ACLU Sues Utah Over Governor’s Refusal to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

HerbertThe ACLU is suing the state of Utah on behalf of four gay couples married before the Supreme Court placed a stay on a lower court ruling striking down the state's ban. Shortly thereafter, Utah Governor Gary Herbert announced that the 1,300+ marriages would be "on hold" pending the appeal of that case and would not be recognized.


“These couples were legally married under Utah law and their unions must be treated the same as any other Utah marriage,” said John Mejia, legal director of the ACLU of Utah. “Even our attorney general said that the marriages were entitled to full recognition by the state at the time they were performed.  Regardless of what ultimately happens in the federal challenge to Utah’s marriage ban, the marriages that already occurred are valid and must be recognized now.”

 The lawsuit argues that once same-sex couples are legally married in Utah, they gain protections that cannot retroactively be taken away under the due process clauses of the Utah and United States Constitution.

 Some couples not only wanted to get married to demonstrate their commitment to each other, but also to ensure protection for their children. As a married couple, each parent can establish a legal connection to their children even if they’re not the biological parent or previously recognized adoptive parent. Otherwise, Utah law allows single parents to adopt, but forbids an unmarried partner from being recognized as a parent to the other’s biological or already-adopted children, which could have devastating legal implications.

 “We acted as soon as we could to make sure our family could stay together in case, heaven forbid, something happens to one of us,” said Matthew Barrazza, who is the adopted father of Jesse, the son he is raising with his husband Tony Milner. Milner currently is not recognized as their son’s parent. “We just want the peace of mind of knowing that whatever happens, Jesse has security of knowing his other parent will take care of and provide for him. Now, because the state refuses to recognize our marriage, this peace of mind is again out of reach.”

 Their adoption process is on hold because of the state’s refusal to recognize their marriage. Other couples worry that they will lose the ability to make decisions for each other or care for each other if one of them is hospitalized.

 "The state has reduced these unions to second-class marriages," said Erik Strindberg of the firm Strindberg & Scholnick, LLC. "It is imperative that these marriages be recognized now, so that these couples and their families can receive the protections given to all other legally married couples in this great state."

Read the complaint HERE.


  1. Chuckles says

    This is just a fundraiser for the ACLU. They have no better case than someone married in California. Same prohibition applies.

  2. Marco Luxe says

    The governor is just making right wing political points by trying to enforce Amd 3’s denial of “recognition” during the stay, and he’s just making Utah look spiteful. The prophet should have the LDS PR department intervene with the governor’s office or he’ll never get a sheep in the White House [so close].

  3. says

    @Chuckles: Wrong and wrong. Valid case and not the same situation as in CA, where the state honored the marriages. Utah isn’t and needs to be held accountable.

  4. Rich says

    The California case is precedent, though not binding on Utah. In California, the State Supreme Court invalidated the marriages that were celebrated in 2004, but protected the ones celebrated in 2008 when it otherwise upheld Prop 8. In both cases, the California Supremes relied solely on their understanding of California law and its Constitution.

    In Utah, the Governor has said the marriages celebrated are void, the Attorney General said they’re valid. If the Federal appelate proceedings strike down the Circuit Court invalidation of Utah’s prohibition, it will probably fall to the state courts to arbitrate the difference. If the Federal Courts mandate marriage equality in Utah, it would be difficult to imagine the circumstances under which the same-sex marriages performed in good faith could be challenged.

  5. Randy says

    Paragraph 93 “Further recognition of those marriages, including Plaintiffs’ marriages, occurred on January 15, 2013 …”

    I assume they mean 2014…

  6. Randy says

    And identical paragraph 110.

    When you work with copy and paste,
    Double the errors result from haste.