To: Rep. Perry, L.,
Subject: Re: Weber State Granting Same-Sex Benefits
What I don’t understand is how state agencies act to sanction gay marriage and extend benefits while the official position of the State is to appeal the ruling of one federal judge who base been on the bench for 6 months over the sovereign, constitutional act of nearly 70 percent of of the ultimate sovereign in the state, the people?
What this judge is really saying is that 70% of the people of Utah as the ultimate sovereign in a matter that has been the exclusive jurisdiction of the States since 1787 (and ever before) are not capable, competent or able to govern themselves …
This is about so much more than same-sex marriage. At its heart it means the citizens of the state of Utah are not capable, according the federal functionaries of governing themselves as they (the ultimate sovereign) determine by constitutional act.
On Jan 6, 2014, at 5:17 PM, Steve Handy <email@example.com> wrote:
Curt, hadn't thought of that but right. I have spent about 4 hours today proving that I am married!
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 6, 2014, at 5:00 PM, "Curtis Oda" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Mike,Yes, I'm curious as well. I understand PEHP has allowed enrollment.If we win the SCOTUS appeal, I feel they should have to reimburse our state coffers for what they spent.It is disconcerting since PEHP just required my wife amd me to prove we are married. Yet, they are allowing enrollment before they know for sure of the legality of same sex marriage!Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Ken Ivory <email@example.com>
Date: 01/06/2014 3:40 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: Mike Christensen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Curtis Oda <email@example.com>,Steve Handy <firstname.lastname@example.org>,Jim Nielson <email@example.com>,Lee Perry <firstname.lastname@example.org>,Marc Roberts <email@example.com>,Jake Anderegg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Weber State Granting Same-Sex Benefits
Can you please help me understand who makes such a decision so rapidly while things are still in flux, and how, for a state university where the State Constitution does not recognize same-sex marriage and the Supreme Court issued a stay?
How are these decisions made? Who makes them?