Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Document: 00116793783
Page: 1
No. 14-2184
Rose A. Saxe
First Circuit Bar No. 1121399
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
(212) 549-2627
rsaxe@aclu.org
William Ramirez
First Circuit Bar No. 6111
Counsel of Record
ACLU OF PUERTO RICO
Union Plaza Building, Suite 1105
416 Avenida Ponce de Leon
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918
(787) 753-8493
wramirez@aclu.org
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 2
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 3
s/ William Ramirez
William Ramirez
First Circuit Bar No. 6111
ACLU OF PUERTO RICO
Union Plaza Building, Suite 1105
416 Avenida Ponce de Leon
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918
(787) 753-8493
wramirez@aclu.org
ii
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ........................................................ ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... iv
INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ...............................................................................1
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ........................................................................2
ARGUMENT .............................................................................................................2
I. UNDER THE TRADITIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR IDENTIFYING
SUSPECT OR QUASI-SUSPECT CLASSIFICATIONS, SEXUAL
ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATIONS MUST BE SUBJECTED TO
HEIGHTENED SCRUTINY. ..........................................................................2
A. Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People Have Suffered a Long History of
Discrimination. ...........................................................................................6
B. Sexual Orientation Has No Bearing on a Persons Ability to Perform
in or Contribute to Society. ........................................................................6
C. Sexual Orientation Is an Obvious, Immutable, or Distinguishing
Characteristic. .............................................................................................8
D. Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People Lack Sufficient Political Power to
Protect Themselves Against Invidious Discrimination. ...........................11
II. THIS COURT HAS NEVER APPLIED THE TRADITIONAL
FRAMEWORK, AND THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT CONSTRAINED
THIS COURT FROM DOING SO IN MASSACHUSETTS V. U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES NO LONGER
APPLY. ..........................................................................................................13
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................17
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE .......................................................................18
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS .............................19
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................... A-1
iii
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 5
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Armstrong v. Brenner,
135 S. Ct. 890 (Dec. 19, 2014) ...........................................................................15
Baker v. Nelson,
409 U.S. 810 (1972) ............................................................................................13
Baskin v. Bogan,
766 F.3d 648 (7th Cir. 2014) ....................................................................... passim
Bishop v. Smith,
760 F.3d 1070 (10th Cir. 2014) ..........................................................................14
Bostic v. Schaefer,
760 F.3d 352 (4th Cir. 2014) ..............................................................................14
Bowen v. Gilliard,
483 U.S. 587 (1987) ..............................................................................................8
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr.,
473 U.S. 432 (1985) ................................................................................. 3, 4, 7, 8
Clark v. Jeter,
486 U.S. 456 (1988) ..........................................................................................2, 3
Cook v. Gates,
528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008) .................................................................................15
DeBoer v. Snyder,
772 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 2014) ..............................................................................15
Frontiero v. Richardson,
411 U.S. 677 (1973) ............................................................................. 7, 8, 12, 13
Golinski v. U.S. Office of Pers. Mgmt.,
824 F. Supp. 2d 968 (N.D. Cal. 2012) ................................................. 5, 8, 10, 12
Griego v. Oliver,
316 P.3d 865 (N.M. 2013) ..............................................................................5, 12
iv
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 6
Grutter v. Bollinger,
539 U.S. 306 (2003) ..............................................................................................4
Hernandez-Montiel v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv.,
225 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2000) ............................................................................10
In re Marriage Cases,
183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008) ..................................................................................5, 9
J.E.B. v. Ala. ex rel. T.B.,
511 U.S. 127 (1994) ..............................................................................................4
Kerrigan v. Commr of Pub. Health,
957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008) ..............................................................................5, 9
Kitchen v. Herbert,
755 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2014) ..........................................................................14
Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services,
682 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012) ........................................................................... passim
Moser v. Marie,
