Posted on 12/27/2013 12:32:52 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Utah announced its plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court a district judge's ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. The state announced its appeal plans Thursday as Utah's last four holdout counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, following the orders of Gov. Gary Herbert.
The office of Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes said that the state will consult with outside attorneys in the coming days and seek an emergency stay with the Supreme Court as soon as possible. "The Attorney General's Office is preparing an application to the United States Supreme Court requesting a stay of the district court's order," the attorney general's office said in a statement.
"Due to the necessity of coordination with outside counsel the filing of the appeal may be delayed for a few days. It is the intent of the Attorney General's Office to file with the Supreme Court as soon as possible."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor will receive the emergency appeal request because she has jurisdiction over Utah and surrounding states. The magnitude of the state's appeal could cause her to request all of the Supreme Court Justices to offer their opinion on the case.
Last Friday, U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby ruled Utah's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it violated the right to equal protection and due process under the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment. Shelby wrote in his ruling that the ban on same-sex marriage violated couples' "fundamental right to marry and, in so doing, demean the dignity of these same-sex couples for no rational reason."
Sixty-six percent of Utah's residents voted in 2004 to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being exclusively between a man and a woman. Utah is considered to be a more conservative state on the issue of same-sex marriage, due in part to its large Mormon population and the religion's belief that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman.
On Monday, the state requested a temporary stay in the district judge's ruling, arguing that they wanted to see the case play out in the appeals court before the state actually allowed same-sex couples to start marrying.
Judge Shelby refused to grant a temporary stay in his own ruling, and the state was also denied an emergency stay by the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday.
The Utah attorney general's office has said it is appealing Judge Shelby's ruling because the "federal district court's ruling that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right has never been established in any previous case in the 10th Circuit [Court of Appeals]."
As Utah announced its plans to appeal to the Supreme Court, the last of the state's holdout counties began issuing same-sex marriage licenses after Gov. Gary Herbert ordered them to do so. Four counties, including Box Elder, Utah, Piute and San Juan had previously refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses in spite of Shelby's ruling.
County clerks told the Associated Press that they had little choice in issuing same-sex marriage licenses after the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant an emergency stay on Tuesday. The counties could reportedly be held in contempt of federal court if they continued to refuse to issue the licenses.
San Juan County Clerk Norman Johnson told AP that he was hesitant to begin issuing same-sex marriage licenses because he feels it is not the will of the voters who put him in office over a decade ago, but ultimately the county clerks must abide by state orders. "We have no choice," Johnson said Thursday. "The scales have tipped. It's not the way I want to see things go. But the law's the law, and I accept it. It's time."
Utah Gov. Gary Herbert ordered all counties to comply with Shelby's orders, although he made it clear he disagreed with the judge's ruling. "I am very disappointed an activist federal judge is attempting to override the will of the people of Utah."
I wish I were merely thinking aloud. Instead the nightmare about the Roberts court is true —
(1) Roberts found Obamacare constitutional, enraging conservatives.
(2) Since the two gay marriage decisions, several judges have cited the Roberts court in knocking down laws against gay marriage.
See commentary below —
“The U.S. Supreme Court today struck down the key component of the Defense of Marriage Act, handing the Obama administration the power to recognize same-sex marriages nationwide for the purposes of federal benefits.
At the same time, Chief Justice John Roberts perhaps unwittingly gave the administration carte blanche to interpret the DOMA ruling in the broadest terms possible. By rejecting a citizen challenge to the federal court ruling that overturned California’s Prop. 8 ban on same-sex marriage, Roberts may have made it impossible for conservatives to sue the administration over how it recognizes those unions on a federal level.”
have you read the prop-8 opinion, with Roberts and Scalia in the 5-4 majority?
have you read the Windsor DOMA opinion, with Roberts and Scalia in the 5-4 MINORITY?
do you agree with the prop 8 opinion?
do you agree with the prop 8 majority opinion?
Regarding the PROP 8 SCOTUS case:
1. It does not matter what I think or what I agree to, as I am not involved in it. It matters what the facts are.
2. Nobody knows for sure that Kennedy does want to get state marriage laws before the court so that he can do an Amendment 14 national right to gay marriage.
3. Nobody knows for sure that Kennedy does NOT want to do an Amendment 14 national right to gay marriage.
4. IT IS possible Scalia knows Kennedy is ready for #2 and sided against standing to keep Kennedy’s hand off of it for as long as possible ... into the next presidential term with a possible new judge.
5. It is possible #4 is not true.
6. The ruling has to do with standing on referendums and state constitutions ... not explicitly about marriage.
7. When I read thru the majority opinion, I can find areas that are reasonable and some paragraphs that I DO NOT agree with.
8. When I read thru the MINORITY opinion, I can find areas that are reasonable and some paragraphs that I DO NOT agree with.
9. I stopped analyzing the text of SCOTUS opinions after KELO because the populist right (FReeper) do not read them and don’t have an interest.
10. The job of the attorneys is to get plaintiffs who clearly have standing, so you do not risk getting a case rejected on such an issue.
11. The attorneys failed in this case as the court was so divided on the standing of these plaintiffs.
12. it is absurd to think only the AG and GOV could have standing.
13. It is reasonable that the San Diego County clerks have standing (a better choice I believe than the referendum petitioners) ... they pressed their case ... but dropped it in the end, without going to SCOTUS.
14. To me, it seems almost certain that Scalia would have allowed standing for the San Diego County clerks. They were directly impacted by the District Court.
#45
endless comments on this site blaming Roberts for the DOMA decision ... I decided to spend 10 minutes trying to assert some facts ... no interest! ... Ranting is in, facts are not relevant.
Roberts dissented in the DOMA and case Kennedy was the b*tch, so I declare you the winner based on reality.
I ain’t no law talking guy but I’m sure the reason given why it’s actually Roberts fault is a bunch of hooey. Mind you I hate the SOB for Obamacare but come on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.