Griego v. Oliver
316 P.3d 865
N.M.2013Background
- This case involves six same-gender couples seeking to marry in New Mexico, challenging state marriage statutes as denying equal access to civil marriage and its rights.
- The Supreme Court of New Mexico granted a writ of superintending control to settle statewide uncertainty over clerks issuing same-gender marriage licenses.
- The district courts had held NM marriage laws unconstitutional as applied to same-gender couples; clerks varied in issuing licenses.
- The Court interprets NM marriage statutes as a whole to determine if they prohibit same-gender marriages and, if so, whether that denial violates the NM Constitution.
- The Court acknowledges that the issue implicates rights to marriage, family protections, and associated rights under both state and federal law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do NM marriage statutes prohibiting same-gender marriages violate the NM Constitution? | Same-gender couples are similarly situated to opposite-gender couples. | Statutes do not explicitly prohibit same-gender marriages; prohibitions arise from context and tradition. | Yes; denial violates equal protection under Article II, §18; marriage must include same-gender couples. |
| What level of scrutiny applies to the equal protection challenge? | Discrimination based on sexual orientation warrants heightened scrutiny. | Classification based on sex; not applicable as a sex classification; political power of LGBT considered. | Intermediate scrutiny applies to sexual-orientation discrimination in marriage. |
| Is there a fundamental right to same-gender marriage under NM law? | Right to marry is fundamental; applies to same-gender couples. | Right to marriage not definitively a fundamental right under NM law for same-gender couples. | No need to decide definitively; intermediate scrutiny suffices for relief. |
| What remedy should the NM court provide? | Equal rights and protections should apply to same-gender marriages. | Preserve existing statutory framework while ensuring equal application. | Writ of superintending control; civil marriage defined as union of two persons to exclude others; gender-neutral terms adopted; rights equivalently extended to same- and opposite-gender marriages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) (invalidated racial restrictions on marriage as unconstitutional under equal protection)
- Windsor v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) (federal recognition of same-sex marriages; reflective of equal protection context)
- In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008) (court held same-gender and opposite-gender marriages are substantially similar for equal protection")
- Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Pub. Health, 957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008) (same-gender couples similarly situated to opposite-gender couples for marriage purposes)
- Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009) (recognition of same-sex marriage as constitutional under equal protection)
- Chatterjee v. King, 280 P.3d 283 (N.M. 2012) (stated that same-sex couples may have standing in custody and related rights; supports equal treatment)
- Breen v. Carlsbad Mun. Sch., 138 P.3d 413 (N.M. 2005) (applies intermediate scrutiny to certain classifications; framework used)