135 S. Ct. 511 (Nov. 12, 2014) ...........................................................................15
Nyquist v. Mauclet,
432 U.S. 1 (1977) ..................................................................................................9
Otter v. Latta,
135 S. Ct. 345 (Oct. 10, 2014) ............................................................................15
Parnell v. Hamby,
135 S. Ct. 399 (Oct. 17, 2014) ............................................................................15
Pedersen v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.,
881 F. Supp. 2d 294 (D. Conn. 2012)......................................................... passim
Perry v. Brown,
671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2012) ............................................................................14
Plyler v. Doe,
457 U.S. 202 (1982) ..............................................................................................8
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 7
Rice v. Cayetano,
528 U.S. 495 (2000) ..............................................................................................4
SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Labs.,
740 F.3d 471 (9th Cir. 2014) ............................................................................3, 5
United States v. Windsor,
133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) ........................................................................................14
Varnum v. Brien,
763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009) ...............................................................................5
Whitewood v. Wolf,
992 F. Supp. 2d 410 (M.D. Pa. 2014) ...................................................................5
Windsor v. United States,
699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012) ....................................................................... passim
Wolf v. Walker,
986 F. Supp. 2d 982 (W.D. Wis. 2014) ..................................................... 5, 9, 11
Rules
Fed. R. App. P. 29 ......................................................................................................1
Other Authorities
Am. Psychiatric Assn, Position Statement On Homosexuality and Civil Rights,
131 Am. J. Psychiatry 436 (1974) ........................................................................7
Am. Psychiatric Assn, Resolution
(Dec. 15, 1973), reprinted in 131 Am. J. Psychiatry 497 (1974) .........................7
Barbara S. Gamble, Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote,
41 Am. J. Pol. Sci. 245 (1997) ............................................................................12
Br. of Amicus Curiae GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT Equality
(Gay & Lesbian Med. Assn) Concerning the Immutability of Sexual
Orientation in Support of Affirmance on the Merits, United States v.
Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), No. 12-307, 2013 WL 860299 (Feb. 26,
2013) ...................................................................................................................10
vi
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 8
Br. of Org. of Am. Historians & Am. Studies Assn as Amici Curiae
in Support of Respondent Edith Windsor, United States v. Windsor,
133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), No. 12-307, 2013 WL 838150 (Feb. 28, 2013) .............6
Donald P. Haider-Markel, et al., Lose, Win, or Draw?: A Reexamination of
Direct Democracy and Minority Rights, 60 Pol. Res. Q. 304 (2007) ................12
Gregory M. Herek, et al., Demographic, Psychological, and Social
Characteristics of Self-Identified Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US
Probability Sample, 7 Sex Res. Soc. Policy 176 (2010) ....................................10
Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Council of Representatives,
30 Am. Psychologist 620 (1975) ..........................................................................7
vii
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 9
All parties have consented to the filing of this brief. Substantially similar
briefs were submitted by amicus the American Civil Liberties Union and other
legal organizations, including Lambda Legal, in cases challenging the
constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and state laws excluding
same-sex couples from marriage. Neither the parties nor their counsel have
contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting this brief. No
person other than amici, their members, or their counsel contributed money that
was intended to fund preparing or submitting the brief. See Fed. R. App. P. 29.
2
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 10
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 11
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 12
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 13
(Immutability and lack of political power are not strictly necessary factors to
identify a suspect class.); see also Baskin, 766 F.3d at 654 (Discrimination by a
state or the federal government against a minority, when based on an immutable
characteristic of the members of that minority (most familiarly skin color and
gender), and occurring against an historical background of discrimination against
the persons who have that characteristic, makes the discriminatory law or policy
constitutionally suspect.).
As numerous federal and state courts have recently recognized, any faithful
application of those factors leads to the inescapable conclusion that sexual
orientation classifications must be recognized as at least quasi-suspect and
subjected to heightened scrutiny. See Baskin, 766 F.3d at 655-56; Windsor, 699
F.3d at 181-85; Wolf v. Walker, 986 F. Supp. 2d 982, 1014 (W.D. Wis. 2014), affd
sub nom. Baskin, 766 F.3d 648; Whitewood v. Wolf, 992 F. Supp. 2d 410, 425-30
(M.D. Pa. 2014); Pedersen v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 881 F. Supp. 2d 294, 310-33
(D. Conn. 2012); Golinski v. U.S. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 824 F. Supp. 2d 968, 98590 (N.D. Cal. 2012); Griego v. Oliver, 316 P.3d 865, 879-84 (N.M. 2013); Varnum
v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862, 885-96 (Iowa 2009); Kerrigan v. Commr of Pub.
