10 state ask delay in same-sex ruling CALIFORNIA Attorneys general want to wait until November vote

Utah's Attorey General Mark Shurtleff speaks at the annual Utah Public Health conference, Monday, May 9, 2005, in Park City, Utah. Shurtleff addressed the issue of polygamy in the state and what can be done to help those communities. (AP Photo/Douglas C. Pizac) less Utah's Attorey General Mark Shurtleff speaks at the annual Utah Public Health conference, Monday, May 9, 2005, in Park City, Utah. Shurtleff addressed the issue of polygamy in the state and what can be done to ... more Photo: DOUGLAS C. PIZAC, ASSOCIATED PRESS Photo: DOUGLAS C. PIZAC, ASSOCIATED PRESS Image 1 of / 4 Caption Close 10 state ask delay in same-sex ruling 1 / 4 Back to Gallery

The dispute over whether the California Supreme Court should put its ruling legalizing same-sex marriages on hold until voters consider the issue in November was joined Friday by attorneys general from 10 states, who say a postponement might save them from legal headaches over whether to recognize California marriages.

In papers filed with the court, the attorneys general - all Republicans - said that if the ruling is implemented as scheduled June 17, it would subject their states to a profusion of lawsuits involving gay and lesbian residents traveling to California to get married.

Each of the states has a law barring recognition of same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. However, unlike Massachusetts - the only other state to legalize same-sex marriages - California allows residents of other states to wed here even if the marriage would not be permitted in their home state.

"An inevitable result of such 'marriage tourism' will be a steep increase in litigation" over whether the couple's home state must recognize their marriage, said Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, author of the brief.

He said a court might have to decide, for example, whether the couple could file a joint state tax return, whether one spouse could refuse to testify against another, or whether one could sue over the other's wrongful death.

The situation will become murkier, Shurtleff said, if California voters approve a constitutional amendment Nov. 3 that would overturn the state high court's ruling and declare that only opposite-sex marriage is valid or recognized in the state. Courts in other states, as well as California, would then have to decide whether same-sex marriages performed before Nov. 3 were valid.

Sponsors of the amendment have submitted more than 1.1 million signatures on petitions; 694,354 valid signatures are needed to qualify for the ballot.

Delaying implementation of the ruling until after the election would spare the states from "premature, unnecessary, unnecessarily difficult, and therefore unduly burdensome litigation in our courts," Shurtleff said. He was joined by the attorneys general of Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina and South Dakota.

Conservative organizations opposed to same-sex marriage filed similar requests earlier in the week, while the plaintiffs in suits that challenged California's law defining marriage as between a man and a woman - 23 gay and lesbian couples and the city of San Francisco - opposed any delay.

The plaintiffs were joined Thursday by state Attorney General Jerry Brown, whose office defended the same-sex marriage ban in court but who said postponing implementation would withhold rights from couples who are now entitled to them.

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera criticized the 10 states' request for a delay Friday and said he would submit opposing arguments next week.

"To further delay constitutional rights to gay and lesbian partners based on political conjecture as to whether or not an amendment will pass - or even qualify for the ballot - would be both unprecedented and inhumane," Herrera said in a statement.

The state high court has until June 16 to decide whether to put its ruling on hold until November.