Comments about ‘State asks for more time to file appeal in gay marriage recognition case’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Aug. 18 2014 6:25 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

How much more time is needed to dress up a losing argument?

I'm sorry but no amount of word selection or novel lawyering will make "cuz my God says so" any more valid in a secular, civil court.

Buffalo, NY

The gross incompetence of the state is showing more and more. They've had plenty of time to get ready. They are like a college student who keeps asking for extensions because they are too lazy or too irresponsible.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

Dear Governor Herbert: You don't have a legal leg to stand on, and 30--or 300--days more time isn't going to help. Claiming complex issues and busy attorneys fools no one. Give it up already!

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

Well, you can always ask. Can't imagine how anyone will justify moving a filing deadline which is still over a whole month away, another month further away. The legal filings in these marriage and recognition cases, in courts around the country all year long, have seen high-quality 50-page reply briefs written and filed almost overnight. And those are the ones which have been on the winning side!

The only thing an extension of this filing deadline will provide Utah, is not a better brief, is not a new argument, is not a winning strategy, but only an additional one-month delay in the inevitable loss of its appeal.

Eagle Mountain, UT

"This case is factually and legally complex and relates to the constitutionality of Utah's marriage statutes and the recognition of same-sex marriages in Utah, and more time is necessary to adequately address the novel issues presented," Utah's motion states.

In other words...All of our arguments have been rejected and we are out of ideas. We need more time to come up with something.

American Fork, UT

I hope they don't get it. The 'it makes us feel icky' defense should only take so much time to prepare.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

The State of Utah is getting a reputation for using delaying tactics in this case:

"The court notes that the State chose this forum by removing the action from state court. Unlike Plaintiffs who seek certification in order to obtain favorable rulings from both courts, the State seeks to begin the process anew in a different forum from the one it chose. The court agrees with Plaintiffs that the State’s late-filed motion to certify, asserting a nearly identical question to those posed by Plaintiffs, appears to be a delay tactic."

Judge Dale Kimball
May 19, 2014 Evans v Herbert,
(cv-00055-DAK Doc 45),page 33

The Shire, UT

Translation: "We've tried parroting right wing think tanks, but that hasn't worked. We need time to come up with something... anything else.

If people weren't being denied their civil rights, this would start being amusing.

St.George, UT

Such a waste of energy.
More families in the state of Utah would finally be able to function as families! That important fact seems to be ignored.
Instead of fighting SSM, Utah could be working on the air pollution problem which will be upon us again. This is the elephant in the room, the yearly problem that physically chokes and sickens so very many of the states residents and visitors.
The state could work toward better educating Utah's young people, improving health care, curbing gang violence, working towards more ethical government, better land management.
There is so much being put on the back burner, or just forgotten. All this time, money and energy going to fight something that Utah is going to lose.
Do they all know this? Is this why Utah is requesting a delay?

Dane, WI

Given the massive size of their last losing brief in this case, the state is probably hunting for even more words to use.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

@riverofsun, Herbert is neither stupid nor naive. He knows all that already. Perhaps his intention is just to stall. If he can keep this at bay long enough, some other state will lose their case and he will be able to say "I didn't want to but SCOTUS made me do it".


@Laura Bilington, I think you hit the nail on the head. He is just waiting for the quintessential "Loving v Virginia" type of ruling so he can save face with his base.

Glendale, CA

I think each side deserves the proper amount of time to prepare their case. But in doing so I think the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals should tell the State of Utah no other opposite sex marriages should be conducted until the State can complete the organization of their case. We are all about equality in this country.

Holden, MA

This is outrageous! The Utah state government has had plenty of time to prepare their case. Most likely when SCOTUS does rule on these cases it will base it's decision on the repeal of section 3 of DOMA because these states can't resolve their problems concerning marriage equality.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

"The state also writes that the petition in the original case challenging Utah's ban on same-sex marriage took more time than expected".

Preparing the appeal of Kitchen v Herbert took longer than expected because the State's attorney was so blindsided by his reliance on "tradition" --this is Utah, remember--that he "knew" he was going to win. Therefore didn't prepare a motion to stay the decision pending an appeal, let alone work on the appeal itself. Windsor and the Proposition 8 appeal were decided six months earlier and the dominoes were falling right and left, but if you live in a bubble, silly stuff like SCOTUS decisions don't matter.

Irony Guy
Bountiful, Utah

This is a standard request among lawyers because delay = more $ in their pockets, regardless of the case at issue.


Irony Guy, it is definitely a search for more money. The sad thing is that it is the taxpayers paying for it. The Utah state government is actually using Tony Milner's own money to fight against his rights.

Miss Piggie
Phoenix, AZ

@Laura Bilington: "You don't have a legal leg to stand on, and 30--or 300--days more time isn't going to help."

Agreed. This has been a long time coming and I'm getting sick and tired of hearing the ad hominem excuses of the anti-gay people. I can't wait to marry. My 90 year old grandmother has social security she doesn't know what to do with and she ain't getting any younger.

I think it's time for the Supreme Court of the United States to do their job, take the case and rule in favor of SSM. Get on the ball, SCOTUS!

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

Miss Piggie, unless your born-in-1924 grandmother worked for 40 quarters of her life after 1935 (not impossible but unlikely), she is collecting social security on her dead husband's account. Even if you could marry her (which you can't, given the consanguinity laws), she has no social security of her own to "pass on" to you.

Now if you want to milk the system, find an old man who collects on his own account and is not currently married. But your payoff may be less than you think, in more ways than one.

You were serious about marrying your grandmother, weren't you?

Midlothian, VA

It is time for people to be kind.

Rubio said. “This intolerance in the name of tolerance is hypocrisy. . .supporting the definition of marriage as one man and one woman is not anti-gay, it is pro-traditional marriage.”

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments