No oral arguments, court says

Judge’s gay-ban removal still on hold, justices also rule

Chief Justice Jim Hannah of the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Chief Justice Jim Hannah of the Arkansas Supreme Court.

The Arkansas Supreme Court will not entertain a second round of oral arguments in the prolonged challenge to the state's ban on same-sex marriage, nor will it lift a stay on a circuit judge's ruling that found the ban unconstitutional.

photo

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

State Supreme Court Justice Paul Danielson is shown in this file photo.

On Thursday, the state's highest court did not rule whether the law and voter-approved constitutional amendment barring gay marriage were constitutional, but did issue orders in the case.

Six months after the original oral arguments, it's unclear whether the justices are nearing a decision.

Thursday's orders come three weeks after five elected justices and two specially appointed justices decided that the current members of the court will rule on the gay-marriage question.

That spinoff case prompted the two ranking members, Chief Justice Jim Hannah and Justice Paul Danielson, to recuse themselves and accuse other members of the court of intentionally delaying a ruling in the case.

Danielson described the second case as being "manufactured" and one free of any real "controversy."

An attorney for the couples challenging the ban, Cheryl Maples, said she was relieved that the court would not compel a second round of arguments, which she has said would have been redundant and have resulted in more delays to a ruling.

"It's so much work and I didn't want to have to go through that again," Maples said. "That [order] definitely was a victory. We won't have to go through that."

Judd Deere, a spokesman for Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, did not elaborate on the ruling but released a statement.

"The attorney general will continue to vigorously defend the constitutionality of state law defining marriage as between one man and one woman," Deere said. "Now that this important case is ripe for a decision, the attorney general looks forward to the court's final ruling."

The court also denied a motion from Maples to undo a stay it put in place on May 16, 2014, just a week after Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza invalidated the state's ban. Nearly 600 same-sex couples married in Arkansas before the state Supreme Court ordered a halt to the weddings.

Maples had filed the motion Feb. 17, arguing that recent rulings suggested that the U.S. Supreme Court would strike down gay-marriage bans.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments April 28. Justices are likely to issue a ruling by the end of June.

Maples said she had some hope in February that her motion would succeed given that gay marriages are now allowed in multiple states that are appealing their voided anti-gay-marriage laws.

She said she hoped that the motion would prompt some sort of progress in her clients' case.

"I was trying to get something happening," Maples said. "We're just waiting and waiting and waiting. I wanted some movement."

Maples' case, which was first filed nearly two years ago in Pulaski County, has had several delays.

In May 2014, Piazza ruled that the state's bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.

The case was appealed to the state Supreme Court days later. Cliff Hoofman, who was a justice on the court at the time, recused from hearing the case, and in September, retired Boone County Circuit Judge Robert McCorkindale was named as a special judge to hear the case in Hoofman's stead.

The court heard the oral arguments shortly before Thanksgiving, but issued no ruling as the year ran out.

On Jan. 1, Hoofman's term on the court ended, and Rhonda Wood succeeded him. Also, Robin Wynne joined the high court, replacing Donald Corbin, who retired.

Also in January, Democratic Attorney General Dustin McDaniel's term ended, and Rutledge, a Republican, succeeded him.

On Jan. 23, Rutledge asked the high court to allow a second round of oral arguments in the gay-marriage case, so the new justices could weigh in. Attorneys representing gay couples objected, raising the question of which court -- last year's or this year's -- should decide the case.

On April 2, the high court created a second case -- CV-15-227 -- to determine which of the two courts should issue the ruling on the underlying gay-marriage case, which is CV-14-427.

On April 8, Hannah and Danielson recused from the severed case, saying the new case was a stalling tactic. Wood had already recused, saying she would let someone else determine whether she should be the one weighing the ban's constitutionality.

On April 14, Gov. Asa Hutchinson appointed 14th Judicial Circuit Judge Shawn Womack, Searcy attorney Brett Watson and former Supreme Court Chief Justice Betty Dickey as special judges to hear CV-15-227.

When Maples filed the case, only 13 states allowed gay marriage. Today, same-sex couples can be married in 37 states.

"I'm afraid that all they're doing is housekeeping, kind of clearing the motions away and then let this sit until the Supreme Court rules," Maples said. "I hope I'm wrong. Man, I hope I'm wrong. There are [state constitutional] issues that they still need to hear."

Metro on 05/29/2015

Upcoming Events