Laws

United States of America

INDIANA

Limited information only available for these topics

Access to Children
Adoption of Children
Age of Consent
Anti-Vilification
Artifical Insemination
Assisted Reproduction
Bullying
Civil Unions
Custody of Children
Discrimination
Fostering Children
Gender Identity
Harassment
Hate Crimes
HIV/Aids
Homosexuality
Inheritance
In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF)
Marriage
Parenting
Partners
Privacy
Sodomy
Transgender, Transsexual
Violence
Wrongful Death

Please read the Disclaimer

Age of Consent Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

Consensual sex between same-sex couples is lawful at age eighteen (18) years [L1.1].


Indiana Code, Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure, Article 42. Offences against the person, Chapter 4. Sex crimes [L1.1]

IC 35-42-4-3 Child molesting

Sec. 3. (a) A person who, with a child under fourteen (14) years of age, performs or submits to sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct commits child molesting, a Class B felony. However, the offense is a Class A felony if:

(1) it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age;

[parts omitted]

(c) It is a defense that the accused person reasonably believed that the child was sixteen (16) years of age or older at the time of the conduct, unless:

(1) the offense is committed by using or threatening the use of deadly force or while armed with a deadly weapon;
(2) the offense results in serious bodily injury; or
(3) the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug (as defined in IC 16-42-19-2(1)) or a controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-1-9) or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge.

IC 35-42-4-9 Sexual misconduct with a minor

Sec. 9. (a) A person at least eighteen (18) years of age who, with a child at least fourteen (14) years of age but less than sixteen (16) years of age, performs or submits to sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct commits sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class C felony. However, the offense is:

(1) a Class B felony if it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age;

[parts omitted]

(b) A person at least eighteen (18) years of age who, with a child at least fourteen (14) years of age but less than sixteen (16) years of age, performs or submits to any fondling or touching, of either the child or the older person, with intent to arouse or to satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the older person, commits sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class D felony. However, the offense is:

(1) a Class C felony if it is committed by a person at least twenty-one (21) years of age;

[parts omitted]

L1.1 Indiana Code: Chapter 4. Sex Crimes (Accessed 07 JUN 09)
Children: Access, Custody, Visitation Legislation/Cases/References
1.

Courts & Tribunals

On 31 October 2013, the Court of Appeal wanted the Legislature to update state laws to address custody issues regarding children of same-sex and other non-traditional families. The court sent the case back to the Elkhart County judge with instructions to consider the non-biological mother's visitation request under standards involving a former stepparent or grandparent [C1.4], [R1.3].

On 18 March 2003, the Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a lower court ruling that two women can't both adopt three children because the women aren't married [R1.2].

In 2002, the 3-judge Indiana Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that gay parents living with partners should not lose custody of their children or the right to visit them [R1.1].

Further, a child's best interest, not a parent's sexual orientation, must dictate visitation and custody decisions.

The ruling overturns a Marshall County court ruling banning parents from living with same-sex and unmarried domestic partners if they have custody.

C1.4 Opinion: A.C. v. N.J. 20A04-1301-DR-37 PDF 283,83kb, 31 OCT 13
R1.3 EdgeOnTheNet: Indiana Court Says Law Unclear on Same-Sex Custody 01 NOV 13
R1.2 Associated Press: Appeals Court Rules Lesbian Couple Can Jointly Adopt Children 19 MAR 03
R1.1 Indianapolis Star: Parental Rights of Gays Bolstered 16 MAY 02
Civil Unions, Partners Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [INHERITANCE] [MARRIAGE] [PROPERTY]
1.

State

On 28 March 2011, in a 36–11 party-line vote, the Senate rejected a proposal by Anderson Democrat Tim Lanane to delete a ban on civil unions from a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage [R1.1].

2.

County

On 13 August 2012, in a 20–8 vote the Indianapolis City–County Council approved an ordinance proposal now in the hands of the mayor, that would offer health insurance coverage to unmarried opposite-sex and same-sex partners of city employees [R2.1].

3.

Cities & Towns

One other Indiana municipality is believed to offer domestic partner benefits to same-sex couples [Citation required].

