Sister Wives' appeal polygamy ruling to US Supreme Court
SALT LAKE CITY — A polygamous family from TV's "Sister Wives" filed a request Monday for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case for legalizing polygamy.
Kody Brown and his four wives want the high court to review an appeal court's decision that upheld a unique provision of Utah's polygamy law that bans cohabitation with other partners even if the man is legally married to just one woman.
The ruling overturned a previous legal victory for the Browns in which a lower court ruled the law violated polygamists' right to privacy and religious freedom.
The appeals court decided in April that the Browns can't sue because they weren't charged under the Utah law. It didn't consider the constitutional issues.
Like most polygamous families, Brown is legally married to one wife and "spiritually married" to the others.
This was the inevitable result of the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling making gay marriage a constitutional/
It will be interesting of the court has the courage to take up the case.
Logic and common sense dictates that since the state has no interest in defining marriage in the case of gay couples it also has no interest in banning polygamous marriage and the right to privacy trumps right of the state to regulate marriage.
That would be consistent with the Obergefell ruling.
If they rule against the Sister Wives family it will be interesting to see what tortious logic they use to justify the ban on polygamous marriage.
As a famous preacher once said; "The chickens have come to roost".
7 comments:
Male dominated polygamous marriages usually work to the suppression of women's rights.
Adult women enter polygamous marriages of their own free will. That you think it leads to suppression of women's right is just your own moral judgement.
And as justice Kennedy has told us, that has no "rational basis" in law. Love triumphs everything.
Many who enter such arrangements later regret it and have painful experiences trying to get out of such arrangements.
So you want a law to protect women from the consequences of their own decision.
My that's a paternalistic, chauvinistic, not to mention unconstitutional attitude.
Young girls get "religiously" brainwashed into agreeing to repressive relationships they later want to get out of. I'm for laws protecting them.
Well James to follow you peculiar logic; young boys and girls are brainwashed into thinking they are homosexual or are really transgender.
Therefore, we should ban homosexual marriages to protect them.
How does that work for you?
Post a Comment