Health, 957 A.2d 407, 425-32 (Conn. 2008); In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384,
441-44 (Cal. 2008); see also SmithKline, 740 F.3d at 480-84 (finding heightened
scrutiny applicable to sexual orientation without examining the four factors).
5
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 14
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 15
contribute to society. Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 441 (citation omitted); see also
Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677, 686 (1973) (plurality) ([W]hat
differentiates sex from such nonsuspect statuses as intelligence or physical
disability, and aligns it with the recognized suspect criteria, is that the sex
characteristic frequently bears no relation to ability to perform or contribute to
society.).
Sexual orientation has no bearing on an individuals ability to perform in or
contribute to society. More than forty years ago, the American Psychiatric
Association and the American Psychological Association recognized that
homosexuality is not correlated with any impairment in judgment, stability,
reliability or general social and vocational capabilities. Am. Psychiatric Assn,
Resolution (Dec. 15, 1973), reprinted in 131 Am. J. Psychiatry 497 (1974);
Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Council of Representatives, 30 Am.
Psychologist 620, 633 (1975); see also Am. Psychiatric Assn, Position Statement
On Homosexuality and Civil Rights, 131 Am. J. Psychiatry 436, 497 (1974).
Numerous courts have agreed that a persons sexual orientation is irrelevant
to ones ability to perform or contribute to society. There are some distinguishing
characteristics, such as age or mental handicap, that may arguably inhibit an
individuals ability to contribute to society, at least in some respect. But
homosexuality is not one of them. Windsor, 699 F.3d at 182; accord Pedersen,
7
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 16
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 17
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 18
them as a discrete group for purposes of determining whether that group should be
afforded heightened protection under the equal protection provisions of the state
constitution.); cf. Hernandez-Montiel v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 225
F.3d 1084, 1093 (9th Cir. 2000) (Sexual orientation and sexual identity are
immutable; they are so fundamental to ones identity that a person should not be
required to abandon them.), overruled on other grounds, Thomas v. Gonzales, 409
F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2005).
Under any definition of immutability, sexual orientation clearly qualifies.
There is now broad medical and scientific consensus that sexual orientation is an
immutable (and probably an innate, in the sense of in-born) characteristic rather
than a choice. Baskin, 766 F.3d at 657; accord Pedersen, 881 F. Supp. 2d at 32024; Golinski, 824 F. Supp. 2d at 986; see also Gregory M. Herek, et al.,
Demographic, Psychological, and Social Characteristics of Self-Identified
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in a US Probability Sample, 7 Sex Res. Soc.
Policy 176 (2010); Br. of Amicus Curiae GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing
LGBT Equality (Gay & Lesbian Med. Assn) Concerning the Immutability of
Sexual Orientation in Support of Affirmance on the Merits, United States v.
Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), No. 12-307, 2013 WL 860299 (Feb. 26, 2013).
10
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 19
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 20
the workplace. See Frontiero, 411 U.S. at 687-88. In contrast, there is still no
express federal ban on sexual orientation discrimination in employment or housing,
and twenty-nine states have no such protections either. See Pedersen, 881 F. Supp.
2d at 326-27; Golinski, 824 F. Supp. 2d at 988-89. The existence of such
protections did not prevent sex from being recognized as a classification requiring
heightened scrutiny; it follows that the limited success gay people have had in
fighting back discriminatory policies can hardly qualify as political power.
While there have been recent successes in securing antidiscrimination and
marriage equality legislation in some parts of the nation, those limited successes do
not alter the conclusion that lesbians and gay men are not in a position to
adequately protect themselves from the discriminatory wishes of the majoritarian
public. Windsor, 699 F.3d at 185. Gay people have seen their civil rights put to
a popular vote more often than any other group. Barbara S. Gamble, Putting Civil
Rights to a Popular Vote, 41 Am. J. Pol. Sci. 245, 257 (1997); see also Donald P.
