Reactions to Utah’s taking Amendment 3 to US Supreme Court

SALT LAKE CITY – In the wake of the announcement Wednesday that the Utah Attorney General’s Office plans to appeal directly to the Supreme Court over the state’s same-sex marriage ban, groups for and against the action issued statements concerning the matter.

On the same day the announcement was made, gay rights activists in Salt Lake City delivered a 3,800-signature petition to Gov. Gary Herbert asking him to drop the state’s fight for Amendment 3.

Utah Pride Center:

Since Windsor, courts across the country have unanimously ruled that laws like Amendment 3 discriminate against LGBTQ couples and families. Going directly to the Supreme Court does expedite the process of moving toward equality, but in the face of overwhelming judicial decisions in favor of same-sex marriage, it is another slap in the face to LGBTQ families. There is no reason to pursue this to the Supreme Court when Governors around the country have chosen to take high-road and accept the decisions of the lower courts.

Equality Utah:

The Supreme Court may or may not take up this case. In the meantime loving committed couples, their families, and their children remain in limbo. Governor Herbert has the power to give resolution to this matter today by doing what other republican governors are doing all across the nation – don’t appeal the decision and let the marriages stand.

The Sutherland Institute:

Sutherland Institute is happy the Attorney General has decided to take the marriage case directly to the Supreme Court. This gives the state of Utah an opportunity to protect the ability of people in every state to decide for themselves to defend marriage as society’s way to encourage a married mother and father for every child.

From Charles Stormont, the Democratic candidate for Utah Attorney General:

The continued defense of Amendment 3 is an incredible waste of taxpayer resources. Contrary to what Mr. Reyes and Mr. Herbert have said, the Attorney General does not have a duty to blindly defend clearly unconstitutional laws. The Attorney General is supposed to be a legal advisor. Given the rulings in every court that has looked at this issue since Windsor, there is little to no chance this expensive appeal will succeed.

We should stop wasting our tax dollars trying to break up families and start investing resources to protect children. If Mr. Reyes and Mr. Herbert want finality and certainty, there is a simple way: end this appeal.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, released the following statement:

The Supreme Court should take this case and swiftly move to end marriage discrimination across the country. Every day of delay is a day of hardship for couples and their loved ones wrongly denied the freedom to marry and respect for their families. The American people support the freedom to marry, but the law still discriminates for too many American couples in too many states.

It’s regrettable that on the one hand Governor Herbert wants Utah to be a destination for economic growth, and at the same time he is choosing to send the message to the world that Utah is a hostile place for anyone that doesn’t fit a very narrow mold of what it means to be a family.

Related posts

Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @MoriKessler

Copyright St. George News, LLC, 2014, all rights reserved.


Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!


  • Flyaway July 10, 2014 at 11:22 am

    Utah has lots of money to spend on frivolous lawsuits.

  • Urah McQueery July 10, 2014 at 7:30 pm

    Funny when one sees the title page with justice and a rainbow flag. The none God fearing, see gay pride and happy as hell.
    The God fearing see the sign of the rainbow and the justice of God and are happy to see the prideful go to Hell.

    • St. George Resident July 10, 2014 at 8:37 pm

      You sound so prideful when you say that.
      Better watch out, you might find yourself in Hell too.

  • Jen Lindley July 11, 2014 at 4:01 am

    I can’t understand how a state that is either last or second to last in per pupil spending (education) can justify spending MILLIONS of dollars on a lawsuit that benefits no one except a couple lawyers. What shocks me even more though is that there is a very good chance that I will get a reply from one or more stgnews readers defending the states actions.

    I agree that the state has a right to choose whether or not to fight this. We would not have the freedoms we enjoy if people could not question their leaders every once in a while. On the other hand sometimes you need to weigh the pros and cons of asking that question. For example, on the one hand you have a lawsuit that really benefits no one, on the other hand the state is either last or second to last in per pupil spending in the country. What is better for the state ? Is it really better to deny the legal benefits of marriage to a relatively small amount of people simply because you disagree with who they choose to spend their life with or is it better to give our children the educational opportunities they deserve? Personally I hope the state comes their senses and chooses our children. Something tells me they won’t though because after all is said and done most of them were raised in a state under leaders that chose fighting frivilous lawsuits over educating their children.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.