In re Zouzoulas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that circuit court clerk bore the requisite connection to the enforcement of state marriage laws because the plaintiffs could trace the denial of their rights to the defendant's role in enforcing the allegedly unconstitutional law
• finding that where one couple had standing to challenge a marriage license renewal, the court was not required to determine whether another couple had standing for the same claim
• finding that strict scrutiny applies because Virginia marriage laws “impede the right to marry by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and nullifying the legal import of their out-of-state marriages”
• finding that plaintiffs’ “stigmatic injuries are legally cognizable” because they flowed from allegedly discriminatory laws that impacted them personally, including by hindering their hospital visits and preventing them from adopting a child
• noting “that a case is justiciable if some, but not necessarily all, of the plaintiffs have standing as to a particular defendant”
• declining to narrowly characterize the right at issue as the right to same-sex marriage rather than a general right to marry because the majority in Bostic asserted that Lawrence and Windsor suggest otherwise

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).