DENVER — Colorado’s attorney general asked the state Supreme Court Monday to stop county clerks from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples and settle the larger question of whether Colorado’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.
The appeal from Attorney General John Suthers comes after a district judge’s ruling Monday that the state cannot stop the Denver County Clerk and Recorder from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
“The underlying question of whether our laws will stand or fall is now in the Colorado Supreme Court’s hands, and we hope it or the U.S. Supreme Court will resolve the question expeditiously,”Suthers said in a statement. “We have sought to bring resolution to these issues as quickly as possible, and this is another important step in doing so.”
Last week, the same Adams County judge ruled the state’s voter-approved ban unconstitutional.
Suthers has appealed that decision by Adams County District Court Judge C. Scott Crabtree to the state Supreme Court.
On Monday, Crabtree denied the state’s request for an injunction against Clerk and Recorder Deborah Johnson.
Johnson started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples last week after Crabtree handed down a decision out of Adams County finding the state’s ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
That ruling is one of many LGBT rights supporters have cheered since the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled against a same-sex marriage ban in Utah.
While both the 10th Circuit’s ruling and the Adams County case have been stayed pending appeal, the Clerk and Recorders in Denver, Boulder and Pueblo counties have decided it gives them legal cover to start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Colorado’s Attorney General John Suthers has said those licenses are invalid and has repeatedly asked judges to stop clerks from handing them out.
Suthers has said the U.S. Supreme Court should rule on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans and counties should wait until then to issue licenses.
Crabtree’s ruling Monday said that a stay was not the same as an injunction, which requires a higher level of proof from the attorney general’s office.
“The Court did not deny, grant or dissolve an injunction,” Crabtree wrote in his ruling. “The injunction issue had simply not been adequately addressed in the briefing either from an evidentiary or a legal standpoint for the Court to enter such an order.”