Alabama Chief Justice Appeals Suspension With Cryptic Motion For Recusals

As previously reported, two weeks ago Alabama's Court of the Judiciary suspended Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore for the remaining two years of his term on charges stemming primarily from his order to state probate judges telling them they had a duty under Alabama law to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples despite controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent to the contrary.  The decision has been followed by a series of appellate moves by Moore.  On Sept. 30, Moore filed a Notice of Appeal with the Alabama Supreme Court. Then on Oct. 10, Moore filed a Motion (full text) to recuse four current and three former Alabama Supreme Court Justices from hearing the appeal.  The grounds for seeking recusal of 6 of the 7 were filed only in a sealed affidavit with the following cryptic explanation:

Because Case No. 1150818 has been maintained under seal by the present and former justices who sat on that case, the argument for this section is not presented in this public filing. However, the facts presented in the attached Sealed Affidavit of Chief Justice Roy S. Moore amply demonstrate that the Justices, present and former, who sat on Case No. 1150818, have disqualified themselves by their biased and unconscionable actions in that case not only from participating in this case but also from playing any role in selecting a substitute Court.... Media organizations and members of the public, if they so choose, may intervene in Case No. 1150818 to demand that the records of that case be made public.

The motion also argued:

The selection of replacement Justices should be made by a random drawing from a pool of names consisting of all sitting circuit judges.

In an October 12 public statement, Moore urged the unsealing of the referenced case, saying in part:

I call upon the press to demand that the Alabama Supreme Court unseal Case No. 1150818 and, if necessary, to intervene in that case. The public has a right to know why I have requested that the justices, who participated in that case, be disqualified from playing any role in my appeal. The Court has refused my requests to unseal Case No. 1150818. I ask the Supreme Court and the media to act...

6th Circuit Affirms That County Clerk Kim Davis Had No Qualified Immunity Defense

In Ermold v. Davis, (6th Cir., Sept. 29, 2022), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a Kentucky federal district court decision that Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis does not have qualified immunity in a suit against her for stopping the issuance of all marriage licenses to avoid issuing licenses to same-sex couples. The court said in part:

[P]laintiffs have not only “alleged” but also now “shown” that Davis violated their constitutional right to marry.... And, as we held three years ago, that right was “clearly established in Obergefell.”

The court held that insofar as Davis has raised a free exercise defense under the First Amendment, that issue should be resolved when the case goes to trial and not at the current motion-to-dismiss stage. [Thanks to Thomas Rutledge for the lead.]

Supreme Court Denies Cert In D.C. Gay Marriage Referendum Case

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court denied review in Jackson v. D.C. Board of Elections, (Docket No. 10-511, certiorari denied 1/18/2011). (Order List.) In the case, D.C.'s highest appellate court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld election officials' refusal to accept a petition seeking an initiative vote to bar D.C. from recognizing same sex marriages. (See prior posting.) CNN reports on the denial of cert.

Kim Davis Files Opening Brief With 6th Circuit

On Monday, Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis filed a 126-page opening brief (full text) in her appeal of the federal district court's various rulings against her that require her office to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples despite her religious objections to doing so.  As summarized in the Liberty Counsel press release announcing the filing, the appeal asks the 6th Circuit to reverse the following district court rulings: (1) Preliminary injunction against Davis on August 12, 2015; (2) District court’s denying a preliminary injunction against the State Defendants on August 12, 2015; (3) Expanded injunction against Davis on September 3, 2015; and (4) Contempt order against Davis on September 3, 2015. (See prior related posting.) AP reports on developments.

Early Cert. Petition Filed In Another DOMA Case

In an unusual tactical move announced yesterday, a petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Windsor v. United States even though the case has not yet been decided by the Second Circuit where an appeal is pending.  In the case, a New York federal district court held that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. (See prior posting.) At issue is whether the federal government must recognize the unlimited estate tax marital deduction in the case of the death of a same-sex spouse. The lesbian couple involved had been legally married in Canada. The ACLU explained its reasoning in petitioning on behalf of the parties that prevailed at trial before the government's appeal has been decided:

At this point petitions for Supreme Court review have been filed in two other DOMA cases – GLAD’s Gill v. OPM case, which has been decided by the First Circuit, and Lambda Legal’s Golinski v. OPM case, which, like Windsor v. United States, doesn’t have an appeals court decision yet.

