Eighth Circuit Court Punts On All Cases

"On the court's own motion, oral arguments and any further consideration of these cases will be deferred pending the Supreme Court of the Unites States' decisions in James Obergefell v Richard Hodges."

15 AGs To Supreme Court: Same-Sex Marriage Will Cause Incalculable Damage

The attorneys general of fifteen states have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in which they predictably argue that a ruling in favor of same-sex marriage will "irretrievably" destroy their right to self-government. From the brief: 

The Constitution takes no sides on same-sex marriage, and therefore leaves the issue up to the free deliberations of state citizens. The fact that Americans have reached different conclusions about this novel question is not a sign of a constitutional crisis that requires correction by this Court. It is rather a sign that our Constitution is working as it should. In our federal system, this issue must be resolved by the "formation of consensus" at the state level. To resolve it instead through federal judicial decree would demean the democratic process, marginalize the views of millions of Americans, and do incalculable damage to our civic life in this country.

While the brief cites Loving several times and acknowledges that there are "constitutional guarantees" on the equal application of marriage laws, somehow those guarantees do not apply to LGBT Americans.

Eighth Circuit Court Sets May 12th Details For Marriage Cases Out Of Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, & South Dakota

It seems unlikely that we'd get a decision before the Supreme Court. But we've been surprised many times.

Eighth Circuit Court Combines Marriage Appeals From South Dakota, Arkansas, & Missouri, Sets Oral Arguments For May

SOUTH DAKOTA: Attorney General Marty Jackley To Appeal Gay Marriage Ruling

"It remains the State’s position that the institution of marriage should be defined by the voters of South Dakota and not the federal courts. Because this case presents substantial legal questions and substantial public interest the Federal Court has stayed its judgment allowing South Dakota law to remain in effect pending the appeal." - GOP South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley, in a statement posted to his state website. Jackley was first appointed attorney general in 2009, winning reelection in 2010 and 2014. He is the president-elect of the National Association of Attorneys General, which is currently headed by Mississippi AG Jim Hood.

RELATED: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over seven states. Appeals from Arkansas and Missouri are pending.

Local Hater Has The South Dakota Sadz

"United States District Court Judge Karen E. Schreier, a President Bill Clinton appointee with ties to former Democrat Senator Tim Johnson, has taken it upon herself to attack the institution of marriage, the South Dakota Constitution, and pour contempt on the will of the people of South Dakota who voted in 2006 to affirm in our state constitution what every civilization throughout human history has understood instinctively: that marriage can only be formed by a man and a woman. This kind of judicial activism, perversion of the U.S. Constitution (intended to prevent Democrats from undermining morality and the rule of law), the South Dakota Constitution, and pure contempt for the people of South Dakota and our republican form of government (which does NOT empower judges to make law), should not be allowed to stand." - Bob Ellis, South Dakota Tea Party Alliance leader, in a column published today by BarbWire and American Clarion.

South Dakota Turns Mustard

And the number of red states shrinks again.

BREAKING: South Dakota Marriage Ban Struck Down, Ruling Has Been Stayed

Read the ruling. From its conclusion:

In Loving, the Supreme Court addressed a traditionally accepted definition of marriage that prohibited Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving from marrying. Because Virginia’s laws deprived that couple of their fundamental right to marriage, the Court struck down those laws. Little distinguishes this case from Loving. Plaintiffs have a fundamental right to marry. South Dakota law deprives them of that right solely because they are same-sex couples and without sufficient justification. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Docket 20) is granted, and defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Docket 43) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that SDCL 25-1-1, SDCL 25-1-38, Article 21, § 9 of the South Dakota Constitution, and any other provision of state law that precludes people from marrying, or refuses to recognize an existing marriage, solely because the individuals are of the same gender are unconstitutional because they violate the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants are enjoined from enforcing those laws or otherwise declining to issue a marriage license solely because the applicants are of the same gender. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a separate judgment will be entered and the effects of that judgment will be stayed until the judgment is final.

