Now Reading
Despite new legal ruling, Alabama’s chief justice insists gay marriage not legal in the state

Despite new legal ruling, Alabama’s chief justice insists gay marriage not legal in the state

The Alabama Supreme Court on Friday dismissed three lawsuits that sought to keep same-sex marriage illegal in the state in defiance of last June’s landmark ruling by the US Supreme Court making it legal in all 50 states.

The state’s high court ruled against lawsuits filed by the Alabama Policy Institute, the Alabama Citizens Action Program and Elmore County’s probate judge. The plaintiffs acknowledge they have few legal options at this point, according to AL.com.

Chief Justice Roy Moore Moore nevertheless called the US Supreme Court ruling a ‘lawless act’ and still maintains that a same-sex marriage ban remains in effect in Alabama despite it being struck down by a federal judge last March.

He claims the US Supreme Court’s decision only applies to Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee.

‘The (SCOTUS) opinion appeals more to emotion than law, reminding one of the 1974 song Feelings by Morris Albert, which begins: “Feelings, nothing more than feelings ….,”‘ Moore writes in the opinion. ‘Obergefell (the SCOTUS case) is but the latest example of the Court’s creation of constitutional rights out of thin air in service of the immorality of the sexual revolution.’

Moore seems to be questioning the US Supreme Court’s power and authority overall.

‘The Supremacy Clause, quite obviously, by this chain of reasoning, does not give the United States Supreme Court or any other agency of the federal government the authority to make its every declaration by that very fact the supreme law of the land,’ Moore writes.

‘If the Court’s edicts do not arise from powers delegated to the federal government in the Constitution, they are to be treated not as the supreme law of the land but as mere usurpation.’

But Moore’s colleague, Justice Greg Shaw, disagrees and takes Moore to task in his written opinion: ‘If a judge finds that he or she cannot abide by a controlling decision of a higher court, then that judge should resign from office. He or she should not indulge in the pretense that rebelling against a superior court’s decision is an accepted judicial response.’

‘Such conduct does not show respect for or comply with the law,’ Shaw added. ‘It does not promote public confidence in the integrity or impartiality of the judiciary. Instead, I believe that defiance would bring the judicial office into disrepute.’