Civil and Human Rights

Baskin v. Bogan

Baskin v. Bogan was a federal-court challenge to discriminatory marriage laws in Indiana that prohibit same-sex marriage.

Case Summary

In June 2014, the district court ruled that these laws violate the plaintiffs’ rights to due process and equal protection guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that “[f]undamental rights, once recognized, cannot be denied to particular groups on the ground that these groups have historically been denied those rights.”  Indiana filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

On August 5, 2014, Constitutional Accountability Center and the Cato Institute jointly filed a friend of the court brief in the Seventh Circuit, urging the court of appeals to uphold the lower court’s decision.  Our brief demonstrates that the text and history of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee equality under the law and require equality of rights for all classes of persons and groups, including gay men and lesbians.  The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment recognized the right to marry as a basic civil right of all persons.  As our brief demonstrates, the Amendment’s sweeping guarantee of equality unambiguously applies to the plaintiffs in Baskin, and prohibits discriminatory marriage laws.  Baskin was consolidated with another Seventh Circuit case, Wolf v. Walker (a federal-court challenge to discriminatory marriage laws in Wisconsin), for purposes of oral argument and disposition.

On August 26, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit heard oral argument in Baskin and Wolf, and, only nine days later, on September 4, unanimously affirmed the lower courts’ decisions, agreeing that the discriminatory marriage laws of Indiana and Wisconsin violate the Fourteenth Amendment.  Judge Richard Posner, author of the Seventh Circuit’s opinion, criticized the states’ various arguments as “so full of holes that [they] cannot be taken seriously.”  Sexual orientation, he wrote, is an “immutable characteristic,” and thus discrimination against same-sex couples is constitutionally suspect.

On October 6, 2014, the Supreme Court denied certiorari, thus allowing the 7th Circuit’s decision recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage to stand, clearing the way for marriage equality in all of the states within that Circuit.

Case Timeline

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
November 1, 2021

As Supreme Court weighs Texas abortion law, opposing sides focus on its impact

Austin American-Statesman
While lawyers and U.S. Supreme Court justices frequently zeroed in on esoteric legal points during Monday's...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Chuck Lindell
Civil and Human Rights
November 4, 2021

OP-ED: No, Really, the Right to an Abortion Is Supported by the Text and History of the Constitution

The Atlantic
For decades, conservative originalists have denounced Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey—two Supreme Court cases that...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
November 1, 2021

RELEASE: Abortion: Process Arguments in Supreme Court Must Not Obscure SB8’s Impact on Real People 

WASHINGTON – Following today’s oral arguments in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson and United States...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra
Civil and Human Rights
October 29, 2021

If Supreme Court Rules Neither Abortion Providers nor DOJ Can Challenge S.B. 8, No Right Is Safe.

For non-lawyers trying to follow the various legal challenges to Texas’s six-week abortion ban known...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

CVS Pharmacy Inc. v. Doe

In CVS Pharmacy v. Doe, the Supreme Court is considering whether Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, covers disparate impact discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson

In Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, the Supreme Court is considering whether a state can circumvent federal-court review of a law that prohibits the exercise of the constitutional right to abortion by delegating its enforcement...