KENTUCKY: Anti-Gay Clerk Files Religious Discrimination Suit Against Governor

The Liberty Counsel is suing Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear on behalf of renegade county clerk Kim Davis. Via the Lexington Herald-Leader:

Late Tuesday, Davis filed a lawsuit against Beshear in federal district court. She blamed the governor for instructing all 120 of the state's county clerks to comply with this summer's U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage. Beshear's stance left dissenting county clerks vulnerable to lawsuits, including two that she currently faces, filed by groups of her constituents, Davis said. U.S. District Judge David Bunning is expected to rule in these cases in coming days. "The Commonwealth of Kentucky, acting through Governor Beshear, has deprived Davis of her religious-conscience rights guaranteed by the United States and Kentucky constitutions and laws, by insisting that Davis issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples contrary to her conscience, based on her sincerely held religious beliefs," Davis' lawsuit says.

The suit also names the head of the Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives, which changed the marriage license forms to gender-neutral.

The Liberty Counsel has issued a press release:

“Governor Beshear is unlawfully picking and choosing the conscience-based exemptions to marriage that he deems acceptable,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. When Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway refused to defend Kentucky’s natural marriage laws after “pray[ing] over this decision,” Governor Beshear did not command that he perform his duties, but hired private attorneys to pursue the appeal. “In no uncertain terms, Governor Beshear’s policies and directives are intended to suppress religion—even worse, a particular religious belief,” Liberty Counsel’s complaint points out. “Thus, although Attorney General Conway was given a pass for his conscience about marriage without any threats of repercussion, clerks like Davis are being repeatedly told by their Governor to abandon their religiously informed beliefs or resign.” “Simply put, Governor Beshear is making secularism a litmus test for holding office in Kentucky,” said Mat Staver. “The governor is forcing clerks like Davis to choose between following the precepts of her religion and forfeiting her position, on the one hand, and abandoning one of the precepts of her religion in order to keep her position, on the other,” Staver concluded.

The ruling in the ACLU's suit against Davis is expected next week. (Tipped by JMG reader Allen)

KENTUCKY: Clerk Kim Davis Testifies That She "Prayed And Fasted" About Denying Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Infamous Kentucky county clerk and alleged dog-napping conspirator Kim Davis took the stand today in the ACLU's lawsuit against her for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses. Via the local CBS affiliate:

Davis told the court she's an apostolic Christian and her religion says that marriage can only be between a man and a woman. She says her right to freedom of religion affords her the ability to deny same-sex licenses because she believes the wording on the certificate means she's authorizing the license. Davis said that is something she can't do. "If I authorize it, I'm saying I agree with it. I can't do that," she said. An attorney representing the couples who are suing Davis asked her how far a clerk could take their religious beliefs when it comes to denying licenses. He asked, for example, whether a clerk could refuse a license if they did not believe interracial marriage was biblical. He also asked whether a clerk could deny a license to someone who wanted to get remarried after a divorce. Davis said she couldn't speak for anyone else and didn't answer any hypothetical questions. The plaintiff's attorney asked Davis if she would change her position if the judge orders her to issue those licenses. She said she'd deal with that when the time comes.

More from Kentucky.com:

"It was something I had prayed and fasted over. ... It wasn't a spur of the moment decision," Davis told U.S. District Judge David Bunning, her voice breaking. To authorize licenses, she said, means "I'm saying I agree with it, and I can't." Her choice to also deny licenses to straight couples was because "I didn't want to discriminate against anyone." Two of those straight couples and two gay couples from Rowan County sued Davis shortly after her office stopped issuing marriage licenses to anyone in the wake of the June 26 decision by the Supreme Court, which overturned Kentucky's ban on same-sex marriage and declared the practice legal across the country.  After the hearing, Davis' lawyer, Roger Gannam of Liberty Counsel, a non-profit firm that specializes in religious-freedom cases, said the plaintiffs could have obtained licenses in Ashland, the site of the previous hearing, or in Covington. "This case is not about these plaintiffs' desire to get married," Gannam said. "This case is about the plaintiffs' desire to force Kim Davis to approve and authorize their marriages in violation of her Constitutionally protected religious beliefs."

The judge said today that he will issue his ruling during the week of August 11th. Kentucky's county clerks are elected and can only be removed by the state legislature, which does not reconvene until January. Renegade clerks face jail time for contempt of court should they refuse an order to issue licenses. 

