More about the Utah marriage decision

Listening to Rachel Maddow and her guest, an NYU law professor, I now understand why the Utah marriage decision is perhaps the most significant one thus far.

Until now, all the changes in the 17 states have been done either by state courts or state legislators or by voters.  The Utah decision was the first from a federal judge (District Court).

As Rachel explained, the 30 states with constitutional amendments on gay marriage are immune to being overturned by state courts.   And with 17 states now legalizing gay marriage, there were only three more that could by decided by state courts.  

Utah is one of those with a constitutional amendment   Thus the case was filed in federal court -- because the only recourse was to have a court say it violated the United States Constitution.

That is what happened in Utah and why it is so significant.    It is the first decision by a federal judge that says the state law violates the rights of equal protection in the 14th amendment.

Utah is also the first decision to come down of the several cases that have been filed in federal courts in those states with constitutional amendments.   One, or perhaps several, of them will undoubtedly be appealed and heard by the U. S. Supreme Court -- but probably not until there have been more decisions from other cases.

The argument will be much stronger if there have been some other decisions like this one in Utah.   Let's hope it doesn't reach SCOTUS too soon.   Another couple of years might be just about right when it will seem inevitable even to those opposing change.
 
Ralph