By MATT BAXTERAPIA, AP U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, left, listens to the arguments of attorneys for the attorneys general and the chief justice in a federal court in Washington, Friday, Nov. 19, 2018.
Jackson ruled Thursday that two federal judges should stay the marriage equality bans in Indiana and Mississippi, after hearing arguments in both cases that could drag on months longer than originally scheduled.
Both judges said the state and federal governments could continue enforcing the bans even as they try to reverse them.
The cases are separate and distinct.
They will be appealed to the Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments this fall.
Scott Applewhite) The judges said their work was not a final ruling on the issues, and they would defer to the parties to reach their respective decisions.
The judge also declined to impose a stay on enforcement of the marriage bans, a condition that was included in a letter from the U.K.’s chief justice, Lord Thomas, that was sent to attorneys for two states seeking to halt the laws.
“We will continue to exercise our constitutional rights to determine whether these laws are in the public interest, in accordance with the constitution and law, or not,” Jackson wrote.
The Indiana case, filed by Attorney General Mike DeWine, and Attorney General Curtis Hill are separate cases.
They were scheduled to go to trial in September but were put on hold for a month while the appeals process was conducted.
The two states have said the marriage laws are constitutional, and the court will rule by Dec. 1 whether to grant a stay of the bans.
Indiana’s chief justice and other judges in the U,S.
Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in Philadelphia, will take up the case when it is heard in the coming weeks.
Indiana has argued that the state cannot stop the state from enforcing its marriage equality laws without violating the U’s equal protection and due process guarantees.
The federal courts, however, have ruled that Indiana has the right to restrict same-sex marriages, which it did in 2014, after Gov.
Eric Holcomb signed a law banning same-gender marriages.
Indiana Attorney General Mark Herring said in a statement Thursday that the court decision would “provide an important legal foundation for states to continue to continue marriage equality.”
“Our courts have consistently held that state officials have a legitimate interest in protecting the health and safety of their citizens, regardless of their sexual orientation,” Herring wrote.
Indiana became the sixth state to pass marriage equality law in June.
In Mississippi, which was the first state to legalize same-year marriages in 2013, the governor, Phil Bryant, signed a bill into law in May that extended marriage to gay and lesbian couples.
The Mississippi Supreme Court has not yet issued an opinion on whether the state’s gay marriage ban is constitutional.
In the case of the state of Indiana, the court issued a preliminary injunction that could prevent the governor from enforcing the law against same-day marriages if the federal courts decide to block it.
Indiana attorneys general, including Republican Gov.
Mike Pence, have said their legal arguments were based on the “liberty” clause of the U Constitution.
Doug Jones, who has called for repeal of the gay marriage bans nationwide, said he was disappointed by the ruling and was looking forward to a review of the case by the U-S Supreme Court.
The U. S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the case in late December, but it is unclear when a decision will be made.
Indiana is one of five states that have already declared their marriage equality.
In addition to Indiana, a number of states are in preliminary stages of enacting laws to end the bans, including Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Michigan, New York, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
The Justice Department said Friday it has asked the federal government to intervene in the Indiana case to prevent the states from enforcing their marriage bans.
The court has also ordered the states to allow same-state couples to marry in their respective states, while the U to stop enforcing the marriage ban in the state.
The issue of same-suspect marriages has been a central part of the litigation over the gay-rights movement and is expected to come up again in the future.
In February, the Supreme Justice said he would not hear the case, but his office has said that it is likely to hear the Indiana suit at some point.
In June, Indiana’s Supreme Court issued a stay, and Indiana Gov.-elect Joe Donnelly said he plans to issue a new marriage license.
In response to the Indiana court decision, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana said the court’s ruling is “another example of judicial activism that has no basis in law, and it’s also a violation of the fundamental constitutional rights of gay and transgender people.”
The lawsuit was filed by the American Family Association and other conservative groups that contend that Indiana’s law violates