ACLU Vs Kim Davis: No Ruling Today

KENTUCKY: Alleged Dog-Napping Update

Following my mention of their 2013 story, Page One Kentucky has posted an update about the dog allegedly stolen by the daughter of renegade county clerk Kim Davis.

Remember Charlie Brown? He’s the dog Kim’s daughter apparently stole (not allegedly, she did it). Kim was running for election at the time — a campaign she ultimately won, replacing her mother as County Clerk. Despite barely squeaking by in the Democratic primary. But small town law enforcement turned a blind eye. They were afraid of Kim and the good old boy Democratic machine that thrives in rural Eastern Kentucky. For outsiders: the Dems in Kentucky are about 100x more conservative than Republicans in D.C. and 1,000x more corrupt. The County Attorney (Hey, Cecil!) refused to get involved because he was afraid of backlash. A County Attorney in a nearby town ultimately got interested in the case late last fall but lost his campaign for re-election. Since then, nothing’s happened. There are several witnesses, security camera footage, all those text messages and Facebook threats, interactions with law enforcement, Kim retaliating against Madden for outing her daughter as the culprit. And nothing.

Page One Kentucky spoke to the dog's owner, who relates a recent encounter with clerk Davis:

Ross says he’s still asked about Charlie as he travels around the region. You can imagine that few have anything kind to offer about Kim Davis. Especially at this point in time. He also shared a story about recently having business to conduct in the Clerk’s office. During the time he was there, Kim didn’t make eye contact or acknowledge him. But when it was time for him to leave? She yelled, “BYE ROSS!”, waving, smirk plastered across her thrice-divorced face. Which, well, seems to line up with everything the public has seen of her behavior. One can’t help but feel for Ross. His frustration permeates everything he says and it’s clear to even casual observers that he’s been left to fend for himself.

Davis will be in court on Monday to respond to the lawsuit filed by the ACLU. (Tipped by JMG reader Str8 Grandmother)

KENTUCKY: ACLU Sues County Clerk For Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses

Via press release:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky today filed a lawsuit on behalf of four Rowan County couples, two same-gender couples and two opposite-gender couples, denied marriage licenses by County Clerk Kim Davis. Since the U.S. Supreme Court issued a sweeping and historic decision that affords gay and lesbian couples the legal right to marry, Ms. Davis has refused to provide marriage licenses to any couple applying for one in Rowan County citing “religious concerns.” In explaining the ACLU’s decision to file suit on the couples’ behalf, ACLU of Kentucky Cooperating Attorney Laura Landenwich stated, “Ms. Davis has the absolute right to believe whatever she wants about God, faith, and religion, but as a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, she cannot pick and choose who she is going to serve, or which duties her office will perform based on her religious beliefs.”

Davis spoke to Kentucky.com on Monday: "What has happened is that five lawyers have imposed their personal view of what the definition of marriage should be on the rest of us. And I, as a Christian, have strong views, too. And I know I don't stand alone."

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/06/29/3923157_some-kentucky-county-clerks-refusing.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

ACLU Video Supercut: Pop Culture's Journey Toward's Marriage Equality

Clip recap: "In 1970, the ACLU filed the first freedom-to-marry lawsuit in the United States. We are now at the Supreme Court to fight to win the freedom to marry for couples in all 50 states. As we get closer than ever before to the freedom to marry for all, let’s take a walk down memory lane. Thank you to Tegan & Sara for the use of the song Closer."

Who Will Argue For Us At SCOTUS?

As the date for oral arguments before SCOTUS draws closer, LGBT groups have been jockeying for position. Chris Geidner reports on yesterday's developments at Buzzfeed:

Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the six cases out of four states before the Supreme Court asked the justices to split the April 28 arguments, which will include 90 minutes focused on whether states can ban same-sex couples from marrying and 60 minutes focused on whether states can refuse to recognize same-sex couples’ marriages, between four lawyers.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers have asked the court to split the marriage question between the Michigan and Kentucky teams and to split the marriage recognition question between the Ohio and Tennessee teams. The letter did not, however, announce who would be arguing in each spot.

What’s more, those four as-of-yet unnamed lawyers support the request of Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. to also argue in support of marriage equality — meaning a total of five lawyers, each with 15 minutes, likely will appear at the podium to present arguments in support of marriage and marriage recognition.

