From Deseret News archives:

Utah filing targets ban on polygamy

Barnard cites top court ruling against Texas law forbidding gay activities

Published: Monday, April 26, 2004 7:41 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last summer against a Texas law that forbade private homosexual activities, Justice Antonin Scalia ominously predicted the decision would spell the end to laws against a list of other taboos, including polygamy.

The ruling, Scalia said, "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation" and would likely require laws against "fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity" to be subsequently declared unconstitutional.

Using that train of thought, a Utah civil rights attorney has now asked U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart to pick up where Scalia left off and strike down the state's century-old ban on polygamy.

"Utah's statutory prohibitions make criminal personal sexual relationships between consenting adults," attorney Brian Barnard writes in a new court filing. "This prohibition of polygamist relationships is as unconstitutional as Texas' prohibition against homosexual sodomy because it criminalizes a private sexual relationship between consenting adults."

The court's June 2003 holding in Lawrence v. Texas has been invoked in several lawsuits and sparked interesting legal debates across the country. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court relied heavily on the ruling to reach its November decision rejecting a ban on same-sex marriages in that state.

Story continues below
In January, Barnard filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of three Utahns who wish to participate in plural marriage. The married couple, along with the man's would-be second wife, sued after they were denied a marriage license by the Salt Lake County Clerk's Office.

Barnard on Friday filed a motion for summary judgment in the case asking Stewart to rule that, as a matter of law, the polygamy ban violates the trio's First Amendment rights to practice their religion and their 14th Amendment rights to be free from unwarranted government intrusion.

According to the filing, "Deeply held religious beliefs mandate that plaintiffs now enter plural marriage. Belief in and practice of polygamous marriage is a requisite for plaintiffs' exaltation and eternal salvation."

The couple has not been identified, but Barnard has said the married couple is each in their 60s and the woman in her late 40s.

The Utah Attorney General's Office, which represents Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swensen and two deputy clerks in the action, has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit. It will also have an opportunity to respond to Friday's motion prior to oral arguments in the case.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

i think the jazz players are scared of sloan. he is so grumpy and scarry when...

Audit calls to end rehiring retirees

So, since I retired from the Army at age 40 (20 years of service) and draw my...

This is ridiculous. If there is something offensive like animal...

Here is hoping her works out. Poor tackler in the video. Bad form, alot of...

I totally disagree with Colleen. The photo of the two hugging said more in...

Will state consider gay rights law?

To Mark who said: "...And I would also bet, based on the LDS Church's change...

SLC council OKs gay rights policies

Why is the LDS church sending a member to give this statement? They (we)...

Funny, I don't remember reading about Scrooge shrinking and getting hit in...

Prep football: Felt's Facts Week

To open enrollment - it is called competition. If you lock a good kid in a...

Utes remain silent about BCS

To all you yapping Cewg fans that mock Utah's chances of a BCS bid, one thing...

Advertisements
Advertisement