Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Utah Asks U.S. Supreme Court To Stop Gay Marriages

Posted by on Jan. 1, 2014 at 12:02 PM
  • 57 Replies

Utah Asks U.S. Supreme Court To Stop Gay Marriages

Utah's attorney general has filed a request with the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay that would allow the state to enforce its limit of marriage to a union between a man and a woman.

Similar requests have already been rejected by district and circuit courts. Earlier this month, a federal district court invalidated Utah's ban on gay marriage that was endorsed by voters in 2004, saying it is not constitutional.

In the week that followed, more than 900 wedding licenses were issued to gay and lesbian couples, Huffington Post reports, more than 70 percent of the total granted.

"As a result of the district court's injunction, numerous same-sex marriages are now occurring every day in Utah," Attorney General Sean Reyes wrote in a request that was filed on behalf of himself and Gov. Gary Herbert. "And each one is an affront not only to the interests of the State and its citizens in being able to define marriage through ordinary democratic channels ... but also to this Court's unique role as final arbiter of the profoundly important constitutional question that is so carefully preserved in Windsor."

Windsor, you'll recall, refers to Edith Windsor, whose case was the impetus for the Supreme Court to declare part of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional this past June.

Utah's request was officially filed Tuesday, asking Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who is assigned emergency requests from that section of the United States, to grant a delay pending an appeal.

After receiving the request, Sotomayor "called for a response due by noon E.S.T. on Friday, January 3, 2014," according to a statement from the Supreme Court's press office that was forwarded to us by our colleague Carrie Johnson.

In citing the state's reasons for seeking a stay, the Utah officials wrote that without one, "there is a likelihood — indeed, a certainty — of irreparable harm."

The attorney general wrote that "this case involves not just a refusal by the federal government to accommodate a State's definition of marriage, but an outright abrogation of such a definition — by a single federal court wielding a federal injunction and acting under the banner of the federal Constitution."

The Utah officials' filing is 25 pages long, not counting its inclusion of earlier rulings. It cites 42 other court cases, several parts of the U.S. Constitution, and other authorities ranging from reports on same-sex households to the 1974 book Paternal Deprivation and the 1796 farewell address of George Washington.

National Woman's Party


by on Jan. 1, 2014 at 12:02 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
NWP
by guerrilla girl on Jan. 1, 2014 at 12:03 PM

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?

..MoonShine..
by Redwood Witch on Jan. 1, 2014 at 12:55 PM
In 2004, yes...they voted for an amendment banning SSM. A federal judge ovrrturned it as unconstitutional within the last couple weeks, making it legal.

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?

..MoonShine..
by Redwood Witch on Jan. 1, 2014 at 12:58 PM
2 moms liked this
Would love to know what irreparable harm is happening here.

I hope Sotomayer makes the right decision.
candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:05 PM
1 mom liked this

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?


nixore
by Myk Elskling on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:06 PM
5 moms liked this

And in this particular case, it doesn't matter what the rest of the state wants, because civil rights shouldn't be voted upon.

Quoting candlegal:

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?



candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:15 PM
1 mom liked this

LOL, of course.  It has nothing to do with civil rights.

Quoting nixore:

And in this particular case, it doesn't matter what the rest of the state wants, because civil rights shouldn't be voted upon.

Quoting candlegal:

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?




jessilin0113
by Platinum Member on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:16 PM
1 mom liked this
What other rights do you think should be left up to the whim of the people?

Quoting candlegal:

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?


nixore
by Myk Elskling on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:21 PM
3 moms liked this

So if this whole group voted that YOUR marriage should be banned, you'd gracefully go along with that because it's the will of the people?  Right.  I do believe you'd be saying we have no right to vote on your marriage.  

Because we don't.  

Quoting candlegal:

LOL, of course.  It has nothing to do with civil rights.

Quoting nixore:

And in this particular case, it doesn't matter what the rest of the state wants, because civil rights shouldn't be voted upon.

Quoting candlegal:

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?





..MoonShine..
by Redwood Witch on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM
2 moms liked this
Good thing SCOTUS disagrees with you.

Quoting candlegal:

LOL, of course.  It has nothing to do with civil rights.

Quoting nixore:

And in this particular case, it doesn't matter what the rest of the state wants, because civil rights shouldn't be voted upon.

Quoting candlegal:

In 2004 The voters in the state voted by a majority to keep marriage between one man and one woman.  An activist judge has decided that is not fair and gays should be able to be married.  It did not backfire, but a judicial activist has said it doesn't matter what the people want. 

Quoting NWP:

I have to say that I haven't really been following this case with the holidays and all....so help me understand this....As I am seeing it, Utah tried to limit the definition of marriage and it backfired so now, by default, gays and lesbians can marry in Utah...

Is that right?




lga1965
by on Jan. 1, 2014 at 1:35 PM
1 mom liked this

 Oh my.

Maybe Utah could secede?

The Mormons have said they want their religion/rules become worldwide.Grrrrreat.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN