plan. Tex. Fam.Code §§ 7.001, 7.003; (6) seek spousal maintenance if they separate or divorce. Tex. Fam.Code § 8.051; (7) enjoy the benefit of the “zone of privacy” that heterosexual married couples enjoy in the form of evidentiary privileges between spouses. Tex.R. Evid. 504; (8) enjoy succession rights under state laws of intestacy. Tex. Prob.Code § 45; or (9) have the right to make burial or other decisions regarding the handling and disposition of one another’s remains. On October 3, 2013, Plaintiffs Holmes and Phariss applied for a marriage license from the Bexar County Clerk Riekhoffs office. Defendant Rickhoff refused to issue a license because Holmes and Phariss are both men. This denial establishes an Article III injury. See Parker v. D.C., 478 F.3d 370, 376 (D.C.Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also Bishop, 962 F.Supp.2d at 1273-74,
holding article iii courts may not exercise executive or administrative duties of a nonjudicial nature holding that article iii courts have an independent obligation to determine whether subject matter jurisdiction exists holding that courts have consistently treated a license or permit denial pursuant to a state or federal administrative scheme as an article iii injury holding that the exception applies where a state administrative agency operates pursuant to a federal legislative scheme holding that federal courts may not consider other issues before resolving standing an article iii jurisdictional matter