Alabama AG, Luther Strange, filed an appeal to the SCOTUS in regards to Strange v. Searcy. The only possibly bad news for marriage equality is that the appeal falls directly and only to Clarence Thomas.
In his plea, Lex Luther explained that the state needs a longer stay because:
The decisions by the District Court and the Eleventh Circuit (App. B, C) to deny a longer stay have created confusion in the State. Probate judges, who are not supervised by the Attorney General and are not under his control, issue marriage licenses. As an association, the Probate Judges initially said they did not believe they were subject to the District Court’s injunction and remained under an obligation to follow Alabama law. Later, at least some individual Probate Judges reached a different conclusion.The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama,who also heads the Administrative Office of Courts which may have bearing on the authority of Probate Judges and the administration of their work, has expressed doubts about the scope of the District Court order and its application to members of the Alabama Judicial Branch, when the only Defendant before the District Court was the Attorney General.
So, gay marriage needs to be put on hold, because Roy Moore is a dumb fuck who doesn't know the difference between the Constitution and a Bazooka Joe wrapper. Luther admits that Judge Granade issued a warning to the Probate Judges warning that they had two weeks to get their shit together, and if they refused they would get sued. But you that wasn't clear enough or anything.
All of this aside the appeal gets sort of bizarre, when under the section "The Attorney General is likely to prevail on the merits of his appeal." (hahahahah, yeah you are going to succeed, uggh):
The interests supported by opposite-sex marriage are, at the very least,
rational. States are not in the marriage business “to regulate love.” Id. at 404.
Instead, state marriage laws link children to their biological parents (and link these
biological parents to each other) by imposing a package of privileges and
obligations—such as presumptions of paternity—that make less sense in the
context of same-sex relationships. It is not irrational or malicious for state laws to
reflect an “awareness of the biological reality that couples of the same sex do not
have children the same way as couples of opposite sexes.” Id. at 405. It is instead
the background against which the institution of marriage has developed over the
last several thousand years.
So you're going to just shit all over adoption then, huh? I mean you did read over this, right, and you saw what you were righting. And no warning bells were going off, saying, "this is kind of a band argument."
I mean really, straight people, are you going to put up with this shit.Marriage is just about popping out babies and only your biological spawn. THIS IS WHAT YOUR GOVERNMENT THINKS OF YOU!
And back to the beginning of that paragraph, where it says, "States are not in the marriage business 'to regulate love.'" That's the argument gay couples are making... so thanks, I guess.
***According to his Twitter Feed, Judge Steven Reed of Montgomery County will issue marriage licenses unless a stay is put into place. Super cool!***
Update II
*** Judge Callie V. Granade (awesome judge name) has issued a 14 day stay that also clarifies the original order. Particularly this section:
3.Granting a Stay Will Irreparably Harm the Plaintiffs and Other Same-Sex Couples
As indicated above and in its order granting the injunction, the court has already found that same-sex couples face harm by not having their marriages recognized and not being allowed to marry. The harms entailed in having their constitutional rights violated are irreparable and far outweigh any potential harm to the Attorney General and the State of Alabama. As long as a stay is in place, same-sex couples and their families remain in a state of limbo with respect to adoption, child care and custody, medical decisions, employment and health benefits, future tax implications, inheritance and many other rights associated with marriage. The court concludes that these circumstance constitute irreparable harm.
Ausgezeichnet!***
On Friday Judge Callie V. Granade (greatest judge's name since Learned Hand) from the Federal Southern District of Alabama ruled that the State's Marriage Amendment and Statutes are unconstitutional under federal law. As of this moment no stay has been issued.
However because some people just want to be sued, Alabama Probate Judges Association (which is a non-binding, but contains Probate Judges) had to weigh in. According to this report by Crystal Carr from ABC 33 in Birmingham, the dumb fucks Probate Judges have decided not to issue marriage licences:
"Judge Granade's ruling in this case only applies to the parties in the case and has no effect on anybody that is not a named party. The probate judges were not parties in this matter," Al Agricola, attorney for the Alabama Probate Judges Association, explained. "The legal effect of this decision is to allow one person in one same-sex marriage that was performed in another state to adopt their partner's child. There is nothing in the judge's order that requires probate judges in Alabama to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples."
Hmm... I did not know that in the South the word "Attorney" is defined as "one who is dumber than a sun-baked jar of mayonnaise," but much is explained.
Ok let me 'splain this to you... Attorney General was named on behalf of State... you know that thing you belong to... the nice judge lady say laws stopping certain couples from marring are no longer there... if you don't marry people when they ask, you get sued.
Ughh. Is there a fucking See 'n Say that can explain this to the fucking knuckle dragging mouth breathers? The judge says "unconstitutional."
Ok,you do not need to be named for the decision have an effect on you! So yes, the Judge didn't order you to do anything; however it would behoove you to follow the law!!!!!!!
Don't believe me; here is the Conclusion from Searcy v. Strange, No.14-0208-CG-N (S.D.Ala. Jan. 23, 2015):
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Doc.21), is GRANTED and Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Docs. 47), is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ALA. CONST. ART. I, § 36.03 (2006) and ALA. CODE 1975 § 30-1-19 are unconstitutional because they violate they [sic.] Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant is enjoined from enforcing those laws.
DONE and ORDERED this 23rd day of January, 2015.
In summary, the Plaintiff won. The following section of the Alabama Constitution is no longer governing:
(a) This amendment shall be known and may be cited as the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment.
(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting this unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract. (d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.
(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.
(f) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any common law marriage of parties of the same sex.
(g) A union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex in the State of Alabama or in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state as a marriage or other union replicating marriage.
The following statute is no longer governing:
(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Alabama Marriage Protection Act."
(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting the unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.
(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.
(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.
According to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b), failure to issue marriage licenses can allow aggrieved parties to intervene as plaintiffs in pending actions, allow certification of plaintiff and defendant classes, allow issuance of successive preliminary injunctions, and which will allow successful plaintiffs to recover costs and attorney’s fees.
