Appeals court stops gay marriage in Indiana

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday night stopped county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, a move that throws hundreds of unions performed over the past two days into limbo.

The court – at the request of Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller – issued a stay of a ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Young that found the state’s gay marriage ban unconstitutional.

The ruling means that same sex marriages are “now halted, pending resolution of this appeal in the 7th Circuit,” said Bryan Corbin, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office. “County clerks will be notified that under the stay granted tonight, Indiana’s marriage laws are again fully in force pursuant to the 7th Circuit’s order.”

The order came a few hours after Hoosiers who support same sex marriage delivered a petition with more than 12,000 signatures to the attorney general’s office encouraging him to stop pursuing the stay and an appeal of Young’s decision.

“We are extremely disappointed that the court has issued this stay, and we are committed to protecting the freedom to marry in Indiana,” said Kyle Megrath, marriage coordinator for Hoosiers Unite.

Since the decision Wednesday, hundreds of same sex couples across the state have married. But because Young’s ruling in favor of gay marriage has been stayed, state law is now back in effect. That law does not recognize same sex marriages – even for those couples married in a state where the unions are legal.

“More than anything, this is a terrible blow to the legally wedded Indiana couples and their families who were finally — after so long — recognized this week under Indiana law,” Megrath said.

Zoeller first requested the stay from Young, just hours after the judge issued his original decision. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a response on Friday.

But when Young hadn’t ruled by later Friday, the attorney general sought the stay from the 7th Circuit, which will also consider the appeal.

Earlier in the day, Megrath said he had tried to talk to Zoeller but was told he was unavailable. The group then delivered the petitions to his office.

The Marion County Clerk’s Office said it performed 130 marriages on Friday. All but 10 of the marriages were to same-sex couples.

Since Wednesday, the office has issued 586 marriage licenses in total, with an estimated 500 or more of those to same-sex couples.


