Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore suspended for rest of term


Recommended Posts

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has been suspended from the bench for telling probate judges to defy federal orders regarding gay marriage.

The Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ) issued the order Friday suspending Moore from the bench for the remainder of his term after an unanimous vote of the nine-member board.

 

"For these violations, Chief Justice Moore is hereby suspended from office without pay for the remainder of his term. This suspension is effective immediately," the order stated.

 

The court found him guilty of all six charges of violation of canon of judicial ethics. Moore's term is to end in 2019, but because of his age, 69, he cannot run for the office again. Gov. Robert Bentley will name a replacement for Moore.

 

In its order, the COJ wanted to make sure people understood what Moore's case was and was not about.

"At the outset, this court emphasizes that this case is concerned only with alleged violations of the Canons of Jucial Ethics," the COJ states. "This case is not about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted: indeed, we recognize that a majority of voters in Alabama adopted a constitutional amendment in 2006 banning same-sex marriage, as did a majority of states over the last 15 years."

 

The COJ also stated it is also not a case to review or to editorialize about the United States Supreme Court's split decision to declare same-sex marriage legal nationwide.

In its 50-page order, the COJ stated it did not find credible Moore's claim that the purpose for the Jan. 6 order was "merely to provide a 'status update' to the state's probate judges."

 

"We likewise do not accept Chief Justice Moore's repeated argument that the disclaimer in paragraph 10 of the January 6, 2016, order – in which Chief Justice Moore asserted he was 'not at liberty to provide any guidance ... of the effect of Obergefell on the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court' – negated the reality that Chief Justice More was in fact 'ordering and directing' the probate judges to comply with the API orders regardless of Obergefell or the injunction in Strawser (federal case in Alabama)."

 

Moore's attorney, Mat Staver, stated in a press release that the COJ couldn't agree on an outright removal of Moore from the bench so it decided to suspend him for the rest of his term.

 

"To suspend Chief Justice Moore for the rest of his term is the same as removal. The COJ lacked the unanimous votes to remove the Chief, so the majority instead chose to ignore the law and the rules," said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.

 

The COJ decision states: "A majority of this court also agrees with the JIC that the only appropriate sanction for Chief Justice Moore is removal from office. Removal of a judge from office, however, requires 'the concurrence of all members sitting ... It is clear there was not a unanimous concurrence to remove the Chief from office, so the COJ suspends him for the remainder of his term. In other words, the COJ did what the rules say they cannot do. There is no meaningful difference between suspension for the remaining of the term and removal from office."

 

Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which filed the original complaint against Moore that led to the JIC charges against the chief justice stated this moring that the COJ "has done the citizens of Alabama a great service by suspending Roy Moore from the bench."

 

"He (Moore) disgraced his office and undermined the integrity of the judiciary by putting his personal religious beliefs above his sworn duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution,"  Cohen stated. "Moore was elected to be a judge, not a preacher. It's something that he never seemed to understand. The people of Alabama who cherish the rule of law are not going to miss the Ayatollah of Alabama."

 

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/09/alabama_supreme_court_chief_ju.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good riddance. No one, absolutely NO one, who allows their personal religious beliefs to sway their judicial judgement, should be allowed anywhere NEAR a position of authority in a court room. Ever.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.