771 F.3d 496
9th Cir.2014Background
- On Oct. 10, 2014, plaintiffs moved to dissolve the stay of the district court’s order enjoining Idaho’s same-sex marriage bans.
- Latta v. Otter, 9th Cir. decision held Idaho’s same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional, influencing the stay posture.
- Supreme Court denied certiorari on Oct. 6, 2014, allowing same-sex marriages in affected states notwithstanding state bans.
- The panel dissolved the stay based on the four-factor test from Nken v. Holder and the post-Windsor landscape.
- The court found no compelling reason to maintain the stay given the broader national trend toward marriage equality and the district court’s injunction.
- The dissolution would be effective Oct. 15, 2014, with a brief discretionary delay to allow possible Supreme Court review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stay should be dissolved under Nken factors | Otter cannot show likely success on merits | Stay necessary to await potential Supreme Court review | Yes; stay dissolved due to lack of likelihood of success and public policy favoring equality. |
| Whether irreparable harm supports keeping the stay | Continued denial of marriage rights harms same-sex couples and their families | State bears irreparable injury from rapid changes to its statutes without review | Irreparable harm to plaintiffs and public interest favor dissolution. |
| Whether public interest supports dissolution of the stay | Equality and nationwide trend toward recognition of same-sex marriages | State interest in statutory framework and potential conflicts with other rulings | Public interest supports dissolving the stay. |
| Whether Supreme Court actions post-Windsor undermine the stay | Supreme Court actions do not justify continuing the stay | Certiorari expectations could warrant delay | No basis to maintain stay; dissolution affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744 (2013) (strikes down bans on same-sex marriage under federal Equal Protection and Due Process)
- Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) (four-factor stay analysis governs discretionary stays)
- SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Labs., 740 F.3d 471 (9th Cir. 2014) (binding law on heightened scrutiny for sexual orientation classifications)
- Baskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648 (7th Cir. 2014) (urges alignment with post-Windsor decisions on same-sex marriage)
- Bostic v. Schaefer, 760 F.3d 352 (4th Cir. 2014) (post-Windsor considerations on scrutiny levels)
- Kitchen v. Herbert, 755 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2014) (preference for applying scrutiny frameworks in marriage cases)
- Indep. Living Ctr. of So. Cal., Inc. v. Maxwell-Jolly, 572 F.3d 644 (9th Cir. 2009) (discusses irreparable harm and stay standards in civil rights contexts)