Supreme Court

People walk on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on April 26, 2014.

(Associated Press)

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said Wednesday

on an attempt by the National Organization for Marriage to halt same-sex marriages in Oregon.

Kennedy asked for briefs to be filed by 1 p.m. Monday from the parties in the two lawsuits that led to U.S. District Judge Michael McShane's May 19 ruling that allowed gays and lesbians to marry in Oregon.

Kennedy, who hears emergency appeals from the region that includes Oregon, could issue a ruling on NOM's motion on its own or pass the issue on to the full court.

At a minimum, Kennedy's action means that he wants more information on the case before he makes a decision. But it's hard to know whether NOM has a strong shot for its argument that the Supreme Court should get involved in the Oregon case because of its unusual nature.

When McShane ruled that Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, no one with standing in the case appealed the decision. Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, who represented the chief defendants in the two lawsuits that led to the ruling, said she agreed with the plaintiffs that Oregon's ban violated the federal constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples.

That allowed gay and lesbian couples to immediately begin marrying in Oregon. However, in six other states where federal judges have issued similar rulings, the decisions have all been stayed pending appeal. NOM's appeal to the Supreme Court argued that further same-sex marriages should also be halted in Oregon while the appeals courts look at the legal reasoning coming up from federal district judges.

"It's a very good sign," said John Eastman, NOM's chairman and attorney in the case, of Kennedy's action. He noted that the Supreme Court also issued a stay of a federal ruling in Utah after both the district and circuit court judges refused to do so.

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor who has followed same-sex marriage litigation, noted that the Utah case was different because that state's attorney general had legal standing in the case when he asked for a stay from the Supreme Court. He noted that NOM has no such standing at this point.

Still, Tobias said, "I guess it piqued [Kennedy's] interest enough to want to hear from everybody."

David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said he thought it was good that Kennedy "will have a more complete record" before acting.

Fidanque, whose group represents some of the plaintiffs in the case, noted that he particularly wants Kennedy to see a transcript of McShane's oral ruling explaining why he would not allow NOM to intervene in the case. He noted that NOM did not include this in its brief.

Lake Perriguey, a Portland attorney who represents two of the couples who sought the right to marry, said he thought Kennedy was simply being careful.

"I don't think there's much to take from it," Perriguey said. "Courts don't like to make knee-jerk reactions to things."

-- Jeff Mapes