The Court will likely decide the constitutionality of DOMA this coming term, using one or more of these cases as vehicles for addressing the issue. We filed because we believe that Edie [Windsor's] story is a strong addition to the striking collection of plaintiffs in the Gill case and to Karen Golinski’s story as well. Now the Court has three cases, offering a variety of harms, to choose from.

[Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.] 

Top 10 Religious Liberty and Church-State Developments of 2022

Each year in December, I attempt to pick the most important church-state and religious liberty developments of the past year.  My choices are based on the importance of the pick to law or policy, regardless of whether the development has garnered significant media attention. The selection of top stories obviously involves a good deal of subjective judgment. Here is a somewhat different list of top stories and newsmakers from the Religion News Association, the professional association of religion journalists. I welcome e-mail comment at religionclause@gmail.com on my choices. Here are my Top Ten picks:

1. In the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court overrules Roe v. Wade after premature leak of Court's opinion. Newly imposed abortion restrictions are challenged on Free Exercise grounds by clergy and religious organizations with pro-choice beliefs. Some states act to ensure abortion rights.

2. In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, Supreme Court repudiates the Lemon test for Establishment Clause violations.

3. In Carson v. Makin, Supreme Court says exclusion of sectarian schools from tuition reimbursement program violates Free Exercise clause.

4. Antisemitic incidents in the U.S. increase. White House creates inter-agency group to counter antisemitism.

5. Numerous lawsuits seek religious exemptions from COVID vaccine mandates. Congress in National Defense Authorization Act orders military to rescind its mandate.

6. Congress enacts Respect for Marriage Act, codifying recognition of same-sex and interracial marriages.

7. Accommodation of transgender students and treatment of minors with gender dysphoria remain highly charged political and legal issues.

8. Battles continue over whether anti-discrimination provisions of Title IX, the Affordable Care Act, and some state laws cover discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and scope of exemptions from those provisions for religious institutions.

9. In Ramirez v. Collier, Supreme Court recognizes rights of pastor to lay hands on the prisoner and audibly pray with him during his execution.

10. In Shurtleff v. City of Boston, Supreme Court holds that group's free speech rights were violated by refusing to allow it to briefly fly its Christian flag from City Hall flagpole which is open to other groups for their ceremonies.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jill I. Goldenziel, Veiled Political Questions: Islamic Dress, Constitutionalism, and the Ascendance of Courts, (American Journal of Comparative Law, Forthcoming).
• Jeremy Waldron, What is Natural Law Like? (May 17, 2012).
• Michael Stokes Paulsen, The Priority of God (a Theory of Religious Liberty), (Pepperdine Law Review, 2012, Forthcoming).
• Erica A. Holzer, Defense of Marriage Acts: A Fifty State Survey, (March 5, 2012).
• Erica A. Holzer, DoMA Statutes and Same-Sex Divorce Litigation, (March 5, 2012).
• Pramudya A. Oktavinanda, Choice of Financing Schemes in Islamic Finance Industry: Failed Legal Formalism and Economic Inefficiencies, (May 14, 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Pascale Fournier, Pascal McDougall and Merissa Lichtsztral, Secular Rights and Religious Wrongs? Family Law, Religion and Women in Israel, 18 William & Mary Journal of Women & Law 333-362 (2012).
• Janine Marie Idziak, Forgoing Drugs on Grounds of Cost: A Perspective from Catholic Health Care Ethics and Social Teaching, 13 Marquette Elder's Advisor 89-105 (2011).
• David E. Steinberg, The Myth of Church-State Separation, 59 Cleveland State Law Review 623-644 (2011).

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Benjamin L. Berger, Moral Judgment, Criminal Law and the Constitutional Protection of Religion, (Supreme Court Law Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, 2008).


• Ira C. Lupu & Robert W. Tuttle, The Cross at College: Accommodation and Acknowledgment of Religion at Public Universities , (William & Mary Bill of Rights, Vol. 16, 2008).


• Frederick Mark Gedicks, Three Questions About Hybrid Rights and Religious Groups, (Yale Law Journal Pocket Part, Vol. 117, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP:

• Patrick McKinley Brennan, The Contributions of Catholics to the Socio-Political Order, 56 Catholic University Law Review 1221-1235 (2007).


