Ninth Circuit Temporarily Blocks Idaho Marriages

Jim Burroway

May 15th, 2014

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a temporary stay of a lower court’s ruling that found Idaho’s ban on same-sex marriages unconstitutional. The lower courts ruling was set to go into effect on Friday at 9:00 a.m., but Gov. Butch Otter filed an emergency request with the Ninth Circuit asking for a stay until the pending appeal is completed. The Ninth Circuit has partially granted that request:

In a one-sentence order, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote, “The district court’s May 13, 2014 order is temporarily stayed pending this court’s disposition of appellants’ emergency motions for a stay pending appeal.”

In other words, the three-panel court (consisting of Judges Edward Leavy, Consuelo Callahan, and Andrew Hurwitz) have decided to issue a temporary stay to give them time to decide whether to keep the stay in place throughout the appeals process.

Eric Payne

May 16th, 2014

Before the Ninth Circuit, essentially, got smacked down by the United States Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v. Perry — SCOTUS ruled the plaintiffs had no standing, thus, the Ninth should never have heard the appeal — it had issued a ruling that California’s Prop 8 violated the United States’ Constitution, which no individual state’s Constitution is permitted to do. By issuing such a ruling, technically, the decision of the Ninth never existed, reverting the outcome of that case to the previous ruling.

So, now, the Ninth gets hit with two requests in just a few days: NOM wants a reversal of an order issued barring them from intervening in “defending” Oregon’s marriage equality case, and a request for a stay in the ruling of Idaho’s ruling in favor of marriage equality.

Since the NOM appeal is a replay of Perry, and SCOTUS has already ruled on “standing,” the response of the Ninth should be a no-brainier — the Ninth will deny the request and, in-line with its Perry ruling! SCOTUS will decline to hear the appeal.

Although, I personally believe the request by Idaho’s governor should also have been denied, since before SCOTUS’ decision in Perry, the Ninth had also rendered a decision on marriage equality.

Then it hit me — since SCOTUS “erased” that pro-equality decision, it doesn’t exist… so the gears and levers of the system have to go through the motions.

So, who’s going to get to SCOTUS first? Utah and/or New Mexico out of the Tenth Circuit? Oregon and/or Idaho and/or Nevada out of the Ninth? Pennsylvania out of the Third? Georgia out of the Eleventh (long shot, since case has only been recently filed)? South Carolina and the Fourth(also a long shot as no decision yet reached)? Fifth Circuit and Texas, maybe Virginia and the Fourth? The Sixth Circuit and Michigan, maybe? The Seventh’s Indiana? Or the Eighth and Arkansas?

The only areas of the United States in which a marriage equality case, right now, is not winding it’s way through the system is the First Circuit and the Second Circuit. In all the other cases — at all of the current levels — the decision(s) issued have been pro-marriage equality.

The handwriting’s not only on the wall — it’s been writing with a neon green Sharpie.

Sir Andrew

May 16th, 2014

I’m not sure ANY of these cases will be accepted by SCOTUS. Every court is saying the exact same thing. There is no real controversy that needs resolving. And that is a mandatory part of jurisdiction.


May 17th, 2014

According to some commentators at Equality on Trial, SCOTUS cannot wait until 2016 as it had hoped, but must publish a decision in 2015 due to the sheer number of cases throughout the country and their controversy.

One commentators stated that the only cases that will likely be decided by the Court of Appeals early enough to be decided by SCOTUS in 2015 are the cases out of Oklahoma (not New Mexico, where ME is already achieved), Utah (10th) and Virginia (4th), due in part to the early District Court decisions in the 4th and 9th circuits and especially due to the speed of the 4th Circuit.


May 17th, 2014

Interesting review of the Jo Becker book on Proposition 8, along with the earlier book by Dale Carpenter on Lawrence v. Texas at by Claude Summers. Summers finds both books readable and informative, but especially appreciates Carpenter’s book for its broader perspective and placing the issues in larger contexts. Here is a link.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.