On April 10, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the Kitchen v Herbert case (i.e., same sex marriage in Utah). Since then, I haven’t heard anything about it. Based on history, what would be a realistic time frame for them make a ruling? Two months? Six? A year?
Practically speaking, I can’t see their ruling making any difference at all. The case is headed to the Supreme Court regardless, so what the 10th Circuit decides doesn’t seem as important as when they do.
Bump
Also slight hijack: We have 8 or 9 states in limbo right now, if this number continues to grow, won’t the SCOTUS have to step in before a case reaches it?
The SCOTUS is notorious for not hearing cases unless it absolutely, positively has to. Case in point: the California Proposition 8 case, where the court ruled that “the plaintiff did not have standing, so we’re not going to decide on it one way or the other just yet.” I have a feeling Oregon’s law is going to reach a similar status.
By Wikipedia’s count there are cases pending in at least six of the federal courts of appeals (and cases in lower courts in several other circuits). I think the SCOTUS is gonna “absolutely, positively have to” sooner rather than later.
Do you think they’ll just combine them all since they seem to all have the same basic conclusions as far as the basis of the rulings?
If the rulings in the appellate courts don’t conflict, the SCt might choose not to review any of them.
I think Oregon’s a done deal. Their AG refused to defend the ban, and given that the SCOTUS has already ruled on outside groups acting as a proxy for the state, it seems unlikely that anyone will be able to mount an appeal.
Back to the OP though, is there any way to predict when the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals might make a ruling?
My experience is that after most appellate courts hear oral argument in a matter, from everyone but the court personnel’s perspective, the appeal goes into a black hole until whenever the court issues a decision, which is whenever the court darn well pleases.
The U.S. Supreme Court, which sits in annual terms beginning on the first Monday in October has a tradition of issuing all decisions argued during the term by the close of the term in late June. Most other appellate courts have no fixed practice requiring them to issue a decision in any particular time frame. Rather, the decision gets issued whenever the judges assigned to the case complete the process of researching, writing, circulating and approving the decision and any concurrences or dissents. Caseload pressures, research needs related to the particular case, the speed with which the judges and their staffs work and sometimes personal issues like judicial illnesses affect how long it may take for a decision to come out. Depending on the court, typical times for an appellate ruling could range from one to six months, though it can vary significantly.
In a case with such intense public scrutiny, it is unlikely that the judges will let the matter just sit. However, it is equally unlikely that they will be rushed to just get something out there.
In an ordinary case, the court will simply issue its decision on whatever day it happens to be complete with no warning. Because of the intense media interest in this case, the court may issue a press release very shortly before the decision is issued alerting the media to when it will come out. Other than that, from an outsider’s perspective, it will just happen when it happens.
As to whether and when the US Supreme Court will take up the issue, that will likely depend on whether there is a split among the Circuit courts on whether a ban on same sex marriage is Constitutional. Right now all of the post-Windsor decisions at the district court level have unanimously held that same sex marriage bans must be struck down. If all of the Circuits hold the same way, I doubt the Supreme Court will feel compelled to weigh in. If, however, at least one circuit finds a ban Constitutional and the others hold otherwise, it is almost certain that the Supreme Court will take one or more of the cases next term.
So … the ruling came today, and it affirms the district’s court ruling, but it also stayed its own decision pending Supreme Court appeals. I know it’s all part of the process, but it does seem to be inefficient sometimes. If the decision had to go to the Supreme Court anyway, why waste the Appeals Court’s time hearing the case and deliberating? They took six months, and the net effect is zero.
Well, I guess the Supremes will have to either hear the case or affirm the decision though, so that’s something. One year from today, marriage equality could be the law of the land.