Potter v. Murray City – Bigamy – Polygamy
Potter v. Murray City, 760 F.2d 1065 (10th Cir. 1985).
NATURE OF THE CASE: This family law case involved a suit for wrongful discharge after the plaintiff was fired for practicing polygamy.
FACTS: Potter (P) was terminated from his employment as a police officer in Murray City, Utah after the city learned that he practiced plural marriage. The City discharged Potter on the grounds that he failed to support, obey, and defend the Utah State Constitution by practicing polygamy. Potter sued for wrongful discharge, asserting that his termination was in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Potter appealed the trial court’s dismissal of his claim on summary judgment.
Potter argued on appeal that:1) Utah’s enabling act was void under the equal footing doctrine for requiring that Utah forever prohibit bigamy; 2) Murray City violated his First Amendment rights to the free exercise of religion; 3) his termination was in violation of his fundamental right of privacy; and 4) his termination was a violation of due process and equal protection because Utah’s laws prohibiting polygamy had not been enforced.
ISSUE: Do laws prohibiting polygamy violate the guarantees of the free exercise of religion and privacy in the U.S. Constitution?
RULE OF LAW: No. Laws prohibiting polygamy do not violate the guarantees of the free exercise of religion and privacy in the U.S. Constitution.
HOLDING AND DECISION: The court held that even if Utah’s Enabling Act violates the equal footing doctrine plaintiff would not be entitled to relief. Each state is equal in power, dignity, and authority and a state’s sovereign power may not be constitutionally diminished by any conditions in the acts under which the State was admitted to the Union.
Conditions on statehood imposed by Congress would not restrict the State’s legislative power regarding matters that are not plainly within the regulating power of Congress. The State of Utah had full power to enact or amend its laws regarding any constitutional or statutory provisions dealing with the subject of marriage consistent with the Constitution of the United States.
The prohibition of bigamy is the settled public policy of Utah. Monogamy is inextricably woven into the fabric of our society and is the bedrock upon which our culture is built. The State is justified by a compelling interest in upholding and enforcing its ban on plural marriage to protect the monogamous marriage relationship. We find no authority for extending the constitutional right of privacy to protect polygamous marriages.
P argues that Utah’s laws prohibiting polygamy have fallen into disuse insofar as there have been fewer than 25 prosecutions in Utah since 1952. That there have been a minimal number of prosecutions does not establish an abandonment of the State’s laws. A mere failure to prosecute other offenders is no basis for a finding of denial of equal protection.
DISPOSITION: Affirmed.