Justices: No gay nuptials till decision

The Arkansas Supreme Court on Friday suspended a lower court's ruling that found the state's ban on same-sex marriages unconstitutional.

The decision brought to a halt the issuance of licenses to same-sex couples around the state while the Supreme Court considers the appeal.

It comes one week after Pulaski County Judge Chris Piazza struck down Amendment 83 to the Arkansas Constitution, approved by voters in 2004, and Act 144 of 1997, a separate statute prohibiting same-sex marriages.

Since May 10, on the basis of available numbers, almost 600 marriage licenses have been issued to same-sex couples in Arkansas.

On Friday, 57 marriage licenses were issued to same-sex couples in Pulaski County and 23 in Washington County.

Also Friday, a group of Democrats and House Speaker Davy Carter, R-Cabot, blocked introduction of a resolution opposing gay marriage and condemning Piazza. Opponents, including some opponents of same-sex marriage, said the bill was an assault on the state's judiciary.

The Supreme Court issued its decision in a two-page order that listed the parties and stated, without further explanation, "State Defendants-Appellants' petition for emergency stay and separate White, Washington, Lonoke, and Conway County Appellants' expedited motion for stay are granted."

Six counties are defendants in the lawsuit: Pulaski, Washington, Conway, Lonoke, Saline and White. Clerks in Conway, Lonoke and Saline counties didn't return telephone calls or email messages Thursday afternoon.

Aaron Sadler, a spokesman for Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, welcomed Friday's court order.

"As this office stated in its pleadings, a stay prevents confusion and uncertainty until the Arkansas Supreme Court decides this matter on appeal. The court today made the right decision to issue a stay, as other courts across the country have done in similar circumstances," Sadler said.

Jack Wagoner, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said he was disappointed in the court's ruling but also wasn't surprised. He said that while the plaintiffs in gay marriage cases are "universally winning," the courts have also been "universally staying" the rulings while appeals are heard.

Wagoner said the court reporter will now prepare the documents from the case's history and submit them to the court, which will formally begin the appeals process regarding Piazza's ruling. The court will then set a briefing schedule with the state filing the first brief, the plaintiffs issuing a response and then the state replying to the plaintiffs' brief.

Wagoner said he will "absolutely" request oral arguments in the case.

"I think it's real likely by the end of the year that we have a decision," Wagoner said.

Piazza issued his initial ruling on May 9, and the state quickly asked for a stay, vowing to appeal. Piazza did not rule on the stay, and the state asked the high court to intervene Monday morning.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to issue a stay in the case, saying Piazza had not completed his task and no final order had been completed. The court noted then that Piazza's opinion had not yet addressed the constitutionality of Act 146 of 1997, a related law that prohibits county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Violation of the law is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of between $100-$500.

The law, the court noted, was still in effect, an observation that led to the suspension of the same-sex marriage licenses for a short time.

Piazza expanded his order Thursday to include Act 146, declaring that it was also unconstitutional.

With Piazza rejecting the state's motion for a stay, gay-marriage opponents Thursday asked the Arkansas Supreme Court to issue one.

The Supreme Court originally asked the plaintiffs to respond to the request by noon Monday but moved up the deadline Friday morning to 2 p.m. that day.

Wagoner filed a response to the state's request for a stay shortly after 1:30 p.m. Friday. Wagoner wrote that the court should weigh the "irreparable harm" that would be caused to the plaintiffs against the state's "generalized harm" of not being able to enforce one of its statutes.

The state also made no showing that the stay was in the public's best interest, Wagoner wrote.

"The public has no interest in enforcing unconstitutional laws or in relegating same-sex couples and their families to a perpetual state of financial and legal vulnerability," Wagoner wrote.

Suspending Piazza's ruling, he argued, would hurt his clients and many others.

"If a stay is issued, married same-sex couples in Arkansas will once again be forced to navigate a complex, bewildering, and ever-shifting terrain of uncertainty as to whether they will be respected as a legally married couple by particular federal agencies, private employers, businesses, and particular state and local governmental actors," Wagoner wrote.

Wagoner also referred to the recent announcement by the University of Arkansas to make health insurance available to same-sex spouses who are married to university employees. He said those spouses would lose access to "this critical protection" with a stay.

Earlier in the day, Democrats blocked the introduction of a resolution sponsored by Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Bigelow, during the Arkansas Legislative Council meeting.

The nonbinding resolution expresses support for Amendment 83, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and asks the court to find that the marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples are null and void. The resolution states that Piazza's decision was "in direct contradiction to his oath to uphold the Arkansas Constitution and the overall right of the State of Arkansas to declare policy on such matters."

The resolution also states that the Arkansas Legislative Council "shall explore legislative remedies to prevent" changes to the state constitution by "judicial activism."

"Be it further resolved that the Arkansas Legislative Council views the actions of Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza as an abuse of his judicial authority," the resolution states.

Because the resolution wasn't on the agenda, Rapert needed the backing of two-thirds of the members present to suspend the rules and introduce it.

After a voice vote on the motion to suspend the rules, Rep. Greg Leding, D-Fayetteville, asked for a roll call and a division of the votes.

Under the rules, Rapert needed two-thirds supermajorities from the council's House members as well as its Senate members in order to proceed.

The motion failed after receiving a vote of 19-5 from the House members and 8-6 by the senators. House Speaker Davy Carter, R-Cabot, was the only Republican voting no.

Carter, who was elected speaker with strong Democratic support, left shortly after the meeting, but issued a statement explaining his vote.

"I believe in our constitution and our system of government. Whether or not our state's constitutional amendment runs afoul of the United States Constitution is a question for our highest court," Carter said. "Judicial intimidation by the legislative branch is not appropriate in this instance or any other."

Rep. David Hillman, D-Almyra, said he doesn't support gay marriage and that "the will of the people should prevail." But he said he saw the measure as a "legislative interference" in the judicial system.

Hillman said if the measure was written strictly to express support for Amendment 83, it would have passed with nearly unanimous support.

"The problem that I have with [the resolution] is just because I disagree with a judge's ruling doesn't mean that he should be taken from office," Hillman said.

Leding, the House minority leader, said he feels that there's support among many Democrats for gay marriage but that "there's still a sense of political reality for some of them and they feel that this [resolution] is something they have to support back in their district."

He said he will attempt to block the measure if Rapert tries to present it again,

Rapert said he planned to put the resolution on the council's next meeting agenda and present it again without the need to suspend the rules. He said it was "very, very unfortunate" that the measure was blocked and that it was contrary to the "will of the people."

Matt DeCample, a spokesman for Gov. Mike Beebe, said taking "extraordinary action" beyond what is already happening in the courts "is not going to change that process."

"We've got the appeals process in motion, and this is going to be decided in the court," DeCample said.

Information for this article was contributed by Bill Bowden of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

A section on 05/17/2014