Don't Jerk And Drive

The images above come to you from South Dakota's grammatically-challenged "Driving Proper" campaign. (Via Aksarbent)

SOUTH DAKOTA: Court Denies State's Demand To Dismiss Marriage Case

The above federal court today denied South Dakota's demand for the dismissal of the marriage equality lawsuit filed in late May. The dismissal demand was denied, in part, on the basis of case precedent that the court today ruled as "not controlling." But much more interesting is the Court's statement on last week's ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:

Most recently, a panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned district court decisions in four states which had struck down same-sex marriage laws. The Sixth Circuit stated that applying the doctrinal developments exception laid out in Hicks “would be a groundbreaking development of its own.” The Sixth Circuit’s reading of the doctrinal developments exception is too narrow and would effectively eliminate that exception by requiring either an explicit or implicit overruling of a prior decision. Furthermore, it is difficult to reconcile the Supreme Court’s statement in Windsor that the Constitution protects the moral and sexual choices of homosexual couples with the idea that state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage do not present a substantial federal question. Thus, the Sixth Circuit’s reasoning is not as persuasive as the reasoning of the Second, Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits on this issue.

Yeah, we've got this one too. Read the full denial at Equality Case Files.

SOUTH DAKOTA: Lawyer Asks For Summary Judgment In Marriage Case

Via KSFY-ABC in Sioux Falls:

There's a development in the lawsuit to overturn South Dakota's ban on same-sex marriage. The Minneapolis-based lawyer, Joshua Newville, does not want the case to go to trial. Instead, he wants the judge to rule the ban is unconstitutional, and legalize same-sex marriage. And he says he has precedence on his side. Newville enlisted the help of the National Center for Lesbian Rights and said he wants the judge to bypass a trial and declare the same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. "Of the 22 or 23 cases that have been decided in the last year, the vast majority of them have been decided this way," Newville said. He added this will speed up the process. "Without having the opportunity for their relationships to be recognized their families, including some of them having children, their families are hurting," he continued.

RELATED: Summary judgments were also requested in the two Florida marriage cases that have been heard this month. 

SOUTH DAKOTA: GOP Passes Resolution Calling For Obama's Impeachment

This weekend the South Dakota state GOP passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of President Obama.

The resolution says Obama has "violated his oath of office in numerous ways." It specifically cites the release of five Taliban combatants in a trade for captive U.S. soldier Bowe Bergdahl, Obama's statement that people could keep insurance companies, and recent EPA regulations on power plants. "Therefore, be it resolved that the South Dakota Republican Party calls on our U.S. Representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president of the United States," the resolution reads. Allen Unruh of Sioux Falls sponsored the resolution. "I've got a thick book on impeachable offenses of the president," Unruh said, calling on South Dakota to "send a symbolic message that liberty shall be the law of the land."

SOUTH DAKOTA: AG Files Motion To Dismiss "Implausible" Marriage Suit

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackely has filed a motion to dismiss the marriage equality suit filed by three local couples including Nancy Robrahn, 68, and Jennie Rosenkranz, 72, (above) who were married after 27 years together in an April ceremony officiated by the mayor of Minneapolis. According to the state, the plaintiffs have not presented "any plausible claim" of having been discriminated against. Hit the first link and read the full motion. (Via Equality Case Files)

Matt Baume: Marriage News Watch

Clip recap:

"More than sixteen and a half million Americans gained marriage equality last week, with decisive victories in Oregon and Pennsylvania. We have brand new lawsuits in the last few states that needed one. And the National Organization for Marriage has suffered even more losses this week."

And That Leaves North Dakota

Via the Associated Press:

Six couples filed a federal lawsuit Thursday seeking to block South Dakota's gay marriage ban, leaving North Dakota as the only state in the country with an unchallenged law prohibiting same-sex weddings. South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley has said he's obligated by law to defend both the state constitution and state statutes. He's among the defendants that also include Gov. Dennis Daugaard, Health Secretary Doneen Hollingsworth, Public Safety Secretary Trevor Jones, Pennington County Register of Deeds Donna Mayer and Brown County Register of Deeds Carol Sherman. Five of the couples already got married in Iowa, Connecticut and Minnesota. The sixth couple was denied a marriage license Thursday, Newville said.

The AP adds that the Minneapolis attorney representing the South Dakota couples is "seriously considering" also representing several North Dakota couples that have contacted him.

