No way he's going to rule against us

A correction to what I wrote yesterday. I said it was a change in attitudes over time as the reason Judge Shelby didn't issue a stay when he ruled in favor of gay marriage while in the Calif. case in 2009 a stay came with the ruling. The difference was actually in the attitude or confidence of the defendants, which is the state.

Back in 2009 the Calif. defendants didn't know how the case would be decided in the district court. They did know it would go to the 9th Circuit and on to the Supremes, no matter what the district judge decided. So the defendants requested a stay before the ruling was issued in case it wasn't in their favor. The judge could rule on the stay as part of ruling on the case.

This year in Utah the defendants (the state) did not request a stay ahead of time. So Judge Shelby could not rule on the stay as part of ruling on the case. Was the state lazy or incompetent? Or did they believe that in Mormon Utah with a conservative judge there was no way he would not rule in their favor?

Ruling on the stay along with the case meant Judge Shelby would have preserved the status quo until the appeal. He might have been open to that. But with his ruling without the stay the status quo changed. Shelby might believe that yanking same-sex marriage after they've begun is more harmful that not allowing them at all. And they have begun. There is an estimate of 800 same-sex marriages since Friday.



This is really cool: With long lines at the county clerk's office both the waiting couples and the working clerks may not have time to eat. So boy scouts brought pizzas and offered slices to the workers and the waiting couples. Those rainbow neckerchiefs look pretty sweet. Do they offer a merit badge in equality yet? One of the commenters went digging. It appears these boys (and a balding leader) are part of Troop 351 hosted by a Jewish group and led by Peter Brownstein. He was reprimanded for marching in a gay pride parade.