Munger, Tolles & Olson litigator Jerome C. Roth was quoted by Law360 in its coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in a pair of cases that overturned efforts to stop the right for same-sex couples to marry. [“BigLaw Attys Praise High Court's Gay Marriage Rulings,” Law360, June 26, 2013]
“As counsel to scores of amici, I was overwhelmed by three emotions. First, pride in the result of the efforts of many lawyers working together in a coordinated, compelling way. Second, gratitude to the parties, to the court and to our society for debating and resolving issues without the rancor and violence plaguing other nations.
“Third, joy and awe that, for the first time in my 55 years, I am finally fully adult, confronting the fundamental question other adults face — should I ask my partner in life to marry me. Getting to ponder that question makes me feel older and more responsible, yet younger and giddier,” Mr. Roth told the online legal publication. Mr. Roth is a San Francisco-based a trial lawyer specializing in business and international litigation and white collar criminal defense.
Bram Alden was quoted in a Law360 story following the Ninth Circuit’s removal of the stay on same-sex marriages, which allowed same-sex marriages to resume in California. [“Prop 8 Backers' Bid To Stall Gay Marriage Nixed By Kennedy,” Law360, June 28, 2013]
“I am proud to work at a law firm that has been a leader in the fight for marriage equality, and I am re-energized to forge ahead in the 37 states where the fight continues," Mr. Alden said.
Munger Tolles has been extensively involved in gay marriage litigation in recent years, both before the California Supreme Court and in the federal courts. Most recently, Mr. Roth and a team of Munger Tolles lawyers represented over 40 public interest law, gay rights and bar organizations as amici before the United States Supreme Court in the Prop 8 case that was decided on June 16, 2013 – resulting in the invalidation of Prop 8 which banned gay marriage in California. The Munger Tolles brief argued that marriage is different from the legalistic civil unions previously available to gay couples and that depriving them of the unfettered right to marry amounted to unconstitutional discrimination and stigmatization in violation of the precepts set forth in Brown v. Board of Ed.