Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Utahns on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate applauded the U.S. Supreme Court's decision Friday to finally tackle the issue.
And though Utah's case is not among those the nine justices will hear, Utah Federal Solicitor Parker Douglas said the state will consider filing a friend-of-the-court brief in support of states' rights to define marriage.
The court consolidated cases from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee to hear arguments on whether the 14th Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex. It will also decide whether a state must recognize legal same sex-marriages performed in other states.
Utah's case raised basically the same questions. Douglas, who defended Utah's marriage law, said he's glad the high court will hear the cases.
"I think it's an important issue for the court to consider, and I think it's one that it should consider because it will give all American citizens a uniform answer and a purposeful law so that we are aware of what the government can and can't do," he said.
Equality Utah Executive Director Troy Williams praised the court's decision to hear the cases.
This is a defining moment for gay Americans. All gay and lesbian couples deserve the freedom to marry who they love. We look forward to the Supreme Court determining once and for all that LGBT Americans do enjoy equal protections under the law.
–Equality Utah executive director Troy Williams
"This is a defining moment for gay Americans," he said. "All gay and lesbian couples deserve the freedom to marry who they love. We look forward to the Supreme Court determining once and for all that LGBT Americans do enjoy equal protections under the law."
Sen. Orrin Hatch urged the justices to respect the constitutionality of traditional marriage. He said that although he opposes discrimination based on sexual orientation, he has always believed marriage is the sacred union between one man and one woman.
"In my view, the U.S. Constitution does not dictate a particular definition of marriage, so I believe such judgments are properly left to the citizens of each state," Hatch said in a statement. "I hope the Supreme Court ultimately adheres to the original understanding of the Constitution and allows each state to define marriage for itself."
The landscape has changed on marriage since the Supreme Court rejected cases from Utah and four other states last October. Thirty-six states now allow same-sex marriage, nearly twice as many as just three months ago.
But in November, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati became the first appellate court to uphold state bans on same-sex marriage. Plaintiffs from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee are asking the court to reverse that decision. Each of the states is under the jurisdiction of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
In my view, the U.S. Constitution does not dictate a particular definition of marriage, so I believe such judgments are properly left to the citizens of each state. I hope the Supreme Court ultimately adheres to the original understanding of the Constitution and allows each state to define marriage for itself.
–Sen. Orrin Hatch
That split among appellate courts likely prompted the Supreme Court to bring a national solution. Oral arguments will likely be held in April with a decision coming in late June.
Douglas said he believes there was a split before the Ohio case but it became more clear after that ruling.
"The 6th Circuit decision directly said the Constitution means two different things depending on which region of the country you're in," he said, adding that people on all sides of the issue would find that undesirable.
Bill Duncan, director of Sutherland Institute’s Center for Family and Society, said the organization is encouraged that the court is "finally going to take the opportunity to correct the mistakes of so many federal courts that have said that the states are not free to define marriage as they always have."
Sutherland hopes the justices will take seriously the child-centered purposes of marriage and the rights of voters to choose for themselves the kinds of laws that will govern them, Duncan said.
In 2004, two-thirds of Utahns voted to amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
A federal district court struck down Amendment 3 in December 2013, a ruling that was later upheld by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The state petitioned the Supreme Court but the court declined to take the case, making same-sex marriage legal in Utah.
Gov. Gary Herbert reiterated his position that states have the right to decide their own marriage laws, and that Utah and the nation deserve certainty and finality with respect to the law.
"As this case progresses, I once again encourage all Utahns — regardless of their personal views on this matter — to treat each other with respect," he said in a statement.
Email: romboy@deseretnews.com Twitter: dennisromboy; DNewsPolitics