R1.1 Indiana News: Senate Says No to Civil Unions 28 MAR 11
R2.1 The Advocate: Indianapolis City-County Council Approves Domestic Partner Benefits 14 AUG 12
Discrimination Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 27 January 2016, Senate Rules and Legislative Procedures Committee passed Senate Bill 344 7-5 . The Bill, that has yet to pass the full Senate and the Assembly, would extend civil rights to gay, lesbian and bisexual (but not transgender) people [R1.10].

On 13 December 2015, it was reported that in July the US Federal Government granted Bethel College Title IX exemption status that will allow the school to ban students or employees who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, pregnant out of wedlock or in same-sex marriages, however President Gregg Chenoweth said that the waiver doesn't mean people who are attracted to the same sex are prohibited from attending or graduating from the Christian school in Mishawaka, however they must be celibate [R1.9].

On 02 April 2015, the Indiana legislature passed (SB 50, effective 01 July) that prohibits service providers from using the law as a legal defense for refusing to provide goods, services, facilities or accommodations. It also bars discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or U.S. military service. The measure exempts churches and affiliated schools, along with nonprofit religious organizations [L1.8], [R1.7].

Indiana's has no state legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity [R1.6].


On 26 March 2015, Governor Mike Pence signed into law Senate Bill 101 (the Religious Freedom Restoration Bill) into law. The law goes into effect on 01 July 2015 [R1.5].

On 23 March 2015, the House approved 63-31 (6 excused) Senate Bill 101 (the Religious Freedom Restoration Bill), that would prevent state and local governments from “substantially burdening” a person's exercise of religion unless the government can prove it has a compelling interest and is doing so in the least restrictive means. On 24 February the Senate passed the Bill 40-10 and must now approve House amendments. The Governor has indicated he plans to sign the Bill into law [R1.4].

On 16 March 2015, the House Committee on Judiciary approved 9-4 Senate Bill 101 (the Religious Freedom Restoration Act) that would add legal protections for people with strong religious beliefs, including business owners who don't want to provide services for same-sex wedding ceremonies. The Bill now goes to the full House and will return to the Senate to approve committee amendment [R1.3].

On 18 August 2012, Dynasty Young, a gay, gender non-conforming 17-year-old, would not be allowed to return to his former high school, officials for Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) reportedly decided [R1.2].

In August 2001, State employment policy, which governs the treatment of about 35,000 state employees, specifically prohibited job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation [R1.1].

2.

County

Tippecanoe County has ordinances that prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation [R3.3].

Indianapolis/Marion County, Monroe County has ordinances against descrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identiy [R3.3]

3.

Cities & Towns

On 14 March 2016, Kokomo City Council voted 5-4 to add sexual orientation and gender identity to the city's human rights municipal code and also make discrimination based on marital status, age or veteran status unlawful, with potential fines of up to $2000. Mayor Greg Goodnight has said he will sign the law [R3.6].

On 05 October 2015, the Carmel City Council narrowly passed 4-3 Ordinance D-2224-15 banning discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation and gender identity in housing, public accommodations, education, employment, contracting or entry into a place of business. There are religious and other exemptions [R3.5].

Michigan and Whitestown have enacted ordinances that prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation [R3.4].

Columbus, Hammond, Muncie, New Albany, South Bend, Terre Haute and Zionsville (July 2015) and have enacted ordinances that prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity [R3.4].

Goshen has an executive order is pending, subject to settlement of final wording [R3.3].

On 28 November 2011, Evansville amended the city's municipal code to include provisions against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity [R3.2].

The cities of Lafayette, West Lafayette and Bloomington have local anti-discrimination laws that include sexual orientation, as has Purdue University [R3.1].

In November 2001, Fort Wayne City Council included sexual orientation in its anti-discrimination law to take effect from 1 March 2002 with the ordinance being put up for another council vote in mid-2003 [R3.1].

4.

Courts & Tribunals

On 15 December 2016, US District Court Judge Richard L Young ruled that Harrison County Clerk Sally Whitis did not violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and discriminate against Linda G Summers when she fired her for refusing, on religious grounds, to process marriage licenses for same-sex couples [C4.6], [R4.5].

On 11 October 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit vacated the three-judge ruling that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not protect employees from antigay discrimination, and granted Kimberley Hively's Petition for Rehearing in her claim of employment discrimination by Ivy Tech Community College. The court will announce the date for oral argument in a separate order [C4.4], [R4.3].

On 28 July 2016, in the US Appeals Court for the Seventh Circuit Judge Ilana Rovner wrote in a 42-page decision on behalf of a three-judge panel ''it seems illogical to entertain'' the idea that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 against sex discrimination covers gender non-conformity, but not sexual orientation, however she says she cannot issue a new ruling given precedent in the judicial circuit [C4.2], [R4.1].

R1.10 wane.com: Gay rights bill passes Indiana Senate committee 27 JAN 16
R1.9 TheJournalGazette: Bethel College granted waiver from LGBT law 13 DEC 15
L1.8 Act: Senate Enrolled Act 50 PDF 80.81kb, 03 APR 15
R1.7 EdgeMediaNetwork: Indiana, Arkansas Pass Revised Religious Objection Proposals 02 APR 15
R1.6 Indianapolis Star: Talking Points: Q&A - A look at gay, lesbian concerns'' 19 DEC 02
R1.5 TheAdvocate: Gov. Mike Pence Just Gave Indiana a 'License to Discriminate' 26 MAR 15
R1.4 IndyStar: Indiana House OKs controversial religious freedom bill 23 MAR 15
R1.3 TowelRoad: Indiana House Panel OKs Anti-Gay 'License To Discriminate' Bill Despite Opposition From Businesses 17 MAR 15
R1.2 Qnotes: Bullied student barred from schools 18 AUG 12
R1.1 Bloomington-Herald Times: State Adds Gays to Policy on Job Discrimination'' 07 AUG 01
2. County
R3.3 Goshen Media Release: Mayor Kauffman Issues Media Release on Next Steps in the Civil Rights Conversation (Accessed 24 SEP 15)
3. Cities & Towns
R3.6 93.1fmWIBC: Kokomo Council Approves LGBT Civil Rights 15 MAR 16
R3.5 Carmel, Indiana narrowly passes LGBT anti-discrimination ordinance 06 OCT 15
R3.4 IndyStar: How local LGBT anti-discrimination laws vary in Indiana 23 SEP 15
R3.3 Goshen Media Release: Mayor Kauffman Issues Media Release on Next Steps in the Civil Rights Conversation (Accessed 24 SEP 15)
R3.2 Evansville Courier & Press: City ordinance takes aim at prejudice, bigotry 03 DEC 11
R3.1 Associated Press: Fort Wayne OKs Protections for Gays 07 AUG 01
4. Courts & Tribunals
C4.6 Entry on Cross Motions for Summary Judgment (Registration): Linda G Summers v. Sally Whitis and Harrison County 4:15-cv-00093-RLY-DML PDF 224.23kb 15 DEC 16
R4.5 ReligionClause: Firing Clerk Who Refused To Process Same-Sex Marriage Licenses Did Not Violate Title VII 16 DEC 16
C4.4 Order: Kimberley Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College No. 15-1720 PDF 856.88kb 11 OCT 16
R4.3 LambdaLegal: Full Seventh Circuit Agrees to Rehear Lambda Legalís Indiana Employment Discrimination Case 11 OCT 16
C4.2 Opinion: Kimberley Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College No. 15-1720 PDF 338.49kb 28 JUL 16
R4.1 WashingtonBlade: Court declines to rule anti-gay bias is gender discrimination 28 JUL 16

GayLawNet®™ "Exclusive" Sponsorship of this page IS available
Gender Identity, Intersex,
Transgender, Transexual

[?]
Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [VIOLENCE]
1.

State

In 2002, Indiana's had no state legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 13 March 2017, Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson in the US District Court dismissed the name change suit filed on behalf of transgender man John Doe (legal name ''Jane Doe'') from Mexico. Doe was granted asylum in the US and asserted his constitutional rights under the 1st and 14th Amendments were violated through a state statute prohibiting non-citizens from legally changing their names. The Judge dismissed his case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction - as Doe never actually filled out the application to change his name, he cannot establish an actual injury [C2.4], [R2.3].

