Quantcast
Utah

Gov. says Utah will comply with law if Sotomayor doesn't grant stay

Both sides in same-sex marriage recognition case await word from Supreme Court

Comments

Return To Article
  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    July 19, 2014 9:45 a.m.

    @RedWings
    "So, voicing opposition to SSM means that one can be ridiculed, called names, forced to give up their livelihood and means of support, etc.? "

    I'd recommend stronger labor protections and workers rights laws but that's a pretty liberal thing to support and lately unions have been weakened rather than strengthened so I don't see any help there in the near future.

    "I do not call anyone names - including homosexuals."

    Why do you oppose same-sex marriage? There's gotta be something insulting in that reasoning, even if you frame it in a way that leaves it unstated like 'children do best (on average) with a mother and father' (stereotypes/generalizes same-sex parents as being inferior)

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    July 18, 2014 9:51 p.m.

    Just to be clear, the Wandervogel movement was not a gay movement at all. There was one branch of it that was led by a gay man and when parents found out they demanded that that branch break away from the whole.

    Crafting gay children, though, is something every person with any interest in the LGBT movement should look up and read. It is enlightening to be sure.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 18, 2014 3:45 p.m.

    @ Canadiandy -

    Thank you for the glimpse into our future in the US.

    It does not look brigth, but at least it will be "tolerant"....

  • intervention slc, UT
    July 18, 2014 3:16 p.m.

    @canadiandy
    With all that going on surely you can point us to a credible source to confirm your claims?

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    July 18, 2014 2:53 p.m.

    @Jared wrote, "Except that that interpretation has not been stated by the Supreme Court so as yet is opinion."

    Jared, if the loser in every court decision took that attitude, SCOTUS would have to rule on every single court action. It doesn't work that way. There needs to be a reason that the judge ruled wrongly (e.g. refused to allow you to produce evidence, the decision clashed with the Constitution or with previous SCOTUS rulings).

    The State of Utah paid megabucks to appeal this decision to the 10th Circuit--and presented their argument as to why Judge Shelby was wrong. The appeal was denied. There is NOTHING in Utah's argument that outweighs the 14th Amendment argument. The lawyer presenting the case knew that and every legislator with legal expertise knows it, too. But they continue to waste taxpayers' money, trying to fool their supporters into thinking that they really have a case.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 18, 2014 2:02 p.m.

    @ koseighty-

    That is my point. The governor is living up to his oath to uphold and defend the law. The SC is the final say. If they rule against Ammendment 3, that is what the governor will follow, regardless of his personal opinion.

    @ Schnee-

    So, voicing opposition to SSM means that one can be ridiculed, called names, forced to give up their livelihood and means of support, etc.? Those behaviors are bullying - no less. I do not call anyone names - including homosexuals. That bevavior is childish and does not help a cause.

    @ Ranch-

    Robertson and the Mozilla CEO have a right to do and say what they did. That you do not like it does not give you the right to name-call or attack them. Accusing them of name-calling while calling them "bigots" is the definition of hypocrisy. That is something the left is getting extremely good at....

  • Jared NotInMiami, FL
    July 18, 2014 1:32 p.m.

    @RanchHand: "If Herbert were actually defending the law, he would accept that Amendment-3 violates the 5th and 14th Amendment Rights of LGBT couples and cease his opposition immediately."

    Except that that interpretation has not been stated by the Supreme Court so as yet is opinion.

  • no fit in SG St.George, UT
    July 18, 2014 12:52 p.m.

    Canadiandy,
    Have you been hanging out with Rush Limbaugh, king of conspiracy theories?

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    July 18, 2014 12:20 p.m.

    @Laura Bilington
    Please clock me in for my mandatory propaganda shift. I'm definitly not a Utah native, I wasn't born at Utah Valley Regional Medical Center, I didn't grow up in Davis County and go to Bountiful High School. I don't own a house in Salt Lake. I mean, if I don't agree with @firstamendments positions, clearly i'm not from Utah and i'm and out of state operative heck(there's a Utah word for ya) bent on destroying the cultural fabric of Utah.
    @Firstamendment
    My guess is because 40-50% of Utahns(depending on the poll you believe) support SSM, so even if we are a minority, there are plenty of SSM supporters in Utah. In my age group 20-30, there are even a lot of LDS people who support SSM.

