls.' Mem. at 4. Accordingly, CFI supports the use of the scientific method in examining religious claims and denies that a supernatural source of values is a prerequisite to a meaningful, valuable, or ethical life. Wooden Aff. ¶¶ 3-6. The system of thought promoted by CFI, commonly known as "secular humanism," see Wooden Dep. at 12, typically describes an ideological stance based, inter alia, on the following principles:
Defs.' Ex. C (document entitled "What Is Secular Humanism?").
A local CFI delegation ("CFI-Indiana") of approximately 230 active members,1 all of whom are members of the national organization, is based in Indianapolis. Wooden Aff.¶ 12. As a branch of the national CFI, CFI-Indiana espouses its umbrella organization's core values. Among these beliefs is the appreciation that "the basic components of effective morality and a model for living a good life—integrity, trustworthiness, benevolence, and fairness—are universally recognized sources of human values." Id. ¶ 8. To advance this philosophy in Indianapolis, CFI-Indiana authors and distributes publications explaining secular humanism and hosts classes, community gatherings, and meetings addressing a wide variety of social topics. Pls.' Mem. at 4; see also Wooden Dep. at 51 (). CFI-Indiana has also offered various "secular celebrations"—e.g., commitment ceremonies, memorial observances, and infant naming services—during its seven-year history.2 Wooden Dep. at 55-56. The organization sponsors these events in an effort to provide its members with "meaningful ceremonies that express their non-religious life philosophies and values." Pls.' Mem. at 6.
As of the date of our hearing, Plaintiffs Kiel and Landrum, both members of CFI-Indiana, were engaged to be married and planned to wed "in the near future." Pls.' Mem. at 9. Although they had recently relocated to Kentucky, it was their intent to marry in Indianapolis, Indiana, where many of their family members and friends reside. They view the social and legal benefits associated with marriage as desirable and, as Ms. Landrum has testified, they "want[ed] to get married [for] the same reason[s] everybodyelse wants to get married . . . [I]t's a . . . culturally recognized form of couple bonding." Kiel & Landrum Dep. at 12. Accordingly, they fashioned a wedding ceremony reflecting their shared values, ethics, and beliefs. They view as "extremely important" to their wedding ceremony that their officiant "share [their] beliefs and [be] able to assist [them] in structuring the ceremony in a way that affirm[ed] [their] philosophy." Kiel & Landrum Aff. ¶ 10. Consequently, they planned for Plaintiff Reba Boyd Wooden, their longtime friend and mentor, to perform the ceremony. Pls.' Mem. at 9. Apparently deciding not to wait out the completion of this judicial process, they recently informed the Court that, as of late October 2012, they are now legally married. Docket No. 33.
Ms. Wooden, a retired teacher and counselor, is CFI-Indiana's current Executive Director. Pls.' Mem. at 5; Wooden Aff. ¶ 15. She asserts that when she "started the group," she served the organization in a volunteer capacity. Wooden Dep. at 57. In 2001, before the group became an official CFI community, she obtained a "humanist celebrant" certification enabling her to perform weddings and sign marriage licenses in Indiana. She was certified in this capacity by the Humanist Society, which is a chartered religious organization. Id. Although Ms. Wooden alleges that it was not her preference to be certified by a society that is officially faith-based, she maintains that this course of action "was the only way . . . [she could] actually solemnize marriages in Indiana." Id. at 58. In other words, while acknowledging that "[she] could do ceremonies" without such certification, she notes that being a "humanist celebrant" allowed her to complete the administrative tasks that comprise "solemnization" of an Indiana marriage. See id. Ms.Wooden estimates that she has participated in at least fifty marriages in her capacity as a "humanist celebrant." Id. at 57.
Ms....
To continue reading
Request your trial