Posted on 07/13/2011 1:20:53 PM PDT by NYer
As reported by The New York Times and National Public Radio, I will be traveling to Salt Lake City today to file (on Wednesday) a challenge to the Utah statute criminalizing bigamy and cohabitation. The lawsuit will be filed on behalf of my clients, the Brown family. The Browns are featured in the TLC program Sister Wives as an openly polygamous family.
The lawsuit will be filed in federal court in Salt Lake City on Wednesday and we will be available for questions at 1 p.m. outside of the courthouse.
The Plaintiffs are Kody Brown, Christine Brown, Janelle Brown, Meri Brown, and Robyn Sullivan.
As in past cases, I will have to be circumspect in what I say after the filing of this action. However, we are honored to represent the Brown family in this historic challenge,” said Professor Turley. “We believe that this case represents the strongest factual and legal basis for a challenge to the criminalization of polygamy ever filed in the federal courts. We are not demanding the recognition of polygamous marriage. We are only challenging the right of the state to prosecute people for their private relations and demanding equal treatment with other citizens in living their lives according to their own beliefs. This action seeks to protect one of the defining principles of this country, what Justice Louis Brandeis called ‘the right to be left alone.’ In that sense, it is a challenge designed to benefit not just polygamists but all citizens who wish to live their lives according to their own values – even if those values run counter to those of the majority in the state.
The following is the statement from Kody Brown, which will be the only statement at this time on the filing:
Statement of Kody Brown:
“There are tens of thousands of plural families in Utah and other states. We are one of those families. We only wish to live our private lives according to our beliefs. While we understand that this may be a long struggle in court, it has already been a long struggle for my family and other plural families to end the stereotypes and unfair treatment given consensual polygamy. We are indebted to Professor Turley and his team for their work and dedication. Together we hope to secure equal treatment with other families in the United States.”
We will post the complaint as soon as it is docketed by the Clerk of Court.
Jonathan Turley
And here we go ..... ping!
Homosexual shacking up being called marriage opened the door, and look what strides on in. It’s ok, the brother/sisters, daddy/daughters are right down the street.
with all the Muslims coming here, we’ll might have to reconsider it \sarc
There’s nothing new about polygamy in “remote” Mormon communities.
The social ramifications are huge. The taxpayer picks up the bill for all of the needs of the women and children that cannot be met by one irresponsible man, especially if he disapears and abandons the whole bunch.
Heh. Well, that’s one way of leaving the plantation and becoming independent, although it breaks from their other, more romantic roots. Socialist plutocrats most affected.
How quaintly 19th century of him to say that.
The sad truth of it is, what I want the most from my government, which is for my government to stay out of my life and leave me the hell alone, is what they are the most incompetant in actually providing me.
One day in the not too distant future, I’ll be able to marry my girlfriend, boyfriend, cat, dog - all at the same time.
And they say America is in decline. :D:D:D:D:D
"I love my sister. She loves me. We want to marry."
"I love my son. He loves me. We want to marry."
"I love my dog. She loves me. We want to marry."
"I wuv my Mommy. She wuvs me. We wanna mawwy."
Future? It's already been done!
If I understand correctly (Disclaimer: I’ve only watched one episode of Sister Wives), Cody has one “official” wife. The others are treated as wives but legally are not.
Creepy, but not illegal as long as he doesn’t try to claim any state benefits for the unofficial members of the harem.
If he did try to claim benefits, then I could see where the state would have a dog in the fight. If he doesn’t, then it’s none of the state’s business.
I want a Ferrari! And I want the government to pay for it!
I’d ask for a Rolex too but I have several already. So the government will be saving money. Except for the Ferrari which I want because it is not fair that I don’t have one.
I want a red one and I want it delivered by that chick from that Black Swan movie that is going to go out with the soldier.
All this does not seem like to much to ask for since I never have had anything given to me by the government. It’s my turn.
Sort of like the feral "stud horses" in our big central cities, eh?
I'm no advocate of polygamy, but I doubt that they sow more wild oats than your average gang banger.
We warned all the people stampeding to rubber stamp gay marriage that polygamy would be next. The logical next step after that are serial bum chums.
Page 23 of 34
Income of Christine Brown (celestial wife #3) for 2009 and 2010 listed as income from food stamps.
Would she get food stamps if she was not living with Kody?
There you have it folks, the difference is that they are not seeking recognition of marriage as the homosexual community does... They are seeking privacy.
The SCOTUS Brown v. Texas case clearly establishes this. If the government can't knock down the door and stop sodomy, why does the government have the right to knock down the door and stop polygamy? Under the path the government and the law has taken this county in regards to marriage, I don't see how the government can argue a compelling interest to stop this practice.
It may argue that communities can't afford to support the many kids resulting from these arrangements. Nonsense. These women will have children, we will just have fewer Dads. If the government's compelling interest is that large families are more likely to need social assistance, then the problem is the government's socialism not the individual right to practice polygamy.
Slippery, Slippy Slope...
BTW, I am totally against this, I just think the government has screwed the pooch on this. They have also screwed-up so bad that they will soon be compelled to allow gay marriage on military bases...
Kody/Meri, Janelle, and Christine bankrupt on a rotating basis.
The tax payers are funding their life style - both directly and indirectly. through food stamps and defaults on credit cards.
As long as the NY Times and NPR are telling the story - it would be honest to tell the whole story.
I can only look at the documents - I have no way of predicting what she would or would not do if she was not living with Kody. Your post referenced state assistance.
The majority of polygamists do not seek out welfare support because it invites the government into their lives. Child welfare social workers have a knee-jerk reaction to want to remove children from these homes so the result is that some of the families that maybe *should* be on some sort of assistance never apply because they’re afraid of what follows.
There are also Christian polygamists who practice in relative obscurity while also embracing ‘quiverfull’ or Providential lifestyles. These people tend to be entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors, and etc. and their kids attend colleges and universities in disproportionate numbers. It’s the home school advantage.
Anyhow, aside from the isolated cases of welfare fraud (that should be prosecuted as such) there is no justifiable reason to ban consenting adults from practicing polygamy when people like Hugh Hefner and Charlie Sheen do so openly and without consequence by the grace of their fame.
I don’t know about that premise. There are a lot of these plural families that milk the state for as much welfare as they can get. That is usually what the fathers get in trouble for, non-support.
Goats and grammas next. Pitiful.
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.