  • Canadiandy Alberta, CA
    July 18, 2014 11:53 a.m.

    Here in Canada the acceptance of Same Sex Marriage has already led to the entrenchment of Polygamy groups, grooming of teenage boys by older men (who can now marry), and just last week in politicians pushing to remove the rights of birth parents to have a say in child placement.

    Pandora's box is wide open here and our brains fell right out. Sigh. It would be nice to see the US taking the higher ground on this one.

    Columbia, how you have fallen.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:50 a.m.

    RedWings;

    "It is not Herbert's job to interpret the law. That is for the courts."

    The courts have interpreted the law. Over and over now. And they've all been saying that amendments that deny LGBT couples the right to marry the person of their choice is a violation of the US Constitution. How many such interpretations is enough?

    "Those attacked, villified, or forced to resign from job did not either."

    Yes they did. Go read what Phil Roberson said. The Moz. CEO donated money to deny civil rights to LGBT couples. You may not have said anything, but as I pointed out, these people who are being criticized did do those things.

    It isn't "common civility" (nor logic) to deny the rights you enjoy to others, Red, that is the hypocrisy. Nor is it "civil" to call LGBT people "sinners, perverts, abominations" etc., as we see frequently on the DN's comment pages.

  • Jeremy234 SLC, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:46 a.m.

    First Amendment: How would you refuse to obey this law? By not getting married? And how would your tax dollars be used to fund other people's weddings?

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:37 a.m.

    CJB asks:

    "Do you believe that obeying the law is more important than protecting Utah against the destruction of society and massive loss of life brought on by plagues of Biblical proportion.

    Or do you not believe in the proclamation of the family?"

    CJB your question is exactly what is wrong with this state and it's Government. Governor Herbert was not sworn in to defend and represent the beliefs of the Mormon Church he was sworn it to defend and lead by the Constitutions of the US and the State of Utah.

    I know it's hard for some folks in Utah to understand this but as history has taught us Mormon beliefs don't always walk hand and hand with the constitution.

  • koseighty The Shire, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:37 a.m.

    @RedWings
    "Right now, Ammendment 3 is the law."

    WRONG. The moment Amendment 3 was struct down in federal court, it ceased to the the law. That is why marriages were conducted in the state until a stay was issued.

    With various stays in place, the law is suspended until further judicial review. States can choose to continue to appeal as Utah and others have done. But they are also free to accept the courts' rulings and discontinue their appeals. In which case any stays are lifted and the state extends marriage equality. Pennsylvania chose this course. The state is under no obligation to continue to defend any law.

    In any case, after the federal court and the 10th circuit court rulings, the law TODAY in Utah is marriage equality. Stays are currently in place halting enforcement of the law.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:36 a.m.

    Re Schnee

    I actually agree with you.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:35 a.m.

    @RedWings
    "All they said or did was express support of traditional marriage."

    No, they expressed opposition to same-sex marriage, since that's the point of what they were working on with Prop 8/Amendment 3/etc, banning same-sex marriage.

  • Hugh1 Denver, CO
    July 18, 2014 11:29 a.m.

    @collegestudent25 "Why so many liberal commenters on a clearly conservative paper?" I contribute to the Deseret News because I appreciate DN's integrity. The paper reaches out to be respectful of and to listen to others beliefs and I try to reciprocate when I comment. Dialogue beats pent-up anger. Additionally, Colorado and Utah are both under the umbrella of the 10th Circuit Court. I am critical of Governor Herbert and AG Reyes because they are smart people and have a good idea how gay marriage will be resolved, but they are not forthcoming. "Gov. says Utah will comply with law if Sotomayor doesn't grant stay." Does Governor Herbert have another option? The Governor could do a much better job of reaching out to all parties. I frequently reference families because I am the product of a very loving family and understand the challenges and rewards of family life and also of having a gay child. Family unity is a multi-generational contract and I want to encourage all families to have this discussion. And no, we don't work in shifts.

