So it looks like we're going to see arguments on whether Utah's law banning polygamy is unconstitutional in the "Sister Wives" case, maybe as soon as this fall.
That's after a federal judge ruled in the Brown family's favor today, allowing the case to go forward even though Utah County prosecutors have promised they won't go after them, or any other consenting adults who don't commit other crimes.
And the blog-response from Brown attorney Jonathan Turley here.
The state's response is in my story, here.
The next step in the process will come from the Browns, with a filing due Aug. 31. The deadline for a reply from the state is Sept. 14, and a rebuttal from the Browns is due Sept. 28.
I'm interested to see the state's direct response to the Browns' arguments that the law violates their rights to privacy, freedom of expression, etc. So far the state has been mainly been focused on trying to get the suit tossed.
Maybe they'll take a page from Canada's recent court case over their polygamy law? (It was upheld). Page through the vast trove of documents filed in that case here.
|1.||Paul: Court young voters with privacy focus|
|2.||Utah polygamous family says going on TV liberating|
|3.||Satirical musical ‘The Book of Mormon’ set to play Utah theater|
|4.||Utah cockfighters say sport is tradition, not inhumane|
|5.||Kirby: It’s better to work things out reasonably, even with Utah Republicans|
|6.||Utah activists mark National Tibetan Uprising Day|
|7.||LDS leader tells Mormons to embrace their history, keep their faith|
|8.||BYU basketball: Cougs brace for confident USF in WCC semis|
|9.||Jets release cornerback Cromartie|
|10.||Transformers 4 trailer has Dinobots and Mark Wahlberg in it|