On 04 December 2014, Judge Freidlander for the Court of Appeals of Indiana reversed the trial court denial of a petition to change an f2m transgender man's legal gender so that he could correct the gender markers on his birth certificate, remanding the case and directing the trial court to grant Appellant's petition and issue an order directing the Indiana State Department of Health to amend his birth certificate to reflect his male gender [C2.2], [R2.1].

R1.1 Indianapolis Star: Talking Points: Q&A - A look at gay, lesbian concerns'' 19 DEC 02
C2.4 Order: John Doe v. Michael Pence, et al. No. 1:16-cv-02431-JMS-DML PDF 234.41kb 13 MAR 17
R2.3 TheIndianaLawyer: District court tosses transgender manís name-change suit 13 MAR 17
C2.2 Opinion: In Re Petition for Change of Birth Certificate No. 79A03-1403-MI-91 PDF 197.33kb, 04 DEC 14
R2.1 ThinkProgress: Indiana Court Of Appeals Grants Transgender Man Amended Birth Certificate 18 DEC 14
HIV, Aids Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

As at 2013, it is a Class D felony, meaning six months to three years in prison for the crime of "malicious mischief", placing blood, urine, semen, or feces in a place with the intent a person will "involuntarily touch" the prohibited body fluids, if the accused was infected with HIV [R1.1].

R1.1 The Advocate: 4 States With Scientifically Unsound Laws Criminalizing HIV 01 APR 13
Homosexuality, Sodomy Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

In 1977, consensual sex between same-sex couples became lawful [R1.1].

R1.1 ILGA: State-Sponsored Homophobia fn 125 PDF 700.06kb, MAY 09
Marriage Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

In 1997, Indiana's "defense of marriage" law prohibited the state from recognizing same-sex marriages "solemnized" in other states [R2.1].

State law already had banned same-sex marriage [R2.1].


Title 31. Family Law and Juvenile Law, Article 11. Family Law: Marriage, Chapter 1. Who May Marry [L1.12]

IC 31-11-1-1 Same sex marriages prohibited

Sec. 1. (a) Only a female may marry a male. Only a male may marry a female.

(b) A marriage between persons of the same gender is void in Indiana even if the marriage is lawful in the place where it is solemnized.

As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.3. Amended by P.L.198-1997, SEC.1.


On 13 February 2014, the Senate offered no amendments to HJR3, the constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and thus the language struck by the House earlier this month was not reinserted, meaning the measure must begin its process from the beginning and will not reach voters until at least 2016 [R1.11].

On 10 February 2014, the Senate Rules Committee passed Resolution HJR-3 that would amend the constitution stipulating that only marriage be between one man and one woman would be recognized. Language that also would ban same-sex civil unions being omitted.The Bill must pass the Legislature again this session to go to voters in a November referendum [R1.10].

On 28 January 2014, the House of Representatives approved 57-40 the amended Bill (HB1153 Marriage Amendment Ballot Language) that would place the state's gay marriage ban in the state constitution, while leaving the door open to eventual approval of civil unions. The amended Bill now heads back to the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate [R1.9].

On 22 January 2014, the Elections and Apportionment Committee approved 9-3 House Bill 1153 (Marriage Amendment Ballot Language) that would amend the Consitution to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. If it passes out of the House, the bill would then need to pass out of the Senate then the public would vote on it as a ballot measure [R1.8].

On 09 July 2013, attention was drawn to the 1997 law under which same-sex couples applying for a marriage license in Indiana could face a charge of perjury simply for submitting the application to their county clerk. However, simply styling your name as "John Smith (male not female)" or "John Smith (female not male)" as the case may require, would likely circumvent this law [L1.7], [R1.6].

On 29 March 2011, in a 40–10 vote the Senate approved a state constitutional amendment that would gay marriages and civil unions. If it passes the General Assembly again in 2013 or 2014 it would go on the election ballot in 2014. [R1.5].

On 23 March 2011, the Senate judiciary committee voted 7–3 to advance a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban marriage equality and civil unions [R1.4].

On 15 February 2011, House of Representatives approved a constitutional ban on marriage equality in a 70–26 vote. If the ban passes in the Senate, the same bill must be approved again by the 2013 or 2014 House and Senate. From there, voters will decide on whether to constitutionally bar same-sex couples from marriage in Indiana in the November 2014 election [R1.3].