  • BJMoose Syracuse, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:26 a.m.

    "Why so many liberal commenters on a clearly conservative paper."
    The Deseret News has established criteria on what is allowable to post on these forums. No where in their rules does it state that only conservative opinions will be accepted. As long as one stays within the confines of the rules the D-News has set forth, they have the right to express their opinion, be it conservative or liberal.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 18, 2014 11:07 a.m.

    Ranch-

    It is not Herbert's job to interpret the law. That is for the courts. He follows Utah Law until is it overridden by the SC. Your way is what Obama does - personally interpret and then act. This is not what a governor's job is.

    I have never called anyone those names. Those attacked, villified, or forced to resign from job did not either. All they said or did was express support of traditional marriage. Yet they were called "bigots" and worse by LGBT activists.

    I guess today being a liberal involves a commitment to hypocrisy and an exclusion of logic or common civility...

  • Atlas Smashed Santa Monica, CA
    July 18, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    I'm utterly petrified at the conservative movement to trample all over our Constitution. Who knew that actually following that sacred document would be so difficult?

    Conservatives seem to think that the bill of rights shouldn't apply to everyone. They feel like religious people and big corporations that bribe politicians should have special rights. Special rights that allow them to take away the rights of others and force their religious beliefs down our throats.

    Why should there be a special class of people, religious and big corp? Why can't we treat everyone equally?

    If you want to get married, then get married!
    If you don't want to get married, then don't!

    It's that simple. Why should conservatives have the right to define marriage and force their current definition of marriage on everyone else?

  • Commenter88 Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 18, 2014 10:10 a.m.

    Quote: "Married same-sex couples say they and their families are in legal limbo regarding adoptions, child care and custody, medical decisions, employment and health benefits, future tax implications, inheritance, and many other property and fundamental rights associated with marriage."

    --So why shouldn't single people who can't marry not also have equality in these benefits with a close relative? And why not other types of unions (yes, that same kind that dominates the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Asia)? This is more about wanting to join a club of benefits than "equality for all." I can hardly wait for Sotomayor's "rhetorical flourishes" on this matter.

  • ThornBirds St.George, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:58 a.m.

    Fear of one's chosen unknown is a powerful thing.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:38 a.m.

    @Jared & RedWings;

    The "Law", if you will, is the US Constititution which supercedes every state law. If Herbert were actually defending the law, he would accept that Amendment-3 violates the 5th and 14th Amendment Rights of LGBT couples and cease his opposition immediately.

    RedWings, you said: "My fears are based in what I see happening all over the country to those who believe as I do about homosexuality."

    So, people being criticized for yelling "pervert, sinner, abomination" at LGBT people in the public square causes you fear? People being criticized for donating to causes that discriminate against citizens causes you fear? People being held accountable for their actions, when those actions actually DO HARM to others causes you fear?

    You can believe anything you want about homosexuals. You do not get to use your beliefs to infringe on our rights though.

  • Kings Court Alpine, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:25 a.m.

    I have an anti-homosexual neighbor who said that gay couples already get all the benefits of heterosexual couples, so they don't need the right to get married. Well according to this article, I can see that he is completely wrong:

    "Married same-sex couples say they and their families are in legal limbo regarding adoptions, child care and custody, medical decisions, employment and health benefits, future tax implications, inheritance, and many other property and fundamental rights associated with marriage."

  • Bendana 99352, WA
    July 18, 2014 9:20 a.m.

    "Why so many liberal commenters on a clearly conservative paper."

    Does hearing the liberal argument offend you in some way?

  • Built2Last Provo, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:18 a.m.

    Wait! I thought the new fad in politics was that you could pick and choose what laws you want to comply with or enforce and which you don't. I think Governor Herbert should just follow the lead of our prodigious leaders in Washington. It seems to work for them.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:15 a.m.

    The governor is doing what he has sworn to do in his office - defend the laws of the State of Utah. Right now, Ammendment 3 is the law. Until that is struck down, it is his and the AG's obligation to defend this ammendment.

