• Home
    • Press Releases
    • Religious Freedom Minute
  • About Us
    • Attorney Bios >
      • Brad Dacus - President
      • Kevin Snider - Chief Counsel
      • Matthew McReynolds - Staff Attorney
      • Michael Peffer - Director and Senior Counsel
      • Ray Hacke - Staff Attorney
    • Questions And Answers
    • Contact Us
  • Testimonials
  • Get Help
    • Request Legal Assistance
    • Find An Affiliate Attorney
    • For Parents >
      • Notice of Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
      • Public School Opt-Out Forms
      • What Every Parent Needs to Know About LGBT History
      • When CPS Calls
    • Language For Bylaws And Model Marriage Policy
    • Union Dues Objectors
    • Books And Brochures >
      • Faith in the Workplace
      • Reclaim Your School
      • The Church and Politics
      • Public Education Religious Rights (CA)
      • Public Education Religious Rights (IL)
      • CPS 12 Steps
      • The Constitution on Campus
  • Radio
    • Legal Edge
    • The Dacus Report
  • COJ
  • Give
    • Donate
    • Become An Affiliate Attorney
    • Intern/Volunteer
Pacific Justice Institute

Bride and Groom Court Battle Not Yet Over

10/8/2008

 
Sacramento, CA - While recent reports indicate that the State of California will once again change its widely-criticized "Party A" and "Party B" marriage license forms, attorneys for the Roseville couple who filed suit to preserve their status as "Bride" and "Groom" caution that the final verdict is still up in the air.

Attorneys for Pacific Justice Institute represent Gideon Codding and Rachel Bird, the couple swept into the gay marriage debate when they jotted an explanatory "Groom" and "Bride" next to the state's new terms, "Party A" and "Party B," on their marriage license. The state rejected the couple's license, even though the same traditional terminology was used on the forms just weeks before. The forms had been changed after the state Supreme Court's gay marriage decision became effective June 17.

Late last week, the state announced that it will again change the forms, effective Nov. 17, to allow individuals to identify themselves on marriage licenses as either "Groom," "Bride," "First Person" or "Second Person." Couples would not be restricted in choosing designations corresponding to their gender.

Attorneys for Pacific Justice Institute are encouraged by the state's concession but caution that Gideon and Rachel - who to this day are not deemed legally married by the state - still face uncertainty, and the litigation will proceed until all issues are resolved. "The case is very much alive," noted PJI Chief Counsel Kevin Snider. "If Gideon and Rachel finally get their marriage license processed - as we have been led to believe will happen - that will be one of the first positive developments for traditional marriage since the state Supreme Court decision in May. But since we're talking about state bureaucracy, our optimism is mixed with vigilance." Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, added, "We at PJI are determined to continue this fight until we have a legally binding resolution protecting every future bride and groom in the state of California."

PJI has received invaluable assistance on this case from affiliate attorneys Steven N.H. Wood and Christopher Schweickert, of the Walnut Creek firm Bergquist, Wood & Anderson, LLP, who are working alongside PJI staff attorneys to jointly represent the Coddings.

Comments are closed.

    Subscribe:

    "Like" Us:

    Archives

    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008

    Categories

    All
    Civil Liberties
    Parental Rights
    Religious Freedom

    RSS Feed

Stay Connected! "Like" our Facebook page:

The information provided on this website is not legal advice and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is implied by use of this site.  Because of the unique nature arising from legal matters, individual review by a knowledgeable attorney should be sought.  
PJI.org Privacy Policy
©2016 Pacific Justice Institute - P.O. Box 276600 Sacramento, CA 95827-6600 - (916) 857-6900

Español | Pусский | 한국어  | 中文
✕