Without comment,
the justices brought to an end delays in same-sex marriages in five
states— Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. Chief Justice
John Roberts did not say a word about same-sex marriage as he began the
court's new term.
Couples in six
other states — Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West
Virginia and Wyoming — should be able to get married in short order. Those
states would be bound by the same appellate rulings that were put on hold
pending the Supreme Court's review
No other state
cases were currently pending with the high court, but the justices stopped
short of resolving for now the question of same-sex marriage nationwide.
Still, those 11 states would bring to 30 the number of states where
same-sex marriage is legal, plus the District of Columbia.
Challenges are
pending in every other state.
Evan Wolfson,
president of Freedom to Marry, called on the high court to "finish the
job." Wolfson said the court's "delay in affirming the freedom to marry
nationwide prolongs the patchwork of state-to-state discrimination and the
harms and indignity that the denial of marriage still inflicts on too many
couples in too many places."
Ed Whelan of the
Ethics and Public Policy Center, an opponent of same-sex marriage, also
chastised the court for its "irresponsible denial of review in the cases."
Whelan said it is hard to see how the court could eventually rule in favor
of same-sex marriage bans after having allowed so many court decisions
striking down those bans to remain in effect.
The situation was
changing rapidly Monday in the affected states.
— Wisconsin Gov.
Scott Walker, a Republican, said the fight against same-sex marriage "is
over" in Wisconsin. "With the Supreme Court's announcement today, it is
clear that the position of the court of appeals at the federal level is
the law of the land and we're going to go forward enacting it."
— Virginia
Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat, said marriage licenses could
start to be issued to same-sex couples as early as Monday afternoon.
— In North
Carolina, lawyers for same-sex couples said they planned to ask a judge
Monday to overturn the state's gay marriage ban.
— In Oklahoma,
the clerk in the largest county said he would await a formal order from
the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals before he begins
issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. That court had placed its
ruling striking down the state ban on hold.
Experts and
advocates on both sides of the issue had expected the justices to step in
and decide gay marriage cases this term.
The justices have
an obligation to settle an issue of such national importance, not abdicate
that responsibility to lower court judges, the advocates said. Opting out
of hearing the cases leaves those lower court rulings in place.
Two other appeals
courts, in Cincinnati and San Francisco, could issue decisions any time in
same-sex marriage cases. Judges in the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit who
are weighing pro-gay marriage rulings in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and
Tennessee, appeared more likely to rule in favor of state bans than did
the 9th Circuit judges in San Francisco, who are considering Idaho and
Nevada restrictions on marriage.
James Esseks of
the American Civil Liberties Union said he believes the court will quickly
take up a case if an appeals court upholds state bans.
It takes just
four of the nine justices to vote to hear a case, but it takes a majority
of at least five for an eventual ruling. Monday's opaque order did not
indicate how the justices voted on whether to hear the appeals.
With four
justices each in the liberal and conservative camps and Justice Anthony
Kennedy more or less in the middle, it appeared that neither side of the
court wanted to take up the issue now. It also may be that Kennedy, with
his likely decisive vote, did not want to rule on same-sex marriage now.
Â