    Those in CA who refused to do that same duty with Prop 8 should be impeached.

    I am not basing this on an argument for or against SSM. I am simply stating the duties a governor is expected to perform in office. To refues over political opinion (as was done in CA) is grounds for impeachment, and possible imprisonment.

    @ Laura B:

    Thank you for your post. My fears are based in what I see happening all over the country to those who believe as I do about homosexuality. Secular rights and religious beliefs are different, and can co-exist if we work at it, as you implied. I wish more in the SSM camp had your common sense....

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    July 18, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    @cjb
    "Do you believe that obeying the law is more important than protecting Utah against the destruction of society and massive loss of life brought on by plagues of Biblical proportion.

    Or do you not believe in the proclamation of the family?"

    I don't understand why people think humans can't influence the climate but gay people cause plagues. If God was going to smite us he'd have done it when we were practicing slavery, slaughtering Native Americans, treating women as property... but he didn't.

  • Jared NotInMiami, FL
    July 18, 2014 9:09 a.m.

    Re: The Real Maverick

    Actually, Gov. Herbert is following the 12th Article of Faith. The headline: "Gov. says Utah will comply with law if Sotomayor doesn't grant stay" even makes that clear.

    "If he refuses to follow the law then he needs to be impeached immediately." I agree, especially if you hold Pres. Obama and all other politicians to the same standard (Pres. Obama has broken the law a number of times, even Democrats in Congress have chastised him for it; I say this as an independent moderate).

  • Jared NotInMiami, FL
    July 18, 2014 9:05 a.m.

    So Utah is willing to do what the President (refusing to defend DOMA, among many other things) and California (refusing to defend Prop 8) were not willing to do - support the law even if they find it distasteful? Sounds like the White House and California could take a lesson in honoring the law (which we already knew).

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 18, 2014 8:47 a.m.

    Apparently Herbert doesn't believe in the article of faith 12.

    If he refuses to follow the law then he needs to be impeached immediately.

    We will not live in anarchy here. Contrary to what repubs desire, we should live by laws and the democratic process.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    July 18, 2014 8:45 a.m.

    There is no need to disrupt the lives of those who entered into perfectly legal marriages in good faith. The State suffers no harm but innocent people do by continuing to recognize them.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    July 18, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    @cjb: last I heard, Mr. Herbert was the governor of Utah, which is a secular state, home to people of different religions and to many with no religion. Whether or not he believes in a religious proclamation has nothing to do with the oath he took to uphold the laws of the United States.

    @first amendment: Freedom, of speech is alive and well. The evidence is right in front of you. Anyone has the right to post hateful and hurtful stuff, including slippery slope speculation, although the DN has a right to censor it.

    To my fellow "propogandists". My shift at the computer is about up (my employees start arriving in twenty minutes) but I implore you to be kind to people who disagree with you. Those who issue shrill warnings about the death of civilization are afraid that things are going to change and somehow they will be hurt. Their fear doesn't have to be rational to be real--plenty of adults are terrified of spiders. Love, compassion, and acceptance are more powerful than criticism. The younger generation is watching and they are making up their own minds.

  • SharpHooks Sandy, UT
    July 18, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    The moral majority is neither.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    July 18, 2014 8:02 a.m.

    @ firstamendment

    "Will I be forced to pay taxes to support it?" The quick answer is No!

    However, if we want to be fair , perhaps you should. Since LGBT and other single people have paid taxes since the beginning of the Republic to sustain "traditional Marriage" and all the benefits you enjoyed and have been denied to the rest of us.

    The long answer is still No!...don't worry.

    @ cjb

    Is a requirement for the Governor of Utah to Believe in the Proclamation of the family or be influenced by it? Just curious.

    A personal question; Are you able to sleep at night ? so much conspiracy plots

  • SharpHooks Sandy, UT
    July 18, 2014 7:58 a.m.

    Well--- how very accommodating of him.

  • ElmoBaggins Escalante, UT
    July 18, 2014 7:24 a.m.

