Estimated read time: 3-4 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 Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information.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 — Opponents and proponents of same-sex marriage agree on one thing: that the Supreme Court needs to decide whether states have the right to define marriage.
In a flurry of friend of the court briefs filed by midnight Thursday, a wide array of interests urged the Supreme Court to take up the issue when it returns from its summer recess next month.
Among them was an amicus brief filed by attorneys representing The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and four other faiths. The brief, which represents faith communities of more than 100 million Americans, urges the high court to hear Utah’s same-sex marriage case.
The brief maintains that recent court rulings have burdened religious organizations with legal uncertainty. “The time has come to end the divisive national debate as to whether the Constitution mandates same-sex marriage,” it states.
Other faith organizations filing the brief include The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, National Association of Evangelicals, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention and Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.
Some of the amicus briefs argue that the issue hinges on states rights — whether states have the authority to control social policy in their respective states.
But a brief filed on behalf of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians & Gays Inc., Freedom to Marry and two other groups, argued that the "continuing denial of the freedom to marry imposes severe legal burdens and detriments on millions of Americans every day for no good reason."
As court after court has now held, "there is no reason to perpetuate and prolong these injuries," attorneys for PFLAG and others wrote.
But others, such as the amicus brief filed by Robert P. George in support of the state of Utah, argues that "reducing marriage to a primary mark of social inclusion and equality, would — ironically— spread the very social message it was intended to oppose: that those outside the institution of marriage matter less," George wrote, along with Sherif Girgis.
Related:
Poll: Utahns support Amendment 3, believe victory unlikely
A recent poll shows the majority of Utahns support the state's decision to appeal the ruling that struck down Amendment 3, but an even greater number believe the Supreme Court will rule a ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.George, a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and McCormick professor of jurisprudence at Princeton, University, is a member of the Deseret News national editorial advisory board.
The 25-page brief also raises concerns about the "stigmatic harms that children and partners of broken homes often suffer."
Moreover, dissolving the links between marriage and "any historic marital norm besides consent, it would harm the state's material interests in providing children with stable ties to their own parents. It would undermine their right to be reared by their own parents whenever possible -- a right affirmed by the United Nations Convention on the rights of children.'
In 2004, the Utah Legislature and the Utah electorate, by a margin of 60-40 percent, approved an amendment to the state Constitution that defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Plaintiffs Derek Kitchen and Moudi Sbeity, Laurie Wood and Kody Partridge, and Karen Archer and Kate Call challenged Amendment 3 in federal court in March 2013. Archer and Call joined the suit to have their Iowa marriage recognized in Utah.
U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby overturned the Utah law in December, ruling it violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The state appealed Shelby's decision and obtained a stay from the U.S. Supreme Court, but not before about 1,300 same-sex couples were married in Utah over a 17-day period.
The state of Utah appealed Shelby's decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 25, the appellate court upheld the lower court ruling on a 2-1 decision.
The State of Utah has asked the Supreme Court to take up the case on appeal. Meanwhile, the lower court ruling is hold.