  • Why are you guys being rude towards gays?
    You guys are being really rude to gays in the comments. (Not all of you, I presume). You need to stop it. Gays have just as much of a right to marry as straight people do. It's not fair how you guys are denying them equal rights. They're acting more human than you'll ever be. We obviously haven't matured since the bible was last updated. Hate the sin, not the sinner. You've all committed a sin at least once in your life. You've lied, you've stolen, etc. (Those are just possibilities). We should have a planet for people that support gay rights and a planet for people that don't. Then, gay people could get married without you bigots interfering with their love life. How would you feel if straights couldn't get married? How would you feel if teenagers were afraid to come out to their parents as straight? If straight people got hate everywhere they went? If straight people were afraid to go out in public, because they feared being judged? It's never going to happen at the rate society is going. You haven't seen the side of me where I act obscene. You're glad my inner demon hasn't been released. I would, but oh no, my comment would be removed because of my very strong emotions about this subject. I love gays, and love how they show their affection for each other. I just ADORE how a state is going to give same-sex couples a marriage license, then changes their mind. (I was obviously being sarcastic there). I just LOVE how society thinks gays are an abomination to our society. You're caring about marriage between two men or two women. That's a small thing. Just grow up, and let them marry. Let them live their lives. You can't make them change their sexuality. You can't make them change their lifestyle. In my opinion, gays are more than welcome to marry. Please, grow up and realize that people should be allowed to marry, even if it's same-sex marriage. You guys are saying that "the bible said gay marriage is wrong." Well, guess what else is wrong? Read Matthew:7 and you'll find out. (I am in no way breaking that. I am saying a fact). I'm stating that gays have just as much of a right to marry as straights do. (:
  • So you want to redefine marriage?
    So you want to redefine marriage? So what is the new definition? Is it two men, two women, one man several woman, one woman several men? How about one man and one minor or one brother and one sister? Since marriage is ONLY about "Love" how about one person (we will help the transsexuals) and their pet? But!, if you do not pick all, are you not discriminating against their right to "marry"? By the way, where is the right to marry in the Constitution? There is one fact that is however indisputable. And that is new life can only come from one man and one woman. Therefore by definition, homosexual unions cannot create life and therefore are not equal to marriage. That is a fact. Oh, but what about tax benefits, property rights, inheritance only allowed for marriages? Well, there is a tax penalty to being married. There is no longer inheritance tax in Indiana :). Proper power of attorney and end of life planning can be done by simple legal work. So what's the problem here? The problem is trying to redefine a natural fact and make “equal” that which can never be equal. Redefining marriage is nothing but divisive, unloving and unnecessary.
  • oops
    Love the sinner not the sin 
  • love the sinner not the sin
    Christians love the sinner not the sinner but realize we are all sinners. Love is a two way street and we need to encourage what is best for children and society. Pro gay marriage only thinks of self and even more evident by the gay movement wanting to redefine marriage for themselves and not others who want their unions normalized (bigamy, man boy love etc). Tax laws discriminate on amount of income, if you own a home, give to charity etc. There is actually a tax penalty if you are married. Death tax in Indiana is gone! . Apparently what is needs evaluated are the partner partner laws regarding power of attorney and wills. But to equate the unequal unions with the uniqueness of marriage is divisive, unloving and unnecessary.
  • Comment
    We can see you are very concerned about the people that are harmed by the homosexual citizens of Indiana. We don't see how they are harming anyone but that's obviously beside the point. It is terrible that these homosexuals are harming the Duck Dynasty millionaires. What about the harm to the the citizens that are denied the rights to marry so they can be with their loved ones in case of emergencies? It's obvious you care deeply about these TV stars and news personalities. What about the ordinary citizens of Indiana who have less rights than you do? I know I can't convince you that equal rights for all Indiana citizens is the right thing. I'm sad that you need to live in a world of hate. I know these aren't important parts of the bible for you but just food for thought: Mark 12:31 "The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." Luke 6:31 "Do to others as you would have them do to you." Romans 13:10 "Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." 1 Peter 4:8 "Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins." Proverbs 10:12 "Hatred stirs up dissension, but love covers over all wrongs." 1 John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."
    • people hurt by homosexuals
      No one persecuted or hurt by the radical homosexual movement? How about Benhams by HGTV, Duck Dynasty, floral shop owner, bakery store owner, ESPN announcer and more. Why would anyone believe they respect freedom of religion? They certainly don't care about children and society if they want to mock and destroy marriage by redefining it. Once you redefine marriage there will be no longer any way to stop the slide down the slippery slope and others will demand more sordid arrangements and want to call it a marriage.
    • Thanks Les
      Thanks Les. Your posts are quite entertaining. I fail to see how they are on point, but interesting to read.
    • wolf in sheep clothing
      It should be obvious from the atheistic radical homosexual movement and responses herein that civil rights are a false issue and is a disguise to fool useful idiots. The homosexual movement has no interest in getting civil union or domestic partnership laws. Homosexuals are pawns of the Marxist liberal Democrat agenda that continues quite successfully to destroy marriage which leads to loss of morality and ultimately attacks on Christians. There is hope that the atheistic and lawless Soros/Obama cartel leading the homosexual attack on Christians is not invincible with three supreme court rulings against Obama's lawless appointments, hobby lobby and protection for prolife protests. If the homosexual aren't pawns then they should use this forum to get civil union laws not attack marriage. Civil union laws have more benefits than marriage in terms of tax policy that penalizes marriage and it bypasses the costly need for divorce court. Many heterosexuals that don't care about marriage can also benefit from civil unions and domestic partnership laws. Time to wake up people. Indifference to this issue is to embolden the Marxist agenda.