    Wow!How nice that Gary Herbert decides he'll actually follow the law when he chooses...what a great example...Not!

  • BJMoose Syracuse, UT
    July 18, 2014 7:15 a.m.

    For Dennis. From the article "Should the Supreme Court not extend the stay, the state Division of Motor Vehicles, the Utah Department of Health and other agencies could see a rush of couples looking to change names on drivers' licenses or to amend children's birth certificates."
    Dennis I always enjoy your pieces mainly because they seem to have a neutrality to them that isn't always so in D-News articles. That being said you have a mistake in the above. The Dept.Of Public Safety is the agency that deals with driver's licenses. The Division Of Motor Vehicles deal with car registrations, titles etc. The above implies otherwise.
    For the D-News in general. I am so tired of seeing the slippery slope arguments that have been debunked time and time again still coming up in posts time and time again. They serve no purpose other than to demonstrate the intellectual level of the contributor. I think any posts containing arguments of this nature should in the future be rejected. They are off subject and speculation if nothing else and as such go against your policies.

  • slcdenizen Murray, UT
    July 18, 2014 6:42 a.m.

    @intervention

    The moral majority cares little for substantive argument and rule of law. When it's convenient or fits the narrative, yes. But following propositions to natural conclusions, like the equal protection clause extending to state marriage laws, not a chance. Fortunately one branch of Federal gov't seems to understand it's role and will act accordingly.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    July 18, 2014 6:20 a.m.

    @DN Subscriber;

    Bigotry & discrimination is legal; that doesn't make it right or good for society. I note the way you denigrate J. Sotomayor by putting quotes around your description. You made quite the attempt to diminish her; you failed. All you succeeded in doing is demonstrating your own biases.

    Your "morals" (promotion of bigotry) isn't good for society; stop fighting against what is right and good, equality.

    @collegestudent25;

    Do you want to live in an echo chamber?

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    July 18, 2014 4:02 a.m.

    Questions for the governor.

    Do you believe that obeying the law is more important than protecting Utah against the destruction of society and massive loss of life brought on by plagues of Biblical proportion.

    Or do you not believe in the proclamation of the family?

  • Brightenpath Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 18, 2014 3:19 a.m.

    Those who want to experiment with the marriage and the family should take a lesson from a highly intelligent group: the scientists, engineers, and management of NASA:

    On the Space Shuttle Columbia's last flight, once control problems were observed, and loss of all hydraulic pressure was noted, pilot McCool tried to restart 2 of the 3 auxiliary power units "as they worked to attempt to restore orbiter control" at the very end (Columbia Crew Survival Investigation Report, page 1-20).

    The Columbia astronauts never realized what had gone wrong; they ran out of time needed to troubleshoot the problem - as will we. It will be too late. We ignore the lessons of history, especially in the vital areas of marriage and family, at our own peril.

    "As with the O-ring erosions that ultimately doomed the Challenger, NASA management became accustomed to these phenomena when no serious consequences resulted from these earlier episodes. This phenomenon was termed "normalization of deviance" by sociologist Diane Vaughan in her book on the Challenger launch decision process."

    Well put, Diane.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    July 18, 2014 12:19 a.m.

    @Dn subscriber. You do realize marriage is a legal contract? So a dog can not enter into a contract. Also I believe children are allowed to marry an adult with parent consent at the age of 14 in Utah. They might have changed that law. If so a minor can not legally enter into a contract.

  • firstamendment Lehi, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:57 p.m.

    It would be wise for all of us to visit defend the family and read some of the articles there.
    There are some good ones by Jewish authors etc. about what is going on in our Country, and how it has happened before.

    Try searching for "Crafting Gay Children" or the "Wandervoegel" etc.

    May all go well America, may God save us, and hopefully someone will be able to protect the First Amendment.

  • firstamendment Lehi, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:51 p.m.

    @ collegestudent25 they're propagandists, they work in shifts, and are most active on Conservative papers (and have been called upon to first "destroy the Utah brand." They are the following a certain tradition that is not new (read about that on defend the family). I don't know if those donating to promote the agenda get tax breaks? If they did the IRS probably will supports it. Speaking hypothetically (can't even tell some truths here anymore), if you donate money to protect children and marriage the IRS just might post your name on the internet (not saying this has been done, guess we can't say that), you just might be fired from your job ("")and if the IRS were caught only a few Conservative talk show people might have hypothetically reported on it and hypothetically discussed what might have happened if the IRS used your tax dollars to pay their fine.....that's how could become, if we were under liberal rule..... ;) hypothetically of course.

  • firstamendment Lehi, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:46 p.m.

    Will I be forced to pay taxes to support it? What happens if I refuse to obey Monarch Shelby and his harmful opinions, and if I continue to support the Constitution and Government by the People, for the People, and of the People?

  • Interloper Portland, OR
    July 17, 2014 11:16 p.m.

    The question over same-sex marriage iS settled. Accepting it in the states whose governments haven't is a matter of 'when," not 'if." Those states can face reality or continue to drag their feet. Either way, gay marriage in the U.S. will encompass more and more states. Ultimately all, one suspects.

  • firstamendment Lehi, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:08 p.m.

    Will I be forced to pay taxes to support it? What happens if I refuse to obey Monarch Shelby and his harmful opinions, and if I continue to support the Constitution and Government by the People, for the People, and of the People?

    @ collegestudent25 they're propagandists, some are probably paid, they work in shifts, and are most active on Conservative papers (and have been called upon to first "destroy the Utah brand." They are the inheritors of the Wandervoegel tradition (read about that on defend the family). Those paying to promote the agenda probably get tax breaks. The IRS probably will never do anything about any of this, but if you donate money to protect children and marriage they will post your name on the internet, you will probably be fired from your job, and when the IRS is caught, they will probably use your tax dollars to pay their fine.....that's how America is under the regime.

  • EPDesign Salt lake City, UT
    July 17, 2014 11:00 p.m.

    So the state is going to survive after all.

  • intervention slc, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:46 p.m.

    @dn subscriber

    Do you know why your slippery slope argument has actually never been made in a court of law with relation to this issue?

  • collegestudent25 Cedar City, UT
    July 17, 2014 10:36 p.m.

    Why so many liberal commenters on a clearly conservative paper.

  • benny02 slc, ut
    July 17, 2014 10:31 p.m.

    way go gov...."we will comply if justice sotomayor doesnt grant a stay' you wont have a choice...another reason why my gov is a huge embarrassment...

  • Understands Math Lacey, WA
    July 17, 2014 9:37 p.m.

    @DN Subscriber wrote: "Remember, same sex marriage is just the first misstep down the slippery slope."

    Just because the results are inevitable in your imagination does not make it so.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 17, 2014 9:37 p.m.

    Shouldn't the state comply with the law "just because"?

  • poyman Lincoln City, OR
    July 17, 2014 9:27 p.m.

    So we get Sotomayer as an overseer of the 10th circuit??? Guess we got the short straw.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:58 p.m.

    Will he be impeached?

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:53 p.m.

    Appropriately and properly, Utah and Utahns will obey the law. Even stupid, bad laws.

    Hoping for the "wise Latina" (Obama's term, not mine) Justice to grant a stay is a nearly hopeless "Hail Mary Pass" attempt at this point.

    Just because something is declared to be legal does not make it right or moral or good for society.

    Remember, same sex marriage is just the first misstep down the slippery slope. How can anyone object to plural marriages, or marriages between adults and children, or people and their pets or farm animals. After all, every argument about same sex marriage "rights" applies equally to all those options. Just because something will eventually be declared to be legal does not make it right or moral or good for society.

    This is just one small fault line (among many) in the decay and collapse of our country and indeed, western civilization.

  • SAS Sandy, UT
    July 17, 2014 8:52 p.m.

    @Mike702:

    Of course not. You're forgetting the way we do logic in Utah. One starts with the conclusion, and works backward to the facts.

  • Mike702 Hamilton, 00
    July 17, 2014 8:39 p.m.

    If Sotomayor goes to the full court, and they decide not to grant a stay, will the Governor and AG get the hint?