On 08 February 2011, the House Judiciary Committee approved a resolution 8–4 on a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. The resolution next went to the full House. If the House passes it, it goes to the Senate for consideration [R1.2].

On 29 January 2010, the Senate approved 38–10 a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage that includes a restriction on civil unions. As the law already bans same-sex marriages, the constitutional amendment is unlikely to gain traction in the House [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 06 October 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court denied review of five cases from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin seeking the freedom to marry, leaving in force the five favorable marriage rulings reached in three federal appellate courts, meaning that soon, as many as 60% of the American people will be living in freedom-to-marry states [C2.40], [R2.39].

On 29 September 2014, the nine justices of the US Supreme Court likely met to discuss whether they should take up any or all of the seven petitions before the Court from Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin on the issue of marriage equality. (The only public word from the Court after the conference will be its order list. The list could be released earlier but likely will issue on 06 October.) [R2.38].

On 15 September 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, stayed its 04 September ruling finding bans against same-sex marriage unconstitutional pending disposition by the US Supreme Court [C2.37], [R2.36].

On 12 September 2014, Judge US District Judge Richard Young reinstated four same-sex couples' claim that Indiana's refusal to recognize out-of-state gay marriages is unconstitutional but not that part of the lawsuit that challenged the general constitutionality of the ban [C2.35], [R2.34].

On 11 September 2014, Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen in the US District Court ordered that the State recognise the out-of-state marriage of Veronica Romero and Mayra Yvette Rivera and if either of them should die, the Department of Health will issue a death certificate recording the deceased Plaintiff's status as “married” and list the other adult Plaintiff as the “surviving spouse” [C2.33], [C2.32], [R2.31].

On 04 September 2014, the the Seventh Court of Appeals unanimously upheld lower court rulings finding bans against same-sex marriage unconstitutional [C2.30], [R2.29].

On 19 August 2014, Richard L Young, Chief Judge of the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, ruled in Bowling v. Pence that State law prohibiting same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, staying the order pending the 7th Circuit Court rulings in Baskin v. Bogan, Lee v. Pence, and Fujii v. Pence [C2.28], [C2.27], [R2.26].

On 25 July 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit announced that the date for oral arguments in the Indiana and Wisconsin equal marriage cases had been set down for 26 August. The Court denied a request by the States for an en banc 10-member hearing, that will be before the customary 3-judge panel [R2.25].

On 16 July 2014,the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, " … on its own motion, ORDERS that the oral argument in this appeal, scheduled for Wednesday, August 13, 2014, is VACATED. A new oral argument date will be set by separate court order … " [C2.24], [R2.23].

On 14 July 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ordered the Indiana and Wisconsin marriage equality cases be orally argued on 13 August 2014 [C2.22], [R2.21].

On 01 July 2014, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Indiana to recognize the legal marriage of Amy Sandler and terminally-ill Nikole Quasney, pending the outcome of the appeal [C2.20], [R2.19].

On 30 June 2014, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ordered an expedited briefing schedule for hearing the challenges to the same-sex marriage ban in Indiana [C2.18], [R2.17].

On 27 June 2014, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a stay of the marriage equality cases “Marilyn R Baskin and Esther Fuller et al. v. Penny Bogan et al.” pending resolution of the appeal. The stay puts same-sex marriages in the State on hold [C2.16], [R2.15].


On 26 June 2014, during the few days that same-sex marriage was lawful in Indiana, Monroe Circuit Judge Valeri Haughton granted m2f transgender Melanie Davis (formerly David Paul Summers) and Angela Summers a divorce [C2.14], [R2.13].

Previously:

On 23 December 2013, the Court of Appeals held that the law against same-sex marriage could not be used to invalidate a marriage if one spouse later changes his or her gender identity [C2.5], [R2.4].


On 25 June 2014, federal district court judge Richard L Young struck down Indiana's same-sex marriage ban. The ruling holds that the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. There is no stay however, the State lodged a Notice of Appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeal requesting a stay [C2.12], [C2.11], [R2.10].

On 08 May 2014, US District Judge Richard Young in the US District Court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction so requiring the State of Indiana to recognize a lesbian couple's out-of-state marriage and have one of the women named as a spouse on her terminally ill partner's death certificate [C2.9], [R2.8].