    • DS
      DS, don't try logic. No one has provided any logical reason to deny the rights for same sex marriages so far. I tried to get that and the only response is hypotheticals that haven't happened in the 19 states that do not discriminate. I've yet to see one logical argument. I'm still waiting. I'll wait until the supreme court tells our attorney general that the law banning same sex marriage is against the US constitution. But if anyone has a logical argument, I'd love to hear it. Unlike some people, we totally support the freedom of religion for all citizens. We don't believe one religious group should require all citizens believe and follow tenets of their religion. We don't want Indiana to violate the freedom of religion of homosexual citizens by denying them the rights to marry.
    • Les
      Les, this is an article about Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage/unions (call it whatever you feel more comfortable defining it as) being ruled unconstitutional. You said there are other alternatives to this besides calling it "marriage", BUT NOT IN INDIANA. So without "marriage", the state is denying loving couples the benefits enjoyed by state-recognized couples such as tax benefits, medical visits and end of life decisions, spousal inheritance, etc. Not all marriages create children, whether by choice or medical issues. So should people wanting to we'd be medically screened first to ensure viable offspring can be produced and if so, they must do it because that's the only thing marriage is for? Also, churches will not be compelled to perform marriages. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, has mandated that the government and churches be kept separate. I'm sure if one church decides to be un-Christianlike and deny couples a ceremony (yes, it's a ceremony. The official part occurs when the certificate is signed), there'll be another Christian church who will welcome them with open arms. And in case you're thinking that the church will be sued to compel them to perform these ceremonies, I believe today's Hobby Lobby decision will put your fears to rest. Protect marriage by outlawing divorce. The New Testament (Jesus' teachings) expressly forbids it.
    • Constitutional right of religion
      So let's assume the courts allow a new definition for marriage that also includes homosexual marriage. A homosexual couple then goes to a Catholic Church and demands to be married. The Catholic Church says no but the government forces the Church to violate their conscience and First Amendment Right to freedom of religion because their freedom of religion is now illegal. A growing number of incidents show that the redefinition of marriage and state policies on sexual orientation have created a climate of intolerance and intimidation for citizens who believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman and that sexual relations are properly reserved for marriage. Now comes government coercion and discrimination. Laws that create special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity are being used to trump fundamental First Amendment civil liberties such as freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. Civil unions are every bit as equal to marriage and therefore there is NO discrimination. To equate redefining marriage with the civil rights of African Americans is an enormous slap in the face of African American and lack of understanding our Constitution. Thankfully Obamacare’s requirement for businesses to violate their First Amendment Rights was overruled by the Supreme Court. They should also affirm religious liberty and uphold the definition of marriage that does not harm anyone.
    • sorry
      Les, we are very sorry you are so scared about giving all Indiana citizens the right to marry. There are 19 other states where all their citizens have equal marriage rights. There has been no harm done in those states. In 1869, an amendment was added to the US constitution that allowed anyone to vote no matter their race or color. Some states implemented laws to disallow certain races to vote. We can't believe that people would have done that today. Fortunately, in 1870 there was an amendment to stop the hate and allow all people to vote. It is too bad we are in that same situation now with respect to marriage. I hope it won't be long before all citizens of the United States have the right to marry the person of their choosing. 145 years from today people are going to look back at this situation and wonder why we would treat our fellow citizens this way.
    • What is marriage?
      There is no need to redefine marriage as there are many civil union laws, federal DOMA overruled, other laws that give homosexual unions same rights as marriage without the burden of divorce. It's a tax benefit not to be married especially if you are one living off others’ taxes. Those wanting to redefine marriage ignore thousands of years of history and recent studies that show how sordid and dysfunctional the homosexual lifestyle really is like. Homosexual marriage proponents invoke a selfish mind set that thinks marriage is only about "love". This selfish attitude is unloving because marriage is all about children and functional society. Society today (that includes the 50% of marriages that ended in divorce) have treated our future children like objects to be owned or mutilated by abortion and discarded with medical waste. Homosexual marriage or whatever gets redefined will only make this travesty worse! Just look around the world where societies in Europe and especially the homosexual marriage rates of Netherlands and Sweden and see how they have no respect for life or children and are literally dying off. America is killing itself because people are selfish but won’t admit it. So why do homosexuals want to redefine marriage if there is no new legal or tax benefits? It is obvious that it has nothing to do with marriage but is consistent with the liberal mindset to do away with immorality, destroy marriage and persecute those with religious beliefs. How many homosexual relationships are monogamous? For a typical homosexual, that hasn't happen. How long does a homosexual relationship last? The typical homosexual relationship with the same sex partner does NOT last more than 18 months. How is this good for children, marriage and society? If homosexuals were honest they would admit their real goal and not waste our time and effort so just like the Netherland only about 2% of homosexuals will want to get married. Society needs to encourage true marriage which is hard work and should only be for a non-selfish man and woman that care about others, society and our future.
    • Kudos!
      KUDOS to The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
