A U.S. appeals court on Thursday put on hold a federal judge’s ruling that would have allowed same-sex couples in Nebraska to marry starting on Monday.
The order came hours after the U.S. Supreme Court said it would hear oral arguments on April 28 on the question of whether states have the right to ban gay marriage, as Nebraska does by a state constitutional amendment.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon on Monday found the Nebraska ban on gay marriage unconstitutional and issued a preliminary injunction in the case brought by seven same-sex couples in the state.
Bataillon delayed the order from taking effect until Monday to address state officials’ concerns of possible administrative turmoil. Nebraska officials quickly appealed the ruling to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The three-judge appellate court panel stayed Bataillon’s ruling and scheduled oral arguments in the case for May 12 together with three other same-sex marriage cases pending before the 8th Circuit.
“We are glad the court has granted the stay because it provides current stability in Nebraska’s marriage licensing process,” Attorney General Doug Peterson said in a statement.
Danielle Conrad, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, which challenged the ban, said: “The discrimination that is enshrined in our constitution hurts our clients and countless other Nebraska families.”
The Nebraska plaintiffs include Sally Waters, who has breast cancer that has spread and wants Nebraska to recognize her 2008 marriage to Susan Waters in California in part to provide financial protections for their children.
The Nebraska case raises the same questions the Supreme Court is expected to decide by the end of June in cases involving Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.
(Reporting by David Bailey in Minneapolis; Editing by Peter Cooney)
‘Out of his depth’: Trump holding back on Iran because he understands it’s harder than ‘swinging’ at a primary foe
During a discussion on news that Iran has shot down a U.S. drone over international airspace on CNN, New York Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman explained that Donald Trump is in no rush to respond militarily because, for once, he knows he's "out of his depth."
Speaking with hosts John Berman and Alisyn Camerota, Habermann said that the president will likely get advice from national security adviser John Bolton to push back militarily, but that Trump doesn't seem interested in taking on as large a task as going to war.
"He usually responds to a provocation when it's a smaller thing that he can punch and knock down," Haberman explained. "He's pretty aware he can't actually do that with Iran. So I don't think you're going to see the typical, you know, as if he were swinging back at a primary foe. I think he is going to actually be a little more careful in what he says."
Nightmare scenario: Trump could lose by 5 million votes — but still win re-election by one electoral vote
President Donald Trump could potentially win re-election next year by a single electoral vote.
In that nightmare scenario for Democrats, the president could lose the popular vote -- again -- but still narrowly eke out an electoral win by holding onto four states he carried in 2016, reported Axios.
Even if Democrats flip Michigan and Pennsylvania, increase their vote totals in California and come close to winning Texas -- which could give them 5 million more votes than Trump -- their candidate could still lose if Trump narrowly wins Arizona, Florida, North Carolina and Wisconsin.
Hope Hicks’ latest obstruction just gave the Democrats a major weapon: report
Hope Hicks didn't provide much information for Democrats in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee -- but she may have cracked the stone wall the White House has built around former staffers.
President Donald Trump's former communications director -- and perhaps his most trusted aide outside his family -- claimed blanket immunity throughout her closed-door testimony, but Hicks still gave Democrats something in their legal battle against the White House, argued Margaret Carlson for The Daily Beast.