A state panel in Alabama called the Court of the Judiciary on Monday heard arguments over an order from state Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore that affirmed to lower court judges the status of a pending case involve same-sex “marriage.”
And according to the chief of Liberty Counsel, which is representing Moore, the case is political.
There was no immediate decision on the charge brought by the Judicial Inquiry Commission based on a complaint from the Southern Poverty Law Center, which repeatedly over the years has attacked Moore. But a result could be announced within days.
Mathew Staver, the chief of Liberty Counsel, said the decision should be open and shut for the chief justice. The complaint claimed that he was defying the U.S. Supreme Court decision on same-sex “marriage,” but it is based on an order in which Moore specifically stated he could not give direction to the state’s probate judges, which are the only ones who can issue marriage licenses in the state.
He issued the order because, even though he reported to the JIC that he had tried several times to get the state’s high court to rule on a case related to same-sex “marriage,” six months had passed and he just wanted the judges to know the case remained under deliberation.
His order said the state court’s previous orders procedurally were left standing until the subsequent ruling that eventually came later.
“While the JIC contends that my motivation to issue the administrative order was to defy the federal courts, the following excerpts from my memoranda to the court … indicate that I strongly encouraged my colleagues to dispel the existing concern and uncertainty by promptly addressing the question,” Moore earlier told the court.
He noted that on Sept. 2, 2015, he urged his fellow judges to “make a decision in this case.”
He told his fellow judges “one way or the other: to acquiesce in Obergefell and retreat from our March orders or reject Obergefell and maintain our orders in place.”
“Any decision is better than no decision at all,” he wrote. “The uncertainty facing the probate judges [those who issue marriage licenses in the state] is enormous. … They need guidance from us on this court’s view.”
A month later, he repeated his plea.
The actual charges against Moore are part of a larger offensive by SPLC and JIC against conservative justices in Alabama, critics contend.
WND had just reported that Justice Tom Parker had sued in federal because SPLC filed a complaint with the JIC in an attempt to restrict his free speech, which is protected by the U.S. Constitution.
While Moore’s federal court claim against the JIC procedures was dismissed for now, it could reappear at the appellate court level in the future.
The cases suggested SPLC, which has been linked in a federal court case to domestic terrorism and earlier smeared GOP presidential hopeful Dr. Ben Carson by putting him on a list of “haters,” is working with the JIC to injure the conservatives.
The SPLC and the JIC are attempting “to intimidate, silence, and punish Justice Parker for his originalist judicial philosophy and protected speech,” Parker’s case claims.
“Justice Parker has a constitutional right to speak out on the case so long as he is not presently presiding over it. We know have seen a disturbing pattern of the JIC doing the bidding of the Southern Poverty Law Center and filing politically motivated charges against Alabama Supreme Court justices in order to remove them from the bench. It is time to put a stop to this free speech violation and the automatic removal provision,” said Staver.
The JIC event went so far as to hire a former worker for SPLC to build its case against Moore, the agency’s critics note.
On Monday, the JIC contended that Moore should be removed from his post, to which the voters elected him. Liberty Counsel argued the charges should be dismissed entirely.
Staver told WND after the hearing the panel only has to look at Moore’s order, which is the subject of the complaint. There he specifically states he cannot offer the probate judges advice or counsel on the issue of same-sex “marriage” because the state court had yet to rule on several procedural developments in a state case that was launched before the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision.
“You just have to look at one four-page document,” Staver said. “Ask yourself … did the chief justice advocate open defiance? No, he said he was not able to give them guidance.”
He noted that Monday was the first time the JIC even referenced that fact.
Staver said no matter the immediate outcome, the bigger fight of such politics in the judiciary, and how they impact justice, will be further addressed.
Interestingly, a poll from just a week earlier put Moore as the favorite among Republicans in Alabama to be governor in 2018.
According to a Yellowhammernews report, Moore has huge support among Alabama Republicans.
“The Alabama Forestry Association, one of the state’s most influential conservative groups, commissioned a survey of 600 likely Republican primary voters and found that Moore’s sky-high name recognition makes him the GOP’s current top choice for governor in 2018 in what promises to be a crowded field,” the report said.
The report said 28 percent picked Moore, 24 percent were undecided, Attorney General Luther Strange got 9 percent and another handful each drew support in the single digits.
The report said Moore was viewed favorably by 58 percent of the respondents, unfavorably by 29 percent and 11 percent had no opinion.
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/alabama-marriage-fight-pits-chief-justice-vs-politics/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/alabama-marriage-fight-pits-chief-justice-vs-politics/
No comments:
Post a Comment