On the other side of the arguments, the situation is much more simple. On the marriage question, the Michigan Attorney General’s Office has announced that the state’s former solicitor general, John Bursch, will be arguing in defense of state bans on same-sex couples’ marriages. Joe Whalen, the associate solicitor general in the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office, will argue in defense of the recognition bans.

Hit the link for the full responses from both sides.

ALABAMA: AG Files Motion Opposing Class Action Status Of New Marriage Suit

"The number and rate of developments has been dizzying as officials came to different conclusions about their legal obligations and as parties tried to intervene in the initial cases and bring other officials under the Court’s injunction. The Court should not further undermine the relationship between the state and federal courts by granting Plaintiffs leave to drastically change the nature of this case at this late date. Granting the relief the Plaintiffs seek will only add to all the chaos and confusion in Alabama, and will only increase the tension between the state and federal courts. The only wise and judicious course of action is to deny the motion to amend and wait until June when the United States Supreme Court will resolve the constitutionality of same sex marriage in a way that will be binding on all federal judges and all state officials." - Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange, in today's motion opposing last week's marriage equality suit which calls for class action status.

ALABAMA: Civil Rights Groups File Class Action Demand For Marriage Equality

Via press release:

A group of leading national civil rights organizations today filed a motion requesting a federal district court to expand a lawsuit challenging Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriage and to order all county probate judges in the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The joint motion was filed by the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The request, filed as part of a lawsuit brought by five same-sex couples who previously obtained an order from the same court requiring issuance of marriage licenses in Mobile County, seeks class-action status that would include all same-sex couples in Alabama who wish to marry and have their marriage recognized by the state.

The motion requests that the federal district court expand their lawsuit to cover all county probate judges in the state. In Alabama, probate judges are responsible for issuing marriage licenses. Today’s filing requests the federal district court order to require all probate judges to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The Alabama Supreme Court on Tuesday halted same-sex marriages in the state despite the U.S Supreme Court’s refusal to stay a lower court’s decision invalidating the ban. “If Alabama officials thought we were going to sit back and allow them to deny same-sex couples their constitutional right to marry, they thought wrong,” said Ayesha N. Khan, legal director of Americans United. “We are going to fight for these couples.

See the full filing.

ARKANSAS: LGBT Groups Issue Last Minute Veto Plea To Governor

Two weeks ago the Arkansas legislature approved a bill that would ban any municipality from enacting LGBT anti-discrimination ordinances. Without a veto from Gov. Asa Hutchinson, that law goes into effect tomorrow. Yesterday Lambda Legal, the ACLU, GLAD, and the NCLR issued a last-minute plea to Hutchinson.

SB 202 was passed to thwart cities like Fayetteville and Eureka Springs that recently have enacted sexual orientation and gender identity nondiscrimination protections. So if Governor Hutchinson allows this bill to take effect, it will amount to a giant, flashing “Gays Stay Away” sign. It will block sincere local efforts to show that Arkansas communities are welcoming places beckoning talent, innovation and workforce diversity. It will do precisely what Arizona’s Governor Brewer decided to avoid last year when she vetoed that state’s “discrimination as religion” bill.

Recalling Colorado's fatally flawed Amendment 2, which years ago explicitly targeted lesbians, gay men and bisexuals (and not heterosexuals), many are asking whether SB 202 is a similarly unconstitutional denial of equal protection. When the Supreme Court struck down Amendment 2 in Romer v. Evans, it underscored that the case record revealed anti-gay "animus" propelling the popular vote and no legitimate government reasons for precluding local nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people, and for no one else.

It is that manifest and dangerously discriminatory purpose that causes so many to call out the equal protection problem at the heart of SB 202. Every lawmaker who voted for this bill has taken an oath to uphold both the Arkansas Constitution and the United States Constitution. Both charters contain equal protection guarantees. Governor Hutchinson has taken that oath as well. He also has pledged to shepherd the State's economy. We call on him to honor both commitments by vetoing SB 202.

ALABAMA: State Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Liberty Counsel's Marriage Petition

Last last night the Alabama Supreme Court agreed to consider the petition for a writ of mandamus filed on Wednesday by Liberty Counsel.