SOUTH DAKOTA: GOP Rep Says Gay Sex Is "One Way Alley For The Garbage Truck"

"Certainly there are board-certified doctors in our state who will attest to what seems self-evident to so many: gay sex is not good for the body or mind. Pardon a crude comparison but regarding men with men, we are talking about a one-way alley meant only for the garbage truck to go down. Frankly, I’d question the judgment of doctor who says it’s all fine. This indeed is a matter of being on the wrong side of history considering that homosexuality has been a notable marker of the downfall of past civilizations, not their rise. It’s not hate for a physician to speak up about something that is harmful to human health. It is not unloving to tell people you don’t have to have sex with and marry someone to love and be loved by them. As one who performs marriages and counsels couples as part of my professional life, marriage is the last thing I’d recommend to someone who simply wants to be loved and legitimized." - South Dakota GOP state Rep. Steve Hickey, in an open letter he's trying to get a local newspaper to publish. Hickey is pastor.

SOUTH DAKOTA: Marriage Suit Coming

South Dakota's first marriage equality lawsuit is on the way.

Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges will officiate at the weekend marriage of a lesbian couple from South Dakota as the women prepare to take part in a groundbreaking lawsuit to force their home state to recognize their union. The couple, Nancy Robrahn, 68, and Jennie Rosenkranz, 72, say that along with two other gay South Dakota couples, they plan on filing a federal class-action lawsuit against state officials. Robrahn and Rosenkranz will argue that South Dakota should recognize same-sex marriages when performed outside of the state. In addition, the suit will seek to overturn South Dakota's statewide same-sex marriage ban enacted by a constitutional amendment in 2006. A spokesman for Hodges said she does not know Robrahn and Rosenkranz personally, but responded positively after those working with them reached out to her office.

Robrahn and Rosenkranz have been together for 27 years. In March they were denied a marriage license by the clerk's office in South Dakota's Pennington County.

RELATED:  Once the above suit is filed, that will leave North Dakota, Montana, and Alaska as the only states without marriage equality lawsuits.

Four States Left

Via Good As You.

About South Dakota's Anti-Gay Bills

On Sunday I posted a petition from the South Dakota Democratic Party in opposition to a bill that would legalize anti-gay discrimination on the basis of "sincerely held religious beliefs." Yesterday the Associated Press spoke with the bill's author, who has introduced a second bill that outlaws forcing ministers to conduct same-sex marriages. (Which has never happened anywhere in the history of everything.)

The South Dakota Constitution and states laws already ban gay marriage, but Sen. Ernie Otten, R-Tea, said he proposed the bills because courts could overturn the ban as they have in other states. Lawsuits in some states have threatened businesses that refused to provide wedding cakes, flowers or other services for same-sex ceremonies, he said. The bills would prevent clergy or businesses from being forced to perform or supply goods or services to anything related to same-sex marriages. It could allow a South Dakota business to refuse to host a reception for a same-sex couple legally married in another state. The bills also say clergy and businesses could not be sued or charged with crimes if they refused to take part in gay marriages. Otten said the measures are not intended to hurt gay people, but he believes gay-rights activists are going too far in suing people who refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies or to provide services for such weddings. “It’s unconscionable that somebody from the outside would come in and bring a family business to ruin over activism,” Otten said.

The lead House sponsor of Otten's bills provides our WTF of the day: "Religious rights need to continue to trump gay rights. Otherwise, we’re heading down the road of Iran, where it’s convert or die, be quiet or die. If we want to talk about church and state, this is a bill that keeps the state out of my church." South Dakota is one of 29 states that do not include sexual orientation in its public accommodation laws.

Petition Of The Day

From the South Dakota Democratic Party: "SB 67 was introduced in the South Dakota state legislature on January 21. It allows discriminatory businesses to refuse service to the LGBT community. We must stop SB 67 from becoming law. Please sign the petition if you believe discrimination against any South Dakotans for who they are has no place in our laws. Together, we can stop SB 67. -- Sen. Angie Buhl O'Donnell (D-Sioux Falls)." (Tipped by JMG reader Bobby)