Posted on 01/01/2015 4:35:04 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle has answered one of the state's big questions about gay marriage: Can all 67 counties issue licenses to gay couples who want to marry?
Yes, they can, Hinkle wrote in an order released Thursday afternoon,
"Reasonable people can debate whether the ruling in this case was correct and who it binds," Hinkle wrote. "There should be no debate, however, on the question whether a clerk of court may follow the ruling, even for marriage-license applicants who are not parties to this case."
Hinkle also warned that clerk's who don't issue marriage licences could be sued:
"And a clerk who chooses not to follow the ruling should take note: the governing statutes and rules of procedure allow individuals to intervene as plaintiffs in pending actions, allow certification of plaintiff and defendant classes, allow issuance of successive preliminary injunctions, and allow successful plaintiffs to recover costs and attorney's fees."
Hinkle's decision on Thursday ends weeks of confusion over whether clerks could issue marriage licenses on Jan. 6 to same-sex couples statewide or in Washington County only.
"This is a wonderful development," stated ACLU of Florida staff attorney Daniel Tilley. "Judge Hinkle has made clear that his ruling that declared Florida's marriage ban unconstitutional means that all Florida clerks should begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples when the stay expires at the end of the day on January 5."
Tilley added: "We expect all clerks to respect the ruling. But if not, we are committed to ensuring marriage equality in all 67 counties in Florida and we would like to hear from any couples that are wrongfully denied a license after the stay expires."
Jim Brenner, the original plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, celebrated the decision with his husband, Charles Jones. The couple live in Tallahassee, but were married in Canada in 2009.
"It's a very good day for everybody," he said. "And I know there's a lot of smiles out there right now on the part of a lot of people who were wondering if we would ever get here. It's time."
Brenner said he remains concerned that the clerk in Leon County, which includes Tallahassee, will not heed Hinkle's order. He plans to accompany another couple, friends of his, to the clerk's office on Tuesday morning to ensure they receive a license. If they don't, he said, his attorneys are on speed-dial.
Greenberg Traurig, the law firm that represents the Florida clerk's associaiton, originally recommended that clerks outside of Washington County not offer marriage licenses to same-sex couples until the judge cleared up his original order. On Thursday, the law firm reversed its recommendation.
"We are pleased that Judge Hinkle has clarified his original order and the responsibilities of the clerks around the state," said Hilarie Bass, Greenberg Traurig's co-president. "The order states that the Constitution requires all clerks to issue marriage licenses to all applicants, regardless of gender."
Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote in a statement that her office will let clerks of court determine what to do next.
"This office has sought to minimize confusion and uncertainty, and we are glad the Court has provided additional guidance," she wrote. "My office will not stand in the way as clerks of court determine how to proceed."
Hinkle ruled in August that the state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Last week, he had ordered the state to respond to an emergency motion filed by the Washington County clerk of courts, who sought guidance about the scope of the August ruling.
But in a carefully worded, five-page document filed late Monday, state Solicitor General Allen Winsor and Chief Deputy Solicitor General Adam Tanenbaum wrote that Hinkle could resolve the issue with more specific direction.
"This court is best situated to determine the reach of its own order,'' the response said. "If the court intends for (a key part of the August order) to bind a Florida clerk of court (or all Florida clerks of court), additional specificity may be appropriate to place any such clerk on proper notice."
But earlier Monday, plaintiffs' attorneys argued in a court document that clerks throughout the state are bound by Hinkle's ruling on the constitutionality of the same-sex marriage ban and should start issuing marriage licenses to gay couples next week.
Though Hinkle issued his ruling four months ago, he placed a stay on the decision amid legal appeals. That stay will expire at the end of the day Jan. 5, opening the door for same-sex marriages to start the following day.
Plaintiffs' attorneys focused Monday on part of Hinkle's ruling that said it binds the secretary of the Florida Department of Management Services, state Surgeon General John Armstrong and "their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys --- and others in active concert or participation with any of them."