Haider-Markel, et al., Lose, Win, or Draw?: A Reexamination of Direct
Democracy and Minority Rights, 60 Pol. Res. Q. 304 (2007). This history of
popular referenda to roll back or prevent legal protections for lesbians and gay men
demonstrates that the members of the LGBT community do not have sufficient
political strength to protect themselves from purposeful discrimination. Griego,
316 P.3d at 884.
12
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 21
indicia of suspectness identified by the Supreme Court. But this Court has never
had the opportunity to analyze those traditional factors. Instead, in Massachusetts
v. Health & Human Services, this Court did not engage in that analysis because it
concluded that recognizing sexual orientation classifications as suspect was
foreclosed by the Supreme Courts summary dismissal of the appeal in Baker v.
Nelson, 409 U.S. 810 (1972), for want of a substantial federal question. See 682
F.3d at 9.
13
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 22
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 23
denied, 135 S. Ct. 265 (Oct. 6, 2014). Finally, in January 2015, the Supreme Court
granted certiorari on the question of whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a
state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex. See DeBoer v.
Snyder, 772 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 2014), cert. granted, --- S. Ct. ---, 83 U.S.L.W.
3315 (Jan. 16, 2015) (Nos. 14-556, 14-562, 14-571, 14-574). These actions show
that the Supreme Court no longer considers the question presented in Baker to be
insubstantial and, thus, Baker is no longer good law.3
Cook v. Gates, 528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008), also should not prevent this
Court from conducting a full analysis of the equal protection factors. The Court in
Cook held only that Romer and Lawrence did not mandate that courts apply
heightened scrutiny to sexual orientation classifications. See id. at 61. Although
15
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 24
16
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 25
CONCLUSION
The Court can and should hold that sexual orientation discrimination must
be subjected to heightened scrutiny. For this reason, as well as those outlined by
Plaintiffs-Appellants, the Court should reverse the judgment of the District Court.
Respectfully submitted,
s/ William Ramirez
William Ramirez
First Circuit Bar No. 6111
Counsel of Record
ACLU OF PUERTO RICO
Union Plaza Building, Suite 1105
416 Avenida Ponce de Leon
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918
(787) 753-8493
wramirez@aclu.org
Rose A. Saxe
First Circuit Bar No. 1121399
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION FOUNDATION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004
(212) 549-2627
rsaxe@aclu.org
17
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 26
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
1.
32(a)(7)(B) because it contains 3,769 words, excluding the parts of the brief
exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii).
2.
32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because it has
been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word 2010 in
14-point Times New Roman type style.
s/ William Ramirez
William Ramirez
First Circuit Bar No. 6111
ACLU OF PUERTO RICO
Union Plaza Building, Suite 1105
416 Avenida Ponce de Leon
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918
(787) 753-8493
wramirez@aclu.org
18
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 27
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 28
s/ William Ramirez
William Ramirez
20
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 29
21
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 30
APPENDIX
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (The
Leadership Conference) is a coalition of more than 200 organizations committed
to the protection of civil and human rights in the United States. * It is the nations
oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human rights coalition. The Leadership
Conference was founded in 1950 by three legendary leaders of the civil rights
movementA. Philip Randolph of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters; Roy
Wilkins of the NAACP; and Arnold Aronson of the National Jewish Community
Relations Advisory Council. Its member organizations represent people of all
races, ethnicities, and sexual orientations. The Leadership Conference works to
build an America that is inclusive and as good as its ideals, and toward this end,
urges the Court to hold that sexual orientation classifications should be subject to
heightened scrutiny. The Leadership Conference believes that every person in the
United States deserves to be free from discrimination based on race, ethnicity,
gender, or sexual orientation.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a nationwide, nonprofit,
nonpartisan organization with over 500,000 members dedicated to defending the
principles embodied in the Constitution and our nations civil rights laws. The
ACLU of Puerto Rico is one of its chapters. The ACLU and the ACLU of Puerto
Rico advocate for equal rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)
A-1
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 31
people and the freedom to marry for same-sex couples in Puerto Rico and across
the country.
API Equality-LA is a coalition of organizations and individuals who are
committed to working in the Asian/Pacific Islander (API) community in the
greater Los Angeles area for equal marriage rights and the recognition and fair
treatment of LGBT families through community education and advocacy.
API Equality-LA recognizes that the long history of discrimination against
the API community, especially Californias history of anti-miscegenation laws and
exclusionary efforts targeted at Asian immigrants, parallels the contemporary
exclusion of gays and lesbians from marriage.
Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC (Advancing JusticeAAJC) is a national non-profit, non-partisan organization in Washington, D.C.
whose mission is to advance the civil and human rights of Asian Americans and
build and promote a fair and equitable society for all. Founded in 1991, Advancing
Justice-AAJC engages in litigation, public policy advocacy, and community
education and outreach on a range of issues, including anti-discrimination.
Advancing Justice-AAJC is committed to challenging barriers to equality for all
sectors of our society and has supported same-sex marriage rights in numerous
amicus briefs.
A-2
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 32
A-3
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 33
A-4
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 34
strengthening the bonds and bridging the gaps between the movements for racial
justice and LGBT equality.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) is a national nonprofit
legal organization dedicated to protecting and advancing the civil rights of lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families through litigation, public
policy advocacy, and public education. Since its founding in 1977, NCLR has
played a leading role in securing fair and equal treatment for LGBT people and
their families in cases across the country involving constitutional and civil rights.
NCLR has an interest in ensuring that laws that treat people differently based on
their sexual orientation are subject to heightened scrutiny, as equal protection
requires.
The National LGBT Bar Association (LGBT Bar) is a non-partisan,
membership-based professional association of lawyers, judges, legal academics,
law students and affiliated lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender legal
organizations. The LGBT Bar promotes justice in and through the legal profession
for the LGBT community in all its diversity. This case stands to impact our
membership both professionally and personally. A ruling in favor of marriage
equality would greatly increase our attorneys ability to safeguard the families and
relationships they have formed in their own lives. We believe that marriage
A-5
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 35
equality is a profound step in the right direction towards equitable treatment under
the law for all citizens.
The National LGBTQ Task Force (the Task Force), founded in 1973, is
the oldest national LGBT civil rights and advocacy organization. As part of a
broader social justice movement, the Task Force works to create a world in which
all people may fully participate in society, including the full and equal participation
of same-sex couples in the institution of civil marriage.
The Wide Committee for the Search of Equality (CABE for its Spanish
acronym) is a Puerto Rican non-governmental, non-profit organization composed
of the Rainbow Pride Coalition, Coa, Inc., Bears Community of Puerto Rico,
Matria Project, Amnesty International, the Psychology Association of Puerto Rico,
the Social Workers Professional Association, the Committee Against Homophobia
and Discrimination, the Special Clinic on Discrimination by Sexual Orientation
and Human Rights of the University of Puerto Rico School of Law, the Wide
Womens Movement, the Puerto Rican Organization of Working Women, the
Community Network for Clinical Research on AIDS (PR CoNCRA), American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Cristo Sanador Church, CLADEM of Puerto Rico,
Fundacin Gaviota, and individuals in their personal capacity. CABE works to
guarantee LGBT communities human rights and to propose actions to recognize
those rights. CABE believes that every person in Puerto Rico deserves to be free
A-6
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 36
from discrimination of any kind, including but not limited to discrimination based
on gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
A-7
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 37
A-8
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 38
A-9
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 39
A-10
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 40
A-11
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 41
A-12
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 42
Legal Momentum
Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
Matthew Shepard Foundation
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
Muslim Advocates
NaAmat USA
NAACP
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
NALEO Educational Fund
National Alliance of Postal & Federal Employees
National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education
National Association of Colored Womens Clubs, Inc.
National Association of Community Health Centers
National Association of Consumer Advocates (NACA)
National Association of Human Rights Workers
National Association of Negro Business & Professional Womens Clubs, Inc.
National Association of Neighborhoods
National Association of Social Workers
9 to 5 National Association of Working Women
National Bar Association
A-13
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 43
A-14
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 44
A-15
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 45
A-16
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 46
A-17
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 47
A-18
Case: 14-2184
Document: 00116793783
Page: 48
A-19