Federal Judge Denies Idaho Governor's Motion To Put Same-Sex Marriages On Hold Pending Appeal

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

May 14, 2014 - 2:15 PM

BOISE, Idaho — A federal magistrate judge on Wednesday rejected a request from Idaho's governor to put same-sex weddings on hold while he appeals her ruling from a day earlier that struck down the state's same-sex marriage ban.

U.S. District Magistrate Judge Candy Dale wrote that the appeal is unlikely to succeed so there's no reason to keep the state from granting marriage licenses to gay couples starting Friday.

Dale noted she already found Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter's arguments lacked legal merit when she struck down the ban Tuesday evening. The judge said allowing Idaho to continue enforcing its laws against same-sex marriage would irreparably harm the four couples who sued over the ban, along with other gay couples.

"Nor does the public interest favor preserving a status quo that deprives individuals of their constitutional rights," Dale wrote. "The court finds a stay pending appeal is not warranted."

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/259171741.html

[CurtEastPoint]

1. "Candy" vs. "Butch" sounds like a playground squabble.

[totodeinhere]

2. According to the article they will appeal that ruling just like Utah did.

If necessary they will probably go all the way to the SCOTUS where they might find a sympathetic conservative judge who will grant a stay. So if I wanted to have a same sex marriage in Idaho I would do it the sooner the better.

[Major Hogwash]

7. And they did . . and they got a temporary stay! Almost all of the media talking heads were relieved

I couldn't believe how transparent the local tv news anchors were when the news of the stay was granted, just about 3 minutes before the end of the 4:30 PM news report.
One of the other tv channels carried it as the first story of their news broadcast, when their program started at the bottom of the hour.
They acted all haughty for this "breaking news".

Back on Wednesday, the very same tv news anchors of all 3 local channels were all aghast at the Judge's decision to throw out Idaho's lameass constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

On Wednesday, almost immediately after the judge's decision was announced, every single GOP politician came crawling out from under the rocks they have been hiding from to declare their undying loyalty to "protecting the sanctity of marriage" from *GASP* teh gayze people living in this backwoods state.

I was afraid that some idiot judge would grant a temporary stay.
And one did on Thursday afternoon.

Then when I saw the hurt looks on the faces of so many people that wanted to get married at the courthouse on Friday morning dashed to pieces late on Thursday, it was almost too much for me . . I started swearing at the tv and I was ready to throw a shoe at it when I realized that time is on our side.
It may take another 6 weeks . . . or another 6 months . . . but that stupid, idiotic unconstitutional amendment to our state constitution will be thrown out . . . eventually.

Until then, we can only wait for the scales of justice to be balanced in this state.

The Republican party is dead in this state.
They just signed their own death warrant, as far as I'm concerned.
They can no longer claim to represent the majority of the state's population when they rail so publicly against same-sex marriage, women's rights, affordable healthcare, or immigration reform.
The Idaho GOP is stuck in the black & white television days of the 1950's.

[totodeinhere]

8. I wish you were right, but I doubt very seriously if the Republican Party is dead in Idaho.

It's going to take a few more years for demographic changes to kick in in that state and make a difference.

[shenmue]

3. Whee!

[Swede Atlanta]

4. It will be interesting......

Idaho is in the 9th Circuit in San Francisco.

While the cases are different the 9th Circuit issued a stay on U.S. District Court Judge Walker's scathing holding that withholding the right to marry violated petitioner's Due Process and Equal Protection rights under the U.S. Constitution. But the Supreme Court ordered the 9th Circuit to rescind its order and let Walker's decision stand. The SCOTUS avoided the really big issue which is whether state constitutional or statutory prohibition of same-gender marriage violate the U.S. Constitution. They decided the case by holding that the petitioner's before them lacked standing to defend Prop 8.

Here I don't think there is any question that the governor of Idaho and/or his AG has standing to petition/defend state law.

The question is whether the 9th Circuit has the stomach to risk being reversed on any grounds and rather requiring the state of Idaho to advance their appeal through the 9th Circuit starting with a 3-judge panel and then potentially asking for a full en banc review before submitting a writ of certiorari to the SCOTUS.

[davidpdx]

6. Good points

The SCOTUS took the chickenshit way out on Prop 8 rather than deciding the issue (while I'm happy it was a win, the ruling certainly could have been better). I have to believe this will end up going back before the SCOTUS again in the near future with all the rulings coming down so close together. The question isn't really whether it will happen, but when. Given that they are finishing their current term and these cases still have a lot to play out, I'm wondering if it will be the 2015-2016 term when SCOTUS takes up the issue.

[weissmam]

5. At this point I don't know why they still bother