Utah puts same-sex marriages on hold pending appeal

SALT LAKE CITY Wed Jan 8, 2014 6:50pm EST

Jax Collins (L) and Heather Collins get married at the Salt Lake County Government Building in Salt Lake City, Utah, December 23, 2013. REUTERS/Jim Urquhart

Jax Collins (L) and Heather Collins get married at the Salt Lake County Government Building in Salt Lake City, Utah, December 23, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Jim Urquhart

Related Topics

SALT LAKE CITY (Reuters) - Utah will not recognize, at least for now, the marriages of gay couples who rushed to wed after a federal judge's ruling briefly rendered gay unions legal in the conservative, predominantly Mormon state, the governor's office said on Wednesday.

The state's decision comes as a blow to roughly 1,400 same-sex couples who legally tied the knot after U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ruled on December 20 that a state ban on gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution. His ruling was later put on hold by the U.S. Supreme Court pending an appeal.

"Based on counsel from the Attorney General's Office regarding the Supreme Court decision, state recognition of same-sex marital status is ON HOLD until further notice," Republican Governor Gary Herbert's chief of staff wrote in a statement.

Utah temporarily became the 18th U.S. state to permit gay marriage when Shelby ruled for three same-sex couples in a lawsuit challenging a voter-passed amendment to the Utah constitution that defined marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay on Monday, pending appeal of the ruling, preventing new same-sex marriages from being performed in the state. Following that decision, married same-sex couples who wed after Shelby's decision expressed concern the state might not recognize their marriages as valid.

Shelby's ruling had jolted many of Utah's 2.8 million residents, nearly two-thirds of whom are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which teaches that traditional marriage is an institution ordained by God.

Las Vegas couple Reed Abplanalp-Cowan and Gregory Abplanalp-Cowan came to Utah to wed because they own property and two businesses in the state. They have three children adopted in other states and are trying to adopt a fourth - a girl - from Utah, which bars gay couples from adopting.

"I'm hurt, very hurt," said Reed Abplanalp-Cowan hours after the announcement. "I'm sad for my family personally. I'm sad for the impact on my children."


Salt Lake City couple Paul and Tony Butterfield married in California in 2008 but their union was not recognized in Utah, and on December 23 they wed again in that state. They called their attorney on Wednesday seeking advice about what to do, as did the Abplanalp-Cowans.

"For the governor to just overturn a court-mandated judgment just blows my mind," said Paul Butterfield, who is raising 11-year-old twin boys with his partner of 18 years.

The American Civil Liberties of Utah, which supports the effort to bring gay marriage to the state, expressed disappointment in Utah's decision not to recognize the weddings performed in recent weeks.

The governor's office, in explaining how the state would handle the existing marriages, said state agencies should follow "current laws that prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages."

As an example of how the policy would be applied, it said that if a married same-sex couple in Utah had already changed their names on their drivers' licenses the changes would not be revoked, but such couples would not be able to now apply to change their names on the state-issued identification.

Salt Lake City-based family law attorney Tanya Peters said she thinks Utah acted irresponsibly, saying she had expected Utah to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify the scope of its stay order before deciding it should not recognize same-sex marriages.

"Now what happens is that the state of Utah has opened itself up to civil rights lawsuits," said Peters, who said she's already been called by both gay friends and clients seeking advice. "You can't just simply waive a wand and say those marriages don't exist."

Bill Duncan, director of the conservative Marriage Law Foundation in Utah, said he was not surprised by Utah's decision. "I don't know that the governor had many options. That period during which there was no (judicial) stay issued created a lot of uncertainty," he said.

(Writing by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Cynthia Johnston, Bernadette Baum and Steve Orlofsky)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (8)
WhyMeLord wrote:
Marriage is in God’s domain, Churches should be the final word on who’s married or not; governments, state and/or federal should mind their own business. Surely they have enough on their plates already.
Bottom line on this seems to be taxes; who gets how much and when.
Sad state of affairs when we let politicians into our private lives.
This whole thing is utter foolishness, and is a gigantic waste of our time and energy which would be better spent watching paint dry.

Jan 08, 2014 3:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Brenna47 wrote:
Here we have a state that allows men to have numerous wives according to their “religion” (although the women can’t have numerous husbands) and they want to say that gay marriage is wrong???? This is a religion that is so hypocritical; it’s totally geared toward men having all the sex they want from many partners and use the term religion to have it. My, my, what are people thinking??? I guess they just aren’t! If Utah men want numerous sex partners, go ahead, but don’t judge anyone else’s sexual appetites!

Jan 08, 2014 3:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Laborman wrote:
I don’t recognize Mormon marriage. So we’re even.

Jan 08, 2014 3:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.