In a 6-2 decision issued late Friday, the Alabama Supreme Court set up a schedule next week for the different sides to file their answers and briefs on the request by the Alabama Policy Institute and Alabama Citizens Action Program. The court, however, did not say whether it would hold a hearing for oral arguments before responding to the petition. The order stated the briefs by probate judges should address issues raised by the petition, including whether the state Supreme Court even has jurisdiction to hear the petition.

Answers and briefs by probate judges are to be filed by 5 p.m. Feb. 18 and then ALCAP and API will have a chance to respond by 5 p.m. Feb. 20. API and ALCAP, which both oppose gay marriage, on Wednesday filed their emergency petition for a writ of mandamus declaring the state's ban on same-sex unions is still in force and to halt any probate judge from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

ALCAP and API name those county probate judges who have begun issuing licenses to same-sex couples in response to U.S. District Court Judge Callie Granade's order declaring Alabama's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Chief Justice Roy Moore, who has been the most outspoken in advising probate judges not to issue same-sex licenses, was the only justice not listed as taking part in Friday's decision.

Yesterday a coalition of pro-LGBT groups filed their own petition asking the state Supreme Court to dismiss the Liberty Counsel's demand.

"This request before the Alabama Supreme Court is nothing but an attempt at delaying the happiness that all families deserve - a last-ditch, failing effort to stand in the way of the love we've seen in this historic week," Ben Cooper, board chair of Equality Alabama, said in a statement released Friday night. "The petition should be dismissed, and all probate judges in every corner of the state should follow the law." That brief was filed on behalf of Equality Alabama by counsel from the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the ACLU of Alabama Foundation, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

ALABAMA: Judge Granade Sets Thursday Hearing For Mobile County Judge

From the National Center for Lesbian Rights:

Moments ago, United States District Judge Callie V. S. Granade granted the request of four Mobile County same-sex couples to add Mobile County Probate Judge Don Davis as a defendant in a lawsuit in which Judge Granade previously struck down Alabama’s marriage equality ban as violating the federal Constitution. Judge Granade scheduled a hearing for this Thursday, February 12, 2015, at 1:00 PM CT in the U.S. Courthouse, Courtroom 2B, 113 St. Joseph Street, Mobile, Alabama 36602.

Late Monday, four same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Mobile earlier in the day filed an emergency motion asking Judge Granade to instruct Davis to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples as Judge Granade previously ordered.

The Alabama couples are James Strawser and John Humphrey, who previously obtained a ruling from Judge Granade declaring that Alabama’s exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage is unconstitutional, Meredith Miller and Anna Lisa Carmichael, Robert Povilat and Milton Persinger, and Kristy Simmons and Marshay Safford. The couples are represented by the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), Birmingham attorney Heather Fann, and the ACLU of Alabama.

Read the complaint.

NEBRASKA: Federal Judge Denies Motion To Stay Marriage Case Pending SCOTUS

Via the Lincoln Journal-Star:

A federal judge on Tuesday denied the state's motion to stay a lawsuit challenging Nebraska's ban on same-sex marriages and set a Feb. 19 hearing on a motion that would force the state to allow them while the case is pending. "Let it suffice to say that the State defendants have not made a sufficient showing that a delay in the outcome is necessary," Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Bataillon wrote. In November, seven same-sex couples sued Nebraska's governor, attorney general and other state officials, as well as Lancaster County Clerk Dan Nolte, seeking the right to marry in Nebraska or to have their marriages in other states recognized in Nebraska. Attorneys Susan Koenig of Dunne Divorce Law of Omaha and Amy Miller of the ACLU of Nebraska sought a preliminary injunction that, if successful, would force the state to grant the licenses, arguing that the couples' constitutional rights are being violated every day the state ban stands.

RELATED: In 2005 Judge Bataillon struck down Nebraska's constitutional amendment which barred the recognition of same-sex marriages or civil unions from other states, becoming the first judge in US history to ever invalidate such a law on federal constitutional grounds. The following year the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed his ruling. Bataillon was appointed by Bill Clinton.

