Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Courts - More on: What if there had been no stay of federal Judge Young's order in Indiana?
This ILB post from Monday reported that there had been no efforts to appeal or stay the ruling of a federal trial court judge in Pennsylvania that the ban against same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, except for one county clerk - quoting Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog:
A federal judge in Harrisburg in May ruled that the Pennsylvania ban is unconstitutional, and refused last month to allow the Schuylkill County clerk to intervene so that she could appeal that decision. The judge sharply lectured the clerk about her continuation of the fight. On Thursday, the Third Circuit, acting summarily, barred her from the case and dismissed her appeal, saying it was doing so “for essentially the reasons” given by the district court judge. (A summary decision is made without written or oral arguments.)Last this afternoon Greg Stohr reported for Bloomberg News:
Her challenge can go forward only if Justice Alito or a Supreme Court majority allows her to intervene, and postpones the decision nullifying the ban. Justice Alito has the option of seeking a response from challengers of the Pennsylvania ban before acting on the clerk’s application.
A U.S. Supreme Court justice let same-sex marriages continue in Pennsylvania, rejecting a request from a county clerk who sought to reinstate the state’s ban.[More] Here now in bold is Lyle Denniston's updated report.
The rebuff by Justice Samuel Alito leaves Pennsylvania as one of 19 states where gay marriages can take place. The District of Columbia also allows same-sex weddings, and court rulings permitting them in nine other states are on hold. Alito, who handles emergency matters from Pennsylvania, acted without comment.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 9, 2014 06:41 PM
Posted to Courts in general