By JEFFREY P. BLAIR, Associated PressWASHINGTON (AP) A U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage nationwide on Tuesday made it easier for Americans to legally wed their loved ones, but could leave some couples with confusion about how to get married.
The court’s 5-4 decision came in a case brought by the state of Utah, which is one of several states that have been sued by gay couples seeking to marry.
Utah was the first to allow gay couples to marry in the U.M.L.G.P.A., which is a division of the U of M and was founded in the late 1970s, was founded by a group of evangelical ministers who were looking for a way to get gays and lesbians to get on board with their faith.
Gay marriage is legal in Utah, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming, and the District of Columbia.
But couples in those states can’t legally wed in the other states where it is legal.
The U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women has said gay couples in all countries can’t get married in those countries.
Gay marriages, which can take place anywhere in the world, have become a central issue in the 2016 presidential election.
President Donald Trump has been accused of not understanding the implications of gay marriage and of not being a strong supporter of the LGBT community.
The case is the latest in a long string of court cases involving the issue of same-sex marriage.
In Utah, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes told the court that gay marriage is a “legal right” and that the UM.
G, which represents about 3,000 same-gender couples, was “pleased with the outcome.”
Reyes and the Umar Khadr family, who were married in Idaho, were seeking to wed in Utah after a court ruling in July legalized gay marriages in the state.
A federal judge in Boise in June struck down that ruling, ruling that Idaho’s ban on same-day same-marriage was unconstitutional.
The case was brought by Khadr, who is serving a life sentence in a Canadian jail for killing an American soldier and his Canadian partner in Afghanistan in 2001.
Khadr’s lawyers argued that the ban violated the U:M.
Constitution’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
They also said the ban would force Idaho to recognize Khadr as their child’s father and could force the state to allow Khadr to adopt his biological son, a legal claim the judge rejected.