Quantcast
Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
The Polygamy Blog
Jim Dalrymple II and Trent Nelson
Reporter Jim Dalrymple II and photographer Trent Nelson cover polygamy for The Salt Lake Tribune. You can follow the Polygamy Blog on Twitter at @tribunepolygamy. Follow Jim Dalrymple II on Twitter at @jimmycdii. Follow Trent Nelson on Twitter at @trenthead.

» E-mail Jim Dalrymple II

» Subscribe (RSS)




(Tribune file photo) Kody Brown and his four wives, Janelle Brown, top, Robyn Brown, Christine Brown and Meri Brown, pose for a portrait at the Downtown Mariott in Salt Lake City in September 2010.
After 6 months, no ruling on ‘Sister Wives’ polygamy lawsuit

Six months ago the world was fairly different.

It was cold. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was a measly 13,596. The Utah Jazz had just beaten the Miami Heat and looked like a playoff team. And "The Lone Ranger" still seemed like a good idea.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

But at least one thing hasn’t changed: We still don’t know what’s going to happen in the "Sister Wives" lawsuit.

As of Wednesday, it has been six months since the last hearing in the Brown family’s legal challenge to Utah’s bigamy statute. In case you don’t remember — it has been a long time, after all — the Brown family became famous on the reality show "Sister Wives."

Then, they sued to strike down the statute that makes bigamy a third-degree felony. The last hearing in the case was even pretty lively, for a court proceeding.

Since then, the case has been quiet.

It’s all up to federal Judge Clark Waddoups to issue a summary judgment. Such a ruling could hand a victory to one side and essentially end the matter in the lower courts.

Some people, including Joe Darger, speculated last month that Waddoups was waiting to see how the U.S. Supreme Court would rule on a pair of gay marriage issues. But those rulings came and went, and still we’re waiting. Attorneys involved in polygamy and the Brown case also suggested the impact of the gay marriage rulings would ultimately be minimal.

Waddoups has good reason to take his time. Whichever way he rules, his decision is all but certain to be appealed. So it’s in Waddoups’ interest, and the interest of one or both the parties, to write a well-researched, articulate opinion.

In any event, we’re anxiously watching the court docket. In the meantime, feel free to click through some of our past coverage so you’re up to speed when the ruling (finally!) comes out.

— Jim Dalrymple II

Twitter: @tribunepolygamy



Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment


About Reader Comments


Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
 
Jobs
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Login to the Electronic Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.