    • Praise Jesus!
      God did not call us to live in immorality, but in holiness
    • To Les again
      "Hey RMR, while you homosexuals destroy marriages and we abolish all family standards let's also support Muslim sharia law that want women behind veils and the stove with their fellow wives and mistresses raising their little jihad boys to kill unbelievers. Is it true Sharia law allows for the killing of homosexuals? That's your future RMR by destroying standards for family life!" By keeping religious beliefs separate from the state, we avoid issues like this. Oppressing some citizens from the right to marry is bringing religion into our legal system and is a very slippery slope because we may have to have laws to address issues like this: "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together." There are lots of farmers that use different seeds and people who wear mixed materials that need to be put to death if we allow religious beliefs into the legal system.
      • To: Les
        " Current marriage has self destructed by the cultural pollution that is also normalizing the selfish dysfunctional homosexual lifestyle." Really? How about the over 50% divorce rate of heterosexual marriage? Since you think this is a legal issue, where are laws to help with that? "Marriage between one man one woman is clearly the optimum." This statement is clearly one spoken by someone who has the rights to marry and is not outlawed from marrying the person they love. You want to debate this without involvement of god. I have yet to see any argument that shows that having this law that oppresses citizens of Indiana is worth having.
        • rant
          So, you haven't taken a good look in the mirror. You don't yet have a grip. And you certainly don't seem happy or cheerful. Actually, you seem quite miserable that someone would dare disagree with you.
        • God haters
          The profamily, promarriage discussion by me has nothing to do with religion if anyone dares read or maturely discuss. The discussion is about what is best for children and society. Marriage between one man one woman is clearly the optimum. Current marriage has self destructed by the cultural pollution that is also normalizing the selfish dysfunctional homosexual lifestyle. We do not improve marriage by adding more dysfunction. And where do you draw the line on redefining marriage? Thousands of years of history know that traditional marriage is plan A. The homosexual movement knows this but are bell bent on putting the final nail in the marriage coffin. And when they cannot win this argument rationally, they relish attacking God and terrorizing those that believe in the one true creator of us all. Z, you too have no defense for the sordid selfish homosexual lifestyle and immaturely attack God or religion. Marriage is what it is and will never mean other than what is a fact even if our society walks off the cliff with the help of unelected judges. Just like anti-abortion movement the defense of marriage movement will never end.
          • truth is difficult
            Whose truth? Yours? Mine? Theirs? You assume that those who differ with you are God haters. Why? btw, which version of God do you subscribe to? Authoritarian? Benevolent? Critical? Distant? Or perhaps none of the above? Seems to me that there are as many concepts (and versions) of God as there are people.
            • truth is difficult
              Truth is difficult to take for some people. And there was no religion in it for your God haters
            • mean and hateful
              Amazing the number of mean, hateful comments from those who consider themselves "religious." These holier-than-thou types need to take a good look in the mirror. And get a grip.
              • more facys
                The is of court of appeals is the highest to affirm tradition marriage. And the destructive dysfunctional homosexual lifestyle does nothing bit damage everyone and why it should never be called marriage. So go love yourself and stop wasting blog space with immature rants
              • Don't Put Words In Jesus' Mouth
                Good gosh! Regardless of which side you are on or what your view is, Jesus made no comments about homosexuality. Some have interpreted bible verses toward this end but they are on very thin ice.
              • Oh Les, one last time
                The 7th Circuit is not the "highest" court, nor did it "over rule" anything. Stick to cutting and pasting.
                • just the facts
                  The highest court over rules 20 plus lower courts. Civic 101
                • Also
                  By the way, folks, Les is lifting his comments word for word from the site he finally linked. Guess he got tired of cutting and pasting....
                • Oh Les, part 2
                  Tony Perkins!? And you're trying to claim your argument ISN'T just another religious objection? I think we can all go to brunch now, this one's over.
                • Oh Les
                  Loving vs Virginia established marriage as a right, first of all. Second of all, it's fabulous when cut-and-paste Internet lawyers like you claim to know more about the law than 20+ judges across the country, from both political parties. (Cue Les' claim to be a lawyer, that's usually next.)
                • facts about real marriage
                • legal matter
                  In the nearly one hundred and fifty years since the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, to our knowledge no Justice of the Supreme Court has suggested that a state statute or constitutional provision codifying the traditional definition of marriage violates the Equal Protection Clause or any other provision of the United States Constitution. Indeed, in Baker v. Nelson (1972), when faced with a Fourteenth Amendment challenge to a decision by the Supreme Court of Minnesota denying a marriage license to a same-sex couple, the United States Supreme Court dismissed "for want of a substantial federal question." (Emphasis added.) We hold that § 29 and other laws limiting the state-recognized institution of marriage to heterosexual couples are rationally related to legitimate state interests and therefore do not violate the Constitution of the United States.
                • A Sad Moment in History
                  It is a sad moment in history when the court of appeals decides to impose a stay on the issuance of marriage licenses to same sex couples. Further, it is shameful that the Attorney General is using public resources to appeal a very well-reasoned opinion allowing the state to recognize same sex marriage. For those who view this as a religious issue, our founding fathers were very wise to separate church and state. Thankfully, no church can create state law, and those carrying the banner of the bible need to go read the Constitution. Finally, not so long ago it was illegal for heterosexual couples of different races to marry. There was no logical reason for race-based laws, and there is no logical reason to continue outdated laws which discriminate against same-sex couples. The Indiana Attorney General, Speaker Bosma and other ancient thinkers are on the wrong side of history. They need to get over it. Focus on things that matter - like jobs, public safety, infrastructure and economic development. This tired debate needs to fade away.
