Follow breaking news @lgbtqnation
Nevada

Ten attorneys general file brief supporting Nev. same-sex marriage ban

Monday, February 3, 2014

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes and top law officers from nine other states are fighting a lawsuit challenging Nevada’s same-sex marriage ban, arguing no fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists.

NevadaThe attorneys general, in a newly filed amicus brief in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, claim allowing such unions will lead to “any group of adults” seeking that status and the “tragic deconstruction” of marriage.

“If public affirmation of anyone and everyone’s personal love and commitment is the single purpose of civil marriage, a limitless number of rights claims could be set up that evacuate the term ‘marriage’ of any meaning,” the brief states.

Once “natural limits (are gone), it follows that any group of adults would have an equal claim to marriage.”

Attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and South Carolina also signed the document, The Salt Lake Tribune reported.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval is urging the appeals court to uphold U.S. District Judge Robert Jones’ 2012 decision in favor of his state’s voter-approved ban on gay marriage. Eight same-sex couples are appealing the ruling.

At the same time, Utah is appealing U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby’s December ruling overturning its voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. More than 1,000 gay couples rushed to wed before the U.S. Supreme Court granted the state’s request to halt the weddings in January.

The attorneys general, in their brief on the Nevada case, say 33 states adhere to a “historical” definition of marriage of one man and one woman, which predates the nation’s founding and is centered on procreation.

“Traditional marriage is too deeply embedded in our laws, history and traditions for a court to hold that the choice to adhere to that definition is irrational,” the filing states. “It creates a norm where sexual activity that can beget children should occur in a long-term, cohabitative relationship.”

Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples, which do not rely on a sexual, procreative basis, could require states to recognize any relationships as “marriages” if the parties involved requested that status — from platonic friendships and business partnerships to incestuous or kinship relationships, the attorneys general contend.

“Once the link between marriage and responsible procreation is severed — not simply stretched, but severed — and the commonsense idea that children are optimally raised in traditional intact families rejected, there is no fundamental reason for government to prefer couples to groups of three or more,” the filing states.

The 9th Circuit Court’s recent decision in another case, which concluded it was unconstitutional to bar a prospective juror because of sexual orientation, doesn’t apply, the attorneys general said.

“These technical, doctrinal inquiries only confirm what common sense tells us: traditional marriage arises from concern for opposite-sex couples, not same-sex couples,” they said.

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto has said she’s reconsidering whether to defend the state in the appeal because of the appeals court’s recent ruling.

© 2014, Associated Press, All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Share this article with your friends and followers:

Archives: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Filed under: Nevada

29 more reader comments:

  1. YET drunk straight people are allowed to marry? FUCK OUTTA HERE >:(

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:04pm
  2. What a ridiculous waste of money and court time

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:05pm
  3. What business does a Utah official have in the internal affairs of Nevada?

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:11pm
  4. But prostitution is legal…idiots.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:12pm
  5. No Queer sign ?

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:13pm
  6. They will loose. The Ninth Circuit were the same ones that found Prop 8 to be unconstitutional.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:18pm
  7. Lesbians can have babies thank you!

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:19pm
  8. And polygamy is legal but gays can’t get married?? Makes perfect sense.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:21pm
  9. “Once the link between marriage and responsible procreation is severed — not simply stretched, but severed — and the commonsense idea that children are optimally raised in traditional intact families rejected, there is no fundamental reason for government to prefer couples to groups of three or more,” the filing states.

    At least he’s right on one thing, polyamorous relationships should be just as legally viable as couple marriages.

    That said, i still don’t believe there should be any legal entity overseeing my personal relationships.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:24pm
  10. There is NO reason except religious hatred to prevent same-sex marriages. Once courts rule that there is truly a separation of church and state these arguments become moot.

    Replied on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:24pm
  11. more apropos would be the kneeling guy shooting crap ~

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:25pm
  12. Of course Nebraska’s jackass of an AG would sign this! Why is this world so full of idiots?

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:34pm
  13. What a crock of BS

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:38pm
  14. Dame lazy people at least open the story to see the full head line before likening something.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:39pm
  15. Bad Nevada, very bad Nevada. Though, I don’t see the ban lasting too much longer. I could see it make some nice revenue in Vegas. Just capitalize on it. Same sex marriage chapels, come on, someone has to be ready to get on it.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:44pm
  16. I assume (hope) these are all Republicans?

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:51pm
  17. Why not stop divorce how about that

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:56pm
  18. Discremation plain and simple and that has to stop ASAP

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 2:58pm
  19. I grew up here. how in the world with gambling, prostitution and the liberal majority, can this be happening? I remember when NV welcomed everyone. This is bs! NV has the most liberal marriage laws in the country! Marriage, same day. No fault divorce, 1 week. This is ridiculous and I am embarrassed to have called NV my home. It’s so past time to allow marriage to ALL the people!

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:13pm
  20. bunch of shit

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:18pm
  21. It is almost laughable that so many want their two cents worth and will go to any lengths to deny Constitutional rights to Americans.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:18pm
  22. Oh wow, they must really be sure they are going to lose!!!!

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:23pm
  23. So ten attorney general filed a brief in favor of discrimination. Wow! What idiots.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:27pm
  24. @Robert all I was saying is it’s just as stupid to make polyamorous (3+ group) marriages illegal as it is to make same sex marriage illegal. As a pansexual trans* woman dating a beautiful woman I have no problem with same sex marriage. :) Tthough again I find it strange that anyone would want a malicious third party (government) overseeing and dictating their personal relationships.

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:29pm
  25. Why? Why do straight people care about MY relationship? I don’t care about theirs…

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:50pm
  26. really? u can have las vegas and prostitution,-but not gay marriage. effin lame

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 3:55pm
  27. Boycott Vegas until they change their stance

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 4:20pm
  28. Three words: Loving v. Virginia

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 4:29pm
  29. Crappy decision! Come on people get int this century!

    Posted on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 5:24pm