Way clear for Alabama gay nuptials, but state asks U.S. justices for stay

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A federal appeals court on Tuesday cleared the way for same-sex marriages to begin Monday in Alabama, but the state’s attorney general made a last-ditch attempt to keep the weddings on hold.

Meanwhile, another appeals court agreed Tuesday to hear arguments from states including Arkansas in a spedup process that positions it to weigh in before an expected U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In the Alabama case, a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday refused to delay a district judge’s decision that overturned Alabama’s gay-marriage ban. That would appear to pave the way for Alabama to become the 37th state where gays can legally wed.

“Finally, we’ve got to the point that all Alabama citizens are going to be treated equally,” said Christine Hernandez, a lawyer for the Mobile couple that challenged the Alabama laws.

However, Attorney General Luther Strange asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the weddings until the justices settle the issue nationwide when they take up gay marriage later this year.

“The confusion that has been created by the District Court’s ruling could linger for months until the U.S. Supreme Court resolves this issue once and for all,” Strange said.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in April and is expected to issue a ruling by June regarding whether gay couples nationwide have a fundamental right to marry and whether states can ban such unions.

Same-sex weddings in Alabama will begin when a judge’s order expires Monday unless the Supreme Court intervenes.

U.S. District Judge Callie Granade on Jan. 23 ruled Alabama’s ban was unconstitutional but put a hold on her order until Monday to give the state time to appeal. She refused to lift that order Tuesday — which would effectively allow gay marriages to begin immediately — so that probate courts had time to prepare.

Cari Searcy and Kimberly McKeand filed the lawsuit challenging the ban that prevented Alabama from recognizing their California marriage and Searcy as a parent to their son, to whom McKeand gave birth in 2005 with the help of a sperm donor. A local court had rejected Searcy’s requests to adopt the boy because the two women were not spouses under Alabama law.

Granade’s ruling was the latest in a string of victories for marriage-rights advocates in socially conservative states. Judges have struck down bans in the Carolinas, Florida, Mississippi and Arkansas.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed Tuesday to hear arguments this spring from South Dakota, Arkansas and Missouri. The move will make the conservative-leaning 8th Circuit the final federal appellate court to take action on same-sex marriage before the U.S. Supreme Court takes up the issue.

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said the 8th Circuit may want to signal to the Supreme Court how it thinks the high court should rule, and give it a better sense of where the appellate courts stand.

The Republican attorney general also said the court needs to have a ruling on the record in the event the Supreme Court narrowly draws its decision and fails to address all the issues that could arise regarding same-sex marriages.

“So to the extent that the Supreme Court doesn’t fully answer of all the questions,” Jackley said, “however the 8th Circuit rules in the Missouri, South Dakota and Arkansas cases will be the law of the land, so to speak [in the 8th Circuit].”