Deputy Salt Lake County Clerk Dahnelle Burton-Lee said the district attorney authorized her office to begin issuing the licenses but she couldn't immediately say how many had been issued. But it was clear from the line at the clerk's office that was several dozen.
"The momentum we are seeing is unprecedented in any human rights struggle," Davidson said. "To have this fast a change in the law and in public opinion, is quite remarkable."
State Sen. Jim Dabakis, chairman of the Utah Democratic Party, was one of the first to get married in Salt Lake City with his longtime partner, Stephen Justesen.
"Do you, Jim, take Steven, to be your lawfully wedded spouse?" the mayor asked.
But at the Utah County clerk's office in Provo, same sex-couples were still denied marriage licenses.
Patsy Carter, 42, and her partner of eight years, 39-year-old Raylynn Marvel, said they went to the office immediately after hearing about the ruling but the clerk said they office was still reviewing the ruling and consulting with the county attorney.
Carter said the ruling was still a positive step and she believes Utah County, considered one of Utah's most conservative, will eventually have to start granting the licenses.
"If my marriage licenses could say, `Provo, Utah,' that's probably the most epic contradiction ever," she said.
Utah's lawsuit was brought by three gay and lesbian couples, including one that was legally married in Iowa and just wants that license recognized in Utah.
During a nearly four-hour hearing on the case earlier this month, attorneys for the state argued that Utah's law promotes the state's interest in "responsible procreation" and the "optimal mode of child-rearing." They also asserted it's not the courts' role to determine how a state defines marriage, and that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling doesn't give same-sex couples the universal right to marry.
In the ruling, Shelby wrote that the right to marry is a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution.
"These rights would be meaningless if the Constitution did not also prevent the government from interfering with the intensely personal choices an individual makes when that person decides to make a solemn commitment to another human being," Shelby wrote.