The federal judge who struck down Alabama's same-sex marriage ban agreed Sunday to put that order on hold for 14 days.

U.S. District Judge Callie V.S. "Ginny" Granade rejected arguments by the Alabama Attorney General's Office that the state likely would win on appeal. But she agreed to give attorneys two weeks to make their case to an appeals court.

If the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals fails to act in that time to extend or lift the stay, the order will take effect on Feb. 9. The judge said she also would issue a follow-up opinion clarifying the original order.

One by one, Granade rejected the state's arguments for an open-ended "stay" to delay the ruling until after the U.S. Supreme Court hears a same-sex case later this year that most observers expect will settle the issue once and for all.

"In its discretion, however," she wrote, "the court recognizes the value of allowing the Eleventh Circuit an opportunity to determine whether a stay is appropriate."

Christine Hernandez, an attorney for plaintiffs Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand, issued a statement welcoming Granade's ruling.

"Judge Granade in her order specifically agreed with the Plaintiffs on all points ... We respect Judge Granade's decision and look forward to Feb. 9," she said in the statement.

Attorney General Luther Strange also welcomed the delay. He called it a "step in the right direction" and vowed to continue his defense of Alabama law.

"While I would have preferred a longer stay to allow the matter to be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court's anticipated ruling in June, the 14-day stay allows more time for my office to prepare our stay request to the 11th Circuit Court while also affording the public time to resolve the confusion over the impact of the recent ruling," he said in a prepared statement.

Granade set off a flurry of emotions - positive and negative - when she issued a ruling late Friday in a lawsuit filed in Mobile last year by Searcy and McKeand. That suit challenged the state's ban on same-sex marriage, which prevented Searcy from completing a second-parent adoption of the son she and McKeand have raised since birth.

Judge Ginny Granade ... puts gay marriage ruling on hold.

It is one of at least three challenges to the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment, which voters overwhelmingly voted to add to the state constitution in 2006. But it is the first in which a judge has ruled.

The Attorney General's Office immediately asked Granade to put the ruling on hold, arguing that Alabama was likely to win on appeal and would be irreparably harmed if it took effect immediately.

Although Granade agreed to the 14-day delay, she dismissed the state's conclusions.

"The Attorney General seems to concede that he cannot make such showing because his argument on this point simply refers to the arguments he made in connection with his motion for summary judgment, which the court has rejected," she wrote in response to the argument that the state was likely to win on appeal.

The judge noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has denied similar requests to block orders striking down gay marriage bans. The 11th Circuit also recently turned down a request by Florida after a federal judge there declared its law unconstitutional.

"We certainly hope the 11th Circuit would treat Alabama the same as Florida," said David Kennedy, another lawyer for Searcy and McKeand.

Another argument offered by the state is that allowing marriage licenses to be issued would harm the state by creating "confusion" if the Supreme Court ultimately reverses the ruling. Granade rejected that, too.

"What the Attorney General is describing is harm that may occur to those whose marriages become legal or who are permitted to marry by the State while the injunction is in place, only to have them nullified if this court's ruling is overturned," the judge wrote. "This is not a harm to the State, but rather a potential harm to the same-sex couples whose marriage arrangements recognized or entered into during the period of the injunction which may be subject to future legal challenge by the State if the injunction is overturned."

Pointing to similar situations that have occurred in other states in which gay couples received marriage licenses before the issuance of stays, Granade wrote that such unions in Alabama like would be ruled valid.

"As long as a stay is in place, same-sex couples and their families remain in a state of limbo with respect to adoption, child care and custody, medical decisions, employment and health benefits, future tax implications, inheritance and many other rights associated with marriage," she wrote. "The court concludes that these circumstances constitute irreparable harm."

Less than an hour before Granade issued her ruling delaying her decision, the Alabama Probate Judges Association requested permission to intervene in the case. The request expanded on comments the association's president and lawyer made during a conference call with reporters Sunday afternoon.

In the court document, the association backed the attorney general's position and argued that probate judges needed time to change procedures.

"It is not reasonable to expect that fundamental changes to the administration of Alabama's marriage laws can be uniformly and efficiently implemented between Friday evening of one week and Monday morning of the following week without mass confusion in probate offices across the state of Alabama," attorneys for the association wrote.

Kennedy contended that the association's argument is "unfounded from a legal position" but added that the delay should give probate judges all the time they need to alter forms and train staff.

"If nothing else, the state of Alabama has notice to get ready," he said.

Updated at 7:20 p.m. to include a comment from Christine Hernandez. Updated at 7:48 p.m. to fully detail the judge's rationale.



Updated at 8:06 p.m. to include information about a court filing from the Alabama Probate Judges Association.

Updated at 8:25 p.m. to include reaction from Luther Strange.

Reporter Debbie Lord contributed to this report.