• Charles P. Kindregan, Jr., Religion, Polygamy, and Non-Traditional Families: Disparate Views On the Evolution of Marriage In History and In the Debate Over Same-Sex Unions, 41 Suffolk University Law Review 19-48 (2007).


• Samuel J. Levine, Reflections On Responsibilities In the Public Square, Through a Perspective of Jewish Tradition: A Brief Biblical Survey, 56 Catholic University Law Review 1203-1219 (2007).


• Gregory P. Magarian, The Jurisprudence of Colliding First Amendment Interests: From the Dead End of Neutrality to the Open Road of Participation-Enhancing Review, [Abstract], 83 Notre Dame Law Review 185-264 (2007).

The Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. XXIII, No. 1 (2007-08) has recently been published. It includes articles on Evangelicals and Politics, on the 60th Anniversary of the Everson Decision, and the AALS Jewish Law Section Papers.

Recent Books:

• Amy Sullivan, The Party Faithful: How and Why Democrats Are Closing the God Gap, (Scribner, Feb. 2008), (Reviewed by New York Times).
  
• E. J. Dionne Jr., Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics After the Religious Right, (Princeton University Press, Jan. 2008), (Reviewed by New York Times).
  
• Stephen Paine, A Crisis in America: An Urgent Message to My Fellow Americans, (Outskirts Press, Jan. 2008), (Review by Publisher).

Kim Davis Assessed $100K Damages In One Case, $0 in Another

Last year, in a long-running case, a Kentucky federal district court held that Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis violated the constitutional rights of two same-sex couples when she refused, on religious grounds, to issue them marriage licenses. The court said that damages should be assessed by a jury.  (See prior posting.) That case, along with another making similar claims, were recently tired in parallel before two separate juries. In one of the cases-- Yates v. Davis -- the jury yesterday awarded zero damages.  In a second case-- Emold v. Davis-- a different jury awarded $100,000 damages. Liberty Counsel says the decision will be appealed. USA Today reports on the cases.

Civil Rights Complaint With A Twist-- Baker Refuses To Add Anti-Gay Message To Cake

AP today reports on a complaint filed with the Colorado Civil Rights Division against bakery owner Marjorie Silva by a customer who wanted her to create a cake with an anti-gay marriage message on it.  Silva agreed to bake a Bible-shaped cake for customer Bill Jack, but refused his request to put hateful anti-gay words on the cake along with two men holding hands with an X over them. Silva told Jack that she would give him icing and a pastry bag so he could write the words himself.  This did not satisfy Jack, and he filed a complaint alleging that he was discriminated against based on his creed. The complaint comes as Republicans in the Colorado legislature are looking at legislative changes to protect business owners who refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Courtney Miller, 'Spiritual But Not Religious': Rethinking the Legal Definition of Religion, (Virginia Law Review, Vol. 102, No. 3, 2016).
• Zachary D. Smith, Of Commandments, Crosses, & Prayers: The Roberts Court's Approach to Public Religion, (Brigham Young University Law Review, Vol. 2015, No. 845, 2015).
• Elizabeth Sepper, Contracting Religion, (Law, Religion, and Health in the United States, Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. Glenn Cohen, & Elizabeth Sepper eds., Cambridge Univ., 2017, Forthcoming).
• Kaari E. Hong, From Footnote to Footprint: Obergefell's Call to Reconsider Immigration Law as Family Law, (Forthcoming in Family Law in Britain and America, Brill Publishers, 2016).
• Kari E. Hong, After Obergefell: Finding a Contemporary State Interest in Marriage, (Forthcoming in The Contested Place of Religion in Family Law, Cambridge University Press, 2016).

From SSRN (Non-U.S. Law):

• Surabhi Chopra, Massacres, Majorities and Money: Reparation after Sectarian Violence in India, (Asian Journal of Law and Society, Forthcoming).
• Ketan Modh, Controlling Hate Speech on the Internet: The Indian Perspective, (October 12, 2015).
• Neliana Rodean, Adoption and Same-Sex Couples: New Rights in European Constitutional Space after the Ruling X and Others v. Austria, Direitos Fundamentais & Justica no.29/2014, Oct. 2015).
• Oonagh B. Breen, European Non-Profit Oversight: The Case for Regulating from the Outside In, (Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 3, 2016