arguments compelling, and at this preliminary injunction stage, it shows an increased likelihood they will ultimately prevail on the merits. Likely, the Fifth Circuit, and eventually the United States Supreme Court, will weigh in on this issue with clear instructions. For now, the Court finds it is not necessary to apply heightened scrutiny to Plaintiffs’ equal protection claim since Texas’ ban on same-sex marriage fails even under the most deferential rational basis level of review. (b) Section 32 fails equal protection challenge even under rational basis review To survive a rational basis review, Section 32 must bear at least some rational relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. Romer, 517 U.S. at 631, 116 S.Ct. 1620; see City of Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 446, 105 S.Ct. 3249 (<HOLDING>); Heller, 509 U.S. at 321, 113 S.Ct. 2637
holding that a defendant is in custody and miranda applies even when the purpose of defendants detention is unrelated to the purpose of the interrogation holding that the the statement of the purpose of the law in question in the committee report is not conclusive and reiterating that the question is whether the law is reasonably calculated to achieve a legitimate police power purpose holding that evidence must be offered for a proper nonpropensity purpose that is at issue in the case holding that even when there is a legitimate government purpose the discrimination must bear at least some rational relationship to that purpose holding that rule 11 sanctions are not appropriate when a motion is filed in part for a legitimate purpose even when the motion includes certain evidence which is assertedly presented for an improper purpose