Couples Flood Utah County Clerk Offices After Gay Marriage Ruling

As state files emergency stay and appeals to 10th Circuit Court

  • Share
  • Read Later
George Frey / Getty Images

(L to R) Raylynn Marvel, Patsy Carter, Loreen Major, and Arlene Arnold wait in the offices of the Utah County Clerk and Auditor to learn if they will be issued a marriage license as a lesbian couple on July 20, 2013 in Provo, Utah

Hundreds of gay couples descended on country clerk offices across Utah to obtain marriage licenses following the landmark federal ruling that struck down the state’s voter-approved ban on gay marriage.

Among the first to wed were state Sen. Jim Dabakis, chairman of the Utah Democratic Party, and his partner Stephen Justesen, the Associated Press reports. U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby ruled Friday that the ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional, marking the first federal decision addressing whether states can refuse to recognize same-sex marriage following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturn of the Defense of Marriage Act in June.

The typically conservative state, which is home to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, filed an appeal of the ruling and an emergency stay to prevent the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples just hours after the ruling, the Salt Lake Tribune reports. It is unclear when the judge will make a decision over the stay.

The push for gay marriage also landed a victory in New Mexico this week, where the highest court declared it unconstitutional to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

[AP]

6 comments
wrp136
wrp136

Utah county and its' clerk were enjoined by Judge Shelby from enforcing the marriage ban. If they refused licenses to same sex couples, sue them for civil rights violations.

WorldPeas
WorldPeas

If this decision is upheld, marriage laws will no longer mean anything, as the touchstone of marriage rights has become the consent of adults and state interest in regulating family structures for optimal societal benefits (as has traditionally been the case) means zero.  Polygamy is already coming back and can't be stopped based upon the court's reasoning.  Marriage, at least in the law, will mean nothing at all soon.  States should just rescind all marriage laws and replace the whole concept with contract law -- you want 7 adults in your "contract", well fine;  4 men and 6 women?  fine.  That is essentially where the courts are going at the behest of the radical left -- destroying any concept of marriage, to the point where it means nothing.  Yes, I am a constitutional law professor -- a real one (unlike the hapless B.H. Obama).   This whole litigation strategy to destroy marriage was foretold by many radical feminists in the 1980s and early 1990s.  Don't tell me about slippery slope fallacies, as the left has been pushing to destroy marriage for many decades now.  

JimmyDemello
JimmyDemello

I dislike gay marriage extremely (but not hate cause I don't want to incur the wrath of the gay walking-dead wraiths.)

PhillyCannabis
PhillyCannabis

Yay Utah! Pennsylvania is still in the dark ages.

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

So many states hitched their hate laws to the wording of DOMA that it will only take one lawsuit to bring down their bans simply because the SCOTUS said it's unconstitutional and you can't appeal THAT decision.

Utah will appeal, of course, but they'll lose.  As much as states want to define marriage on their own terms, the fact is civil rights can't be defined based on religious ideology.  That, and the fact they're treating people who are gay differently before the law, make these bans patently unconstitutional.

So there will be much blustering and shouting and when it's all over, marriage between two PEOPLE, regardless of their gender, will be the law of the land.  And then Utah can file a brief about how the state is forbidding polygamy based on religious intolerance and we get to fight the whole stupid "who can get married" BS battle again.

How about we just take civil rights out of marriage?  And put the civil rights strictly in the hands of government?  If you get "married", it's purely religious and has no influence on your civil standing.  If you want the rights, get a civil contract for as many people as you want and sign it.  You'd need both to be called "married" as we know it today, but you'd only get the civil rights by signing that contract.  Seems to me that works better than all this crap that's going on now.

francois3
francois3

@DeweySayenoff 

No because it is still religious based discrimination and this is unconstitutional. Mariage should only be civil, and let the religions discriminate as they wish, it has no legal standing


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,104 other followers