Coincidentally, days after discussing this case and whether or not the Courts would agree to hear it due to its lack of ripeness, an article appeared in the newspaper.
The family brought suit against The State AG and Governor, as well as the Utah County Prosecutor. The matter was brought before the court on ripeness issues, since they were challenging the constitutionality of a Utah law under which they had not been prosecuted, nor had they even been charged.
The U.S. District Judge decided that the State Governor and AG will be removed as parties to the proceedings because they have a policy of not prosecuting adult polygamists and had not made any effort to do so against the Brown family.
On the other hand, even though Utah County prosecutors had not charged or brought court proceedings against the Browns, they had held press conferences confirming their intent to do so and had begun investigations into the family. This was thought to be enough to make the matter ripe for the courts to consider the matter.
I don't know what to think in this matter. Had the investigation been conducted on individuals that weren't out flaunting their lifestyle on national television, would that make it ripe? I think someone who is living a private life which is then interrupted by said investigation, yes. In the Brown's circumstances I don't believe the investigation was "ripe" enough to cause a stink over. The Browns time and time again said they knew the risk they were taking when they decided they put their story out there for the world to see. In their minds they knew what could happen, they knew they would raise eyebrows, and they knew no one would turn a blind eye to their lifestyle. Why cry "wolf" now?
ReplyDeleteI think that just because a law has not been used to prosecute someone doesn't mean that the law should not be applied when it is deliberately flaunted for the whole world to see. I agree with Candice, why cry "wolf" now.
ReplyDelete