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 Rolly: Blogger fired from language school over ‘homophonia’|
|2.||Take off your clothes to make it in reality TV|
|3.||For selling risky mortgages, Bank of America fined $1.3B|
|4.||Annual liquor sales in Utah up $20 million|
|5.||Swallow, Shurtleff appear in court, vow to beat charges|
|6.||Photos: Santana works its musical magic at Red Butte Garden|
|7.||‘Guardians of the Galaxy’ blasts Marvel in a different direction|
|8.||Chefs share tips for home cooks to waste not, want not|
|9.||TV preview: ‘Hell on Wheels’ mocks Mormons|
|10.||BYU basketball: Collinsworth ‘ahead of schedule’ with ACL recovery|