The plaintiffs argued that county court clerks work in concert with the Department of Health, which is headed by the surgeon general and is in charge of marriage forms and records. As a result, they said Hinkle's ruling should apply to clerks throughout the state.
"Thus, the clerks of court are agents or at least in active concert with defendant Armstrong,'' said the document, filed by Jacksonville attorney William Sheppard, who is helping lead a legal team in the case. "As agents or other persons in active concert with defendant Armstrong, they are bound by ... this court's order."
But in the response filed late Monday, attorneys from Bondi's office disputed that argument.
"A clerk is not in privity with the DMS (the Department of Management Services) and Health secretaries, represented by them, or subject to their control,'' the response said. "Instead, a Florida clerk of court is an independent constitutional officer."
The legal wrangling came after attorneys for the Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers this month issued a memo that said Hinkle's August ruling only applied to the named plaintiffs in the case and not to other same-sex couples in the state. It also warned clerks that they could face prosecution if they issued marriage licenses to gay couples.
Florida will become the 36th state to legally recognize same sex marriages.
In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court truck down a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that defined federal marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The ruling set off a series of lawsuits from around the country.
“Florida will become the 36th state to legally recognize same sex marriages.”
The remaining 14 states will stand strong.
They are not LEGALLY recognizing it. They have had it illegally forced on them by renegade judges. The legal vote by citizens of most of those states was ignored. As was the legal votes of the legislatures of those states ignored.
And just where does any judge get off issuing orders on holidays or weekends? No court challenges can be filed when courts are not open. So judges should be banned from this practice — period.
Mario Cuomo just died.
Another way of saying "we have legalized sodomy".
Another case of “evil never sleeps.”
The states didn't "recognize" squat. This is the work of a bunch of perverted, activist, Feral "judges". The tyrants overrode the states and the will of the people.
the homosexuals shouldn’t be so happy they have to use the Courts to get their way cause it shows they really don’t have the support of the vast majority of voters
Watch January 9th - next Friday. The Supreme Court will be considering another homo marriage case (I think from Louisiana).
If they grant cert, we’re going to see homo marriage in all 57 states in June.
THIS is Exactly what happened in MA! Dem Legislature refused , unconstitutionally to allow the ballot question to go forward.
NO ONE EVER VOTED FOR THIS!!
So it is written and so it is done.
Who needs voters and legislatures.
“Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely a dependent being. And consequently, as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker’s will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature. This law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original. The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the holy scriptures. These precepts, when revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part of the original law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man’s felicity. Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these.”
— William Blackstone
“Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
“Hence, in a state of nature, no man has any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him....
“Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man the right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience.”
“When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void.”
— Alexander Hamilton
Marriage is defined in the Florida Constitution as adopted by the People of Florida
ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 27. Marriage defined.—Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
History.—Proposed by Initiative Petition filed with the Secretary of State February 9, 2005; adopted 2008.
No - it may be a happy day for the small percentage of the population who practice homosexual and lesbian sex.
But it is a sad day for the rule of law and the 62% of Florida voters who voted for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a "legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife".
A few pro-homosexual judges have annulled the constitutional vote of almost 5 million voters who approved the constitutional ammendment.
Liberals claim they want a democracy but when the vote does not meet their approval they use any means possible to bypass the will of the people.
The Greeks and Romans had their GODS but we have a president who thinks he is a king and a smattering of judges who believe only they and the King should determine how the people should live.
Too late.
He already did his damage.
How many of the judges who have overturned state laws against homo marriages or just ordered states to permit them are homosexuals themselves?
How many others are sympathetic to, and biased in favor of, homosexual friends and relatives?
How many have been persuaded and influenced in other ways to make pro-homosexual decisions?
We will never know.
But a good number of them have discovered unwritten “rights” that never existed in any interpretation of the federal or state constitutions until the Homo Mafia with the help of the democrats pushed the issue on the nation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.