The following statement from a spokesperson from the Utah Attorney General's office is today's Queer Quote:
To obtain clarity and resolution from the highest court, the Utah Attorney General will not seek en banc review of the Kitchen v. Herbert Tenth Circuit decision, but wll file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in the coming weeks. Attorney General Reyes has a sworn duty to defend the laws of our state. Utah's Constitutional Amendment 3 is presumed to be constitutional unless the highest court deems otherwise.Actually, since both a federal district court judge on December 20, 2013 and a majority of a 3-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on June 25, 2014 has found Amendment 3 to be unconstitutional it is curious indeed that the Attorney General thinks that the law is presumed to be unconstitutional unless the highest court deems it otherwise. The Supreme Court could deny the Writ of Certiorari and marriage equality would come to Utah (and all the rest of the states in the Tenth Circuit's jurisdiction without the high court "deeming" anything.
As I intimated earlier in this post, by declining to appeal en banc (ask all the judges on the Tenth Circuit to consider the case) this means that a definitive question on marriage equality nationwide will almost certainly be known by this time next year (the end of the 2014-2015 Supreme Court term).
The interesting question will the Supreme Court use this case or possibly the 4th Circuit case from Virginia (Bostic) or the numerous 6th Circuit cases (where every state in the Circuit has a marriage equality case under stay) to make its decision? If all 3 appellate panels all rule in favor of marriage equality, will the Supremes even take the case at all?