Officials Seek Stay on Utah Gay Marriage Ruling

Federal judge struck ban down Friday

In the aftermath of U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Shelby's ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert, which triggered hundreds of impromptu weddings in Utah Friday at several county clerk offices, state officials moved on two fronts to put the decision on hold while they appeal.

Shelby has set a hearing on the state's request for a stay for 9 a.m. on Monday.

The judge declined an oral request from the state on Friday to stay his motion. Then Friday night the state filed a written motion with the judge, which Utah Gov. Gary Herbert said in a statement Saturday he hoped would receive an "expedited judicial resolution" because of the "chaotic situation" created by the decision.

There were varied responses Friday from county clerks across the state to requests from same-sex couples for marriage licenses. On Saturday, the Weber County Clerk's Office scrapped its plan to open for an hour to issue licenses to gay couples, after a large turnout caused security issues and what County Clerk Ricky Hatch called "equal protection" concerns.

Comments

[Charles.H.Anziulewicz@wv.]

It is not the courts' job to uphold the precise will of the majority of the people. That's what elections are for. The job of the courts is to uphold the Constitution, regardless of whether the necessary decisions fall in line with the will of the majority. It is up to the judges to determine, without bias from the rest of the population, what constitutes equality under the law, or equal protection. It seems more than obvious to me that to exclude Gays from the institution of marriage is a clear violation of any notion of "equality," and I have yet to see anyone dispute that on a rational level. Therefore, it is not "activism" on the part of judges to declare that Gay and Straight couples should be treated equally under the law, rather it is an example of judges performing their rightful duty.

In any case, this ruling will have precisely ZERO impact on people who are Straight (i.e. heterosexual) nor their marriages.

[Charles.H.Anziulewicz@wv.]

It is not the courts' job to uphold the precise will of the majority of the people. That's what elections are for. The job of the courts is to uphold the Constitution, regardless of whether the necessary decisions fall in line with the will of the majority. It is up to the judges to determine, without bias from the rest of the population, what constitutes equality under the law, or equal protection. It seems more than obvious to me that to exclude Gays from the institution of marriage is a clear violation of any notion of "equality," and I have yet to see anyone dispute that on a rational level. Therefore, it is not "activism" on the part of judges to declare that Gay and Straight couples should be treated equally under the law, rather it is an example of judges performing their rightful duty.

[cavalier973]

Gays have the same "right" to marry someone of the opposite sex as any other human being.

I mean, I'm heterosexual, and I don't have the "right" to marry someone of the same gender as myself.

So, equality.

[SIV]

POSITIVE RIGHTS

[BigT]

Positively wrong!

[SQRLSY One]

Gays! Married! In Utah! Conservative bastion of the USA!!! Ah just dunno any moar, HOW in GAWD's name can ah up-hold mah SACRED hetero marriage vows, and love mah betrothed & the fruit of our loins and LOVE our pet snakes and pet fish and pet spiders and pet bunny waaabbitts, KNOWING full well that my LOVE has been DILUTED and PULLUTED by the GAY marriage license of the GAY lovers down the street! Didn't y'all KNOW that LOVE is a finite resource, zero-sum-game, whereby, if there is more LICENSED gay "love", then the value of my hetero marriage license goes down the crapper?!?!? HOW the HELL da ya all expect me to uphold my Sacred Marriage Vows in these trying times?!?! Jees-um, what else do ah hafta explain to ye morons!?!?!?!?

[On The Road To Mandalay]

SQRLSY One

Finally, someone on this f***ing website with a sense of humor. Thank you.