On 09 April 2014, Chief Judge Richard Young in the US District Court Southern District of Indiana granted a 28-day injunction ordering the state to immediately recognize the marriage of Amy Sandler and Niki Quasney, who married last year in Massachusetts, and are raising two children. Quasney has been fighting stage four ovarian cancer for over five years [C2.7], [R2.6].

On 23 December 2013, the Court of Appeals, in a 3-0 ruling delivered by Mathias J, determined that Indiana's law banning same-sex marriage cannot be used to invalidate a marriage if one spouse later changes his or her gender identity [C2.5], [R2.4].

On 20 January 2005, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld the state's DOMA in its ruling in Morrison v. Sadler. The three same-sex couples that entered into civil unions in Vermont were denied Indiana marriage licenses under Indiana's DOMA. They challenged the law before the Marion Superior Court, which dismissed the case. The Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed, holding that the state's DOMA does not violate the state constitution [C2.3].

In January 2003, Attorney General Steve Carter's office asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit [R2.2].

In August 2002, a lawsuit seeking the right to marry was filed on behalf of Teresa Stephens and Ruth Morrison and two other couples in Marion County Superior Court [R2.1].

L1.12 Indiana Code: Title 31, Article 11. Family Law: Marriage IC 31-11-1-1 (Accessed 07 JUN 09)
R1.11 Towleroad: Indiana Senate Prevents Voters from Considering Gay Marriage Ban Until at Least 2016 13 FEB 14
R1.10 Fox28: Senate committee passes stripped gay marriage ban bill 11 FEB 14
R1.9 EdgeOnTheNet: Indiana House Passes Constitutional Gay Marriage Ban 28 JAN 14
R1.8 GayStarNews: After power play by speaker, House committee in Indiana approves gay marriage ban bill 22 JAN 14
L1.7 Indiana Code: Title 31. Family Law and Juvenile Law. Article 11. Family Law: Marriage. Chapter 11. Offences PDF 53.02kb, 11 JUN 13
R1.6 IndyStar: Same-sex couples seeking marriage could be charged with perjury 09 JUL 13
R1.5 365Gay.com: Indiana Senate approves Constitutional gay marriage ban 29 MAR 11
R1.4 The Advocate: Indiana Senate Panel Approves Marriage Ban 23 MAR 11
R1.3 The Advocate: Indiana House Passes Marriage Ban 15 FEB 11
R1.2 Indy Star: Gay-marriage ban clears House panel 08 FEB 11
R1.1 The Advocate: Indiana Senate Approves Marriage Ban 29 JAN 10

Courts & Tribunals

C2.40 Orders: Ordeer List: 574 U.S. PDF 433.43kb, 06 OCT 14
R2.39 FreedomToMarry: SCOTUS denies review of marriage cases, bringing the freedom to marry to 5 states 06 OCT 14
R2.38 GayNZ: Supreme Court discusses marriage 30 SEP 14
C2.37 Order: Marilyn Rae Basking, et al., v. Penny Bogan, et al., Virginia Wolf, et al., v. Scott Walker, et al. Nos. 14-2386, 14-2387, 14-2388, 14-2526 PDF 1.27MB, 15 SEP 14
R2.36 PinkNews: Indiana court stays ruling on same-sex marriage 15 SEP 14
C2.35 Entry on Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider: Melissa Love, et al. v. Michael Richard Pence No. 4:14-cv-00015-RLY-TAB PDF 63.24kb, 16 SEP 14
R2.34 EdgeOnTheNet: Judge Restores Part of Indiana Gay Marriage Suit 17 SEP 14
C2.33 Opinion and Order: Veronica Romero, et al. v. Michael A Brown, et al. No. 2:14-cv-325-JVB-PRC PDF 52.73kb, 11 SEP 14
C2.32 Stipulation: Veronica Romero, et al. v. Michael A Brown, et al. No. 2:14-cv-325-JVB-PRC PDF 88.58kb, 10 SEP 14
R2.31 WishTV: Indiana agrees to recognize 2nd same-sex marriage 12 SEP 14
C2.30 Opinion: Baskin, et al. v. Bogan. et al. and Wolf, et al. v. Walker, et al. Nos. 14-2386 to 14-2388, 14-2526 PDF 294.20kb, 04 SEP 14
R2.29 EqualityOnTrial: Seventh Circuit rules marriage bans in Indiana and Wisconsin are unconstitutional 04 SEP 14
C2.28 Final Judgment: Michelle Bowling, Shannon Bowling and Linda Bruner v. Michael Pence & Ors No. 1:14-cv-00405-RLY-TAB PDF 88.82kb, 19 AUG 14
C2.27 Entry on Cross Motions for Summary Judgment: Michelle Bowling, Shannon Bowling and Linda Bruner v. Michael Pence & Ors No. 1:14-cv-00405-RLY-TAB PDF 71.05kb, 19 AUG 14
R2.26 EqualityOnTrial: District court strikes down Indiana same-sex marriage ban in new ruling 19 AUG 14
R2.25 EdgeOnTheNet: 7th Circuit Sets Hearing on Gay Marriage Ban 25 JUL 14
C2.24 Order: Marilyn Rae Baskin et al., v. Penny Bogan, et al., Midori Fujii, et al. v. Commissioner for the Indiana State Department of Revenue, Pamela Lee, et al. v. Brian Abbott, et al., Virginia Wolf, et al. v. Scott Walker, et al. Nos. 14-2386, 2387, 2388, 2526, 16 JUL 14
R2.23 EqualityOnTrial: Seventh Circuit cancels oral arguments, Utah asks SCOTUS for stay 17 JUL 14
C2.22 Notice of Oral Argument: Marilyn Rae Baskin et al., v. Penny Bogan, et al., Midori Fujii, et al. v. Commissioner for the Indiana State Department of Revenue, Pamela Lee, et al. v. Brian Abbott, et al., Virginia Wolf, et al. v. Scott Walker, et al. Nos. 14-2386, 2387, 2388, 2526 PDF 146.56kb, 14 JUL 14
R2.21 EqualityOnTrial: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sets oral arguments in Indiana and Wisconsin same-sex marriage cases for August 13 14 JUL 14
C2.20 Order: Marilyn Rae Baskin et al., v. Penny Bogan, et al., Midori Fujii, et al. v. Commissioner for the Indiana State Department of Revenue, Pamela Lee, et al. v. Brian Abbott, et al. Nos. 14-2386, 2387, 2388 PDF 879.75kb, 01 JUL 14
R2.19 EdgeOnTheNet: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals orders Indiana to recognize one same-sex coupleís marriage 02 JUL 14
C2.18 Order: Marilyn Rae Baskin et al., v. Penny Bogan, et al., Midori Fujii, et al. v. Commissioner for the Indiana State Department of Revenue, Pamela Lee, et al. v. Brian Abbott, et al. Nos, 14-2386, 14-2387, 14-2388 PDF 1.10MB, 30 JUN 14
R2.17 EqualityOnTrial: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals expedites Indiana same-sex marriage appeal 30 JUN 14
C2.16 Order: Marilyn Rae Basking et al. v. Penny Bogan et al, Midori Fujii et al., v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of Revenue et al., Pamela Lee et al v. Brian Abbott, et al. Nos. 14-2386, 14-2387, 14-2388 PDF 139.89, 27 JUN 14
R2.15 The Advocate: Same-Sex Marriages Halted in Indiana 27 JUN 14
C2.14 State of Indiana Public Records Inquiry: In Re the Marriage of Melanie Davis and Angela Summers Case No. 53C08-1210-DR-000561
R2.13 IndyStar: Judge in Indiana grants same-sex divorce 03 JUL 14
C2.12 Opinion: Marilyn R Baskin and Esther Fuller et al. v. Penny Bogan et al. No: 1:14-cv-00355-RLY-TAB PDF 151.03kb, 25 JUN 14
C2.11 Notice of Appeal: Marilyn R Baskin and Esther Fuller et al. v. Penny Bogan et al. No: 1:14-cv-00355-RLY-TAB PDF 24.21kb, 25 JUN 14
R2.10 EqualityOnTrial: Indiana same-sex marriage ban struck down 25 JUN 14
C2.9 Entry on Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction: Marilyn Rae Raskin & Esther Fuller & Ors v. Penny Bogan & Ors No: 1:14-cv-00355-RLY-TAB PDF 252.03kb, 08 MAY 14
R2.8 abcNEWS: Judge: Indiana Must Still Recognize 1 Gay Marriage 08 MAY 14
C2.7 Case: Baskin v. Bogan No: 1:14-cv-00355-RLY-TAB
R2.6 ThinkProgress: Federal Judge Orders Indiana To Recognize Terminally Ill Womanís Same-Sex Marriage 10 APR 14
C2.5 Opinion: In Re the Marriage of Melanie Davis and Angela Summers No. 53A01-1305-DR-221 PDF 224.21kb, 20 DEC 13
R2.4 LGBTQ Nation: Court: Indiana gay marriage ban cannot invalidate marriages of transgender spouses 23 DEC 13
C2.3 Morrison v. Sadler, 821 N.E.2d 15 (Ind. App. 2005) No. 49A02-0305-CV-447
R2.2 Indianapolis Star: Attorney general seeks dismissal of same-sex marriage suit'' 04 JAN 03
R2.1 Indianapolis Star: Same-sex marriage heading to court'' 22 AUG 02
Parenting, Adoption, Fostering Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

Joint adoption by same-sex couples is lawful [R1.4].

In March 1999, the Indiana Senate killed proposed legislation making it more difficult for singles to adopt children before the bill could come up for final reading, or even a real debate [R1.3].

On 24 February 1999, the Indiana Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5–4 to endorse a bill to make adoption nearly impossible for anyone not living in an "intact marriage" under Indiana law. [R1.2].

In February 1999, Bloomington became the first municipality in Indiana to take an official stand against banning gay and lesbian couples from consideration as adoptive or foster parents. Resolution 99-01 passed the Bloomington City Council 6-0, with two abstentions [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 30 June 2016, US District Court Judge Tanya Walton Pratt concluded that ''Given Indiana's long-articulated interest in doing what is in the best interest of the child and given that the Indiana legislature has stated the purpose of Title 31 is to protect, promote, and preserve Indiana families, there is no conceivable important governmental interest that would justify the different treatment of female spouses of artificially-inseminated birth mothers from the male spouses of artificially-inseminated birth mothers'' [C2.3], [R2.2].

In March 2003, the Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a lower court ruling that two women can't both adopt three children because the women aren't married and the state's adoption statutes don't specifically address the issue of second-parent adoptions [R2.1].

The court found that a second parent sharing legal responsibility for children in a nurturing environment is in the best interest of the children.

R1.4 ILGA: State-Sponsored Homophobia fn 167 PDF 700.06kb, MAY 09
R1.3 Fort Wayne News-Sentinel: The Wrong Priorities 02 MAR 99
R1.2 Gary Post-Tribune: Gays Lose Another Bid to Get Adoption Rights 25 FEB 99
R1.1 Indiana Daily Student: Gay Couples Are Fit Parents 08 MAR 99
C2.3 Entry on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgement: Ashlee and Ruby Henderson v. Dr Jerome M Adams et al. No. 1:15-cv-00220-TWP-MJD PDF 164.35kb, 30 JUN 16
R2.2 EvansvilleCourier&Press: Judge orders Indiana to list both same-sex parents on birth certificate 30 JUN 16
R2.1 Associated Press: Appeals Court Rules Lesbian Couple Can Jointly Adopt Children 19 MAR 03
Violence: Bullying, Domestic Violence, Harassment, Vilification Legislation/Cases/References
1.

State

On 18 August 2012, Dynasty Young, a gay, gender non-conforming 17-year-old, would not be allowed to return to his former high school, officials for Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) reportedly decided [R1.1].

See 2. Courts & Tribunals below.

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 09 July 2013, a proposed settlement agreement in the Darnell “Dynasty” Young v. Indianapolis Public Schools was filed in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis. Young was expelled for bringing a stun gun to school to protect himself from bullies [C2.2], [R2.1].

R1.1 Qnotes: Bullied student barred from schools 18 AUG 12
C2.2 Complaint: Dynasty Young v. Indianapolis Public School Corporation No: 1:12-cv-1241 WTL-DKL PDF 666.43kb, 31 AUG 12
R2.1 SFGN: Gay Indiana Teen Settles Bullying Lawsuit for $65,000 10 JUL 13

GayLawNet®™ "Exclusive" Sponsorship of this page IS available