                • Discrimination hides behind religion
                  No matter what Les'' own narrow interpretation of his religion is, we are fortunate to live in a country where civil rights makes all of us equal in front of the law. This is why religious arguments against race and gender equality eventually went the way of the dinasours (pehaps Les denies their existence too). And that is why the laws not granting marriage to gay people are changing everywhere. The thoughts in your head Les, regarding what you believe your religion says on this topic do not make you better in the eyes of the law which keeps the various religions separated from the Goverment over all of us. Just like blacks and women who Christians also kept from full civil rights for years by using similar distorted views, gay people will triumph and also get the same rights as other citizens to marry the person they love. Les, your right to follow your own beliefs about this and other topics willnot impinged upon, marry whom you like according to your beliefs but like Christian racists and women-haters of the past and present you may not like it but just have to lump it.
                  • Marching Backward
                    And again Indiana marches....no charges back into the dark ages. FOR SHAME
                  • Fascinating
                    We always see the same certain folks on the articles about gay marriage again and again with their lists of perversions they're "worried" about. I, for one, spend exactly zero time concerned about such things. Makes one wonder....
                  • Morality
                    Morality is dictated by one's beliefs. Ones belief is usually religion based. The majority here purport to be "Christians" (followers of Christ). Jesus' teachings all about loving one's enemies and treating others as they would like to be treated themselves. Jesus had nothing to say about same sex relationships; in fact he healed a centueion's "faithful manservant" without question. However, the New Testament is littered with text forbidding divorce. If one is so concerned with preserving "marriage", perhaps divorce should be outlawed?
                    • What's next?
                      Homesexuality being "legitimized" today. What's the next perversion to be legitimized?! Beastiality?! Pedophilia?! When does the moral decay stop? Moral decay is ALWAYS the downfall of a rational society. I fear for my children and their offspring.
                    • Never will be marriage
                      So called homosexual marriage will never be marriage and that is a fact. Marriage is regulated by law: by age, number of people and even what people can't be married. So now are those laws unconstitutional? What is the law if one man one woman is illegal? Do we now have to change the law to include same sex but also must we allow Mormons and muslims to have a right to call their multi-wife unions marriages? Marriage is about one man one woman and the rights of the children from that marriage to their natural mother and father. Homosexual marriage is a mockery of marriage and now that it is being redefined by abrogating the truth then any union no matter how sordid is equally right under this illogical nonsense to be called a marriage. The homosexual movement isn't about marriage it is about destroying marriage. In the Netherlands and Sweden where homosexual marriage has been around since the 1980s, only 3% of homosexuals get married. Not surprising, most heterosexuals don't even bother with marriage because it is a mockery and joke. The people that want to denigrate my words with name calling like homophobic are nothing less than haters and totalitarian thugs. I do not care that people want to live together how ever they want but the only unions that are married is one man and one woman. That is a natural fact.
                    • Common sense prevails
                      I agree that the battle is over and same-sex marriage is here to stay. But the way everything went down this past week seemed a bit fishy. Can you think of another case where a lower court of appeals overturned a law and the government instantaneously took action? Seemed like the clerks were simply more interested in TV cameras than the actual laws & procedures they are charged to uphold. This is a long-term battle (like marriage itself). It's difficult, but strategically it is far better to have another delay leading to a legitimate victory than a quick win that feels sneaky & sows more seeds of discontent.
                    • 7th
                      You mean... The 7th Circuit got this one right. Hold the line Zoeller. It is clear that Young never really should have had this/these case(s) to begin with. His biased decision was made when Long and Bosma chickened out.
                    • Wrong Case Right
                      Judge Young got this case right. It's the cold beer monopoly case that needs the review of the U. S.Court of Appeals in Chicago. Notwithstanding the stay,I think the Court will uphold Judge on this one and reverse him on the beer case.
                    • also a Sad hoosier
                      Why do we waste time on narrow minded thinking, lack of compassion, fear of diversity, and retaining old views that do nothing but hurt others? Let's stop legislating personal beliefs.
                    • Disgusted
                      I'm so sick and tired of Greg Zoeller and this whole same-sex marriage debate. It's old, it's tired, and the battle is over. The war has been won. Indiana is just dragging its collective heels like a petulant child. 50 years down the road, people will look back on states like North Carolina, Indiana, and so many others, just as we look on Mississippi and Alabama in the 1960s. This is definitely one of those days that I'm sad I'm a Hoosier.

                    Post a comment to this story

                    COMMENTS POLICY
                    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
                    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
                    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
                    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
                    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

                    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

                    Sponsored by

                    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

                    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
                    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
                    Subscribe to IBJ