LGBT Rights Groups React To SCOTUS

Freedom To Marry

"The Supreme Court's decision today begins what we hope will be the last chapter in our campaign to win marriage nationwide - and it's time," said Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry. "Freedom to Marry's national strategy has been to build a critical mass of marriage states and critical mass of support for ending marriage discrimination, and after a long journey and much debate, America is ready for the freedom to marry. But couples are still discriminated against in 14 states, and the patchwork of discrimination harms families and businesses throughout the country. We will keep working hard to underscore the urgency of the Supreme Court's bringing the country to national resolution, so that by June, all Americans share in the freedom to marry and our country stands on the right side of history."

People For The American Way

“This is unquestionably an important step towards marriage equality for all Americans,” said Michael Keegan, President of People For the American Way Foundation. “Since the Sixth Circuit got this wrong and denied people in four states their basic rights, the Supreme Court did the right thing by taking these cases. Now the Court needs to do the right thing by making a clear statement about the Constitution’s guarantee of fundamental equality for all people. The time is long overdue for every American to have the right to marry the person they love.” “That said, this is likely to be yet another five-four decision from the Court that gave us Citizens United and Hobby Lobby and gutted the Voting Rights Act. That should be a reminder that our fundamental rights are in jeopardy in our nation’s highest court— and the future of the Court and these rights will be in the next President's hands. Americans should be able to depend on the Supreme Court to defend the rights of ordinary Americans—whether that’s the right to marry, or to vote, or to be treated fairly on the job, or to control their own reproductive health.

National Center For Lesbian Rights

The Tennessee plaintiff couples are Dr. Valeria Tanco and Dr. Sophy Jesty of Knoxville; Army Reserve Sergeant First Class Ijpe DeKoe and Thom Kostura of Memphis; and Matthew Mansell and Johno Espejo of Franklin. They are represented by Shannon Minter, Christopher F. Stoll, and David C. Codell of the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), Tennessee attorneys Abby Rubenfeld, Maureen Holland, and Regina Lambert, and the law firms of Sherrard & Roe PLC and Ropes & Gray LLP. Today’s decision follows the couples’ request that the Supreme Court hear the case to ensure that the marriages of same-sex couples are treated equally across the country. “This is an important day because it means that our family will finally have an opportunity to share our story with the Court and explain how this discriminatory law hurts us each day,” said Tanco, who has a young daughter with Jesty. “We live in fear for ourselves and our little girl because we don’t have the same legal protections in Tennessee as other families. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will resolve this issue so we no longer need to live in fear.”

Lambda Legal

The U.S. Supreme Court today announced it has granted review of all six marriage equality cases decided by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, including two Ohio cases litigated by Lambda Legal, the ACLU and Gerhardstein & Branch. The two cases are Henry v. Hodges, where Lambda Legal joined Gerhardstein & Branch, and Obergefell v. Hodges, where the ACLU joined Gerhardstein & Branch. Oral argument is expected to take place later this year. “After years of struggle and the dedicated work of thousands across the movement, we are finally within sight of the day when same-sex couples across the country will be able to share equally in the joys, protections and responsibilities of marriage,” said Jon W. Davidson, Legal Director and Eden/Rushing Chair at Lambda Legal. “While these cases will carry the marriage standard before the Supreme Court, they represent literally dozens of cases in state and federal courts nationwide and the collective effort of Lambda Legal, NCLR, the ACLU, GLAD, and other sister LGBT groups and private (often pro-bono) counsel dating back years.”

ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union and Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic are co-counsel in the two Kentucky cases, Bourke v. Beshear and Love v. Beshear, brought by lawyers at Clay Daniel Walton & Adams and the Fauver Law Office. These cases challenge Kentucky’s anti-marriage laws on the ground that they violate due process and equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The ACLU along with Lambda Legal and Gerhardstein & Branch are also co-counsel in the Ohio case, Obergefell, et al v. Hodges. “We are thrilled the court will finally decide this issue,” said James Esseks, director of the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender & HIV Project. “The country is ready for a national solution that treats lesbian and gay couples fairly. Every single day we wait means more people die before they have a chance to marry, more children are born without proper protections, more people face medical emergencies without being able to count on recognition of their spouses. It is time for the American values of freedom and equality to apply to all couples.”

FLORIDA: ACLU Files SCOTUS Response To Pam Bondi's Stay Extension Demand

From the ACLU Of Florida:

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a response at the United States Supreme Court today stating that the Court should reject Florida’s request for further extension of the stay placed on a federal court’s decision that struck down Florida’s ban on allowing and recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples. The response argued that Florida families suffer harms every day the ban remains in place.

“Governor Scott, his appointees, and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s efforts to delay the implementation of the order striking down the marriage ban are as senseless as they are incredibly harmful,” stated ACLU of Florida LGBT rights staff attorney Daniel Tilley. “Every day that the couples we represent and the thousands of families across Florida who are also denied the protections of marriage go without those protections, they are suffering real harm, as Judge Hinkle’s order made plainly clear. We are glad to have had the opportunity to explain to our nation’s highest court why it is time to let love win in Florida, and we are hopeful that the Court will reject Governor Scott and Attorney General Bondi’s increasingly-desperate efforts, just as it has refused all requests to stay rulings striking down discriminatory marriage bans since this October.”

Read the response.

BREAKING: Florida AG Pam Bondi Asks SCOTUS To Extend Marriage Stay

On December 5th the Eleventh Circuit Court denied Bondi's demand for an indefinite stay on same-sex marriages while they consider her appeal. That stay is due to dissolve on January 5th and today Bondi filed the same stay extension demand with SCOTUS. Justice Clarence Thomas has jurisdiction over the Eleventh Circuit.

UPDATE: Here's the demand.

WISCONSIN: Legal Team That Won Marriage Asks For $1.2M In Attorney Fees

Via the Pioneer Press:

The legal team that successfully fought to overturn Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage is asking a federal court to award it nearly $1.25 million to cover attorney fees and costs associated with the case. The legal team, headed by the ACLU, sued in February to overturn a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on behalf of eight couples. In a filing late Friday afternoon in U.S. District Court in Madison, the team wrote that in part, the hours they put into the case were driven by an aggressive defense of the amendment by lawyers for the state. "Defendants' decisions to file multiple motions, conduct discovery, assert novel arguments, and frantically try to stop marriages from occurring increased the substantive and procedural complexity of plaintiffs' counsels' work in the trial court and the Court of Appeals, and thus the time required to competently prosecute the action," wrote lawyers for the plaintiffs. Under federal law, as prevailing parties in a civil rights action, the plaintiffs can seek an award of costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, they wrote.

Same-sex marriage became legal in Wisconsin in October after the Supreme Court declined to review the ruling of the Seventh Circuit Court.

MISSOURI: Marriage Plaintiffs File Notice Of Cross-Appeal To Eighth Circuit

The plaintiffs in one of Missouri's marriage equality cases have filed their notice of a cross-appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court. On Friday the state filed their notice. The initial stayed ruling on the ACLU's case came on November 7th, at which time Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster promised to appeal. That stay was due to expire today if no appeals were filed. Both Koster and Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon say they support same-sex marriage. In a separate ruling, same-sex marriage remains legal in St. Louis and those marriages are recognized statewide. Also last week, GOP lawmakers filed an attempt to gain standing to appeal the ruling that forces Missouri to recognize out of state marriages.

MISSOURI: Federal Court Denies Motion To Lift Stay On Same-Sex Marriage

The stay expires on December 9th and no appeal has yet been filed. However Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster declared on the day of the ruling that he will appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court. Marriage licenses continue to be issued in St. Louis only and they are valid statewide. (Via Equality Case Files)

KANSAS: ACLU To Sue To Force State To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

Via the Wichita Eagle:

The lawyer who successfully sued to overturn Kansas’ ban on same-sex marriage in federal court now plans to amend the lawsuit in order to force state agencies to grant marriage benefits to same-sex couples. Same-sex couples in Kansas can get marriage licenses from Sedgwick and other counties and use those licenses to marry anywhere in the state after a federal district court ruled the ban was unconstitutional earlier this month. However, state agencies have refused to grant newly married same-sex couples the same rights as other legally married couples while Attorney General Derek Schmidt appeals the case.

Doug Bonney, who represented the couples suing the state, said the plaintiffs would amend their complaint to force state agencies to recognize the marriages and grant full legal rights to the newly married couples. This includes the right to change the last name on your driver’s license to your spouse’s. For the spouses of state employees, it also includes receiving state health care benefits. Bonney said they would sue Gov. Sam Brownback if necessary. He added the governor has the authority to direct agencies on how to respond to the ruling but said the administration’s combative response was disappointing. He also said it would cost taxpayers a lot of money in the long run.

A large number of Kansas counties are also continuing to refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses.