Novel Compromise Pitched to U.S. Supreme Court in High-Profile Gay Marriage cases

Share Article

Gordon W. Watts, of Lakeland, Fla., Editor-in-Chief, of The Register, who lost a 4-3 split decision on behalf of Terri Schiavo in 2005, pitches an Amicus brief to High Court, using novel 'Equal Protection' argument that makes strong arguments that 'Gay Marriage' can't withstand Constitutional Equal Protection review. Watts' brief is unique among all briefs insofar as it seeks to correct some errors in law which are legitimate grievances of those seeking 'Same Sex' marriage, but helps 'Gay Rights' advocates without comprising the definition of marriage as solely '1-man, 1-woman.'

Gay Marriage confusion: can Watts' compromise work?

Gay Marriage confusion: can Watts' compromise work?

Gay Marriage confusion: can Watts' compromise work?

(Fri. 03 April 2015) Case Update: High Court enters odd ruling, upholding "money can buy access to courts" rule - Petition for rehearing filed with court, "Original + 40," instead of usual 'O+10' required of In Forma Pauperis, so clerks, Justices, libraries, & press can have easy access. Case documents are available at The Register in front-page news.

--End of Update-Original press release follows:

Yesterday, The U.S. Supreme Court docketed a 2nd Supplemental Brief in the case of Register editor, Gordon W. Watts, who is asking the High Court for permission to file an Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) brief in several high-profile gay marriage cases, as reported previously by The Register. The docket number is 14-8744, and filings available at The Register ( or, for open-source (free) download, beneath the 'Lady Justice' icon on the "right-hand" side of the front-page news.

Watts is alleging, in his filing, that both sides have overlooked an obvious, and "workable," solution that will grant relief both to the "traditional" marriage advocates, who wish to keep the definition of marriage the same (1 man and 1 woman), as well as showing 'Gay Rights' advocates solutions that have been used in the past, which did not require the definition of marriage to be altered or changed.

The Court normally does not allow non-lawyers to file their own Amicus briefs, a rule which Watts is challenging, as described more fully in the following concurrent release:

Mr. Watts was a high-profile litigant in the recent 'Terri Schiavo' lawsuit, almost winning in court on her behalf:

In Re: GORDON WAYNE WATTS (as next friend of THERESA MARIE 'TERRI' SCHIAVO), No. SC03-2420 (Fla. Feb.23, 2005), denied 4-3 on rehearing. (Watts got 42.7% of his panel)
In Re: JEB BUSH, GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA, ET AL. v. MICHAEL SCHIAVO, GUARDIAN: THERESA SCHIAVO, No. SC04-925 (Fla. Oct.21, 2004), denied 7-0 on rehearing. (Bush got 0.0% of his panel before the same court)
Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo ex rel. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1223, 2005 WL 648897 (11th Cir. Mar.23, 2005), denied 2-1 on appeal. (Terri Schiavo's own blood family only got 33.3% of their panel on the Federal Appeals level)

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Gordon Watts
+1 (863) 688-9880
Email >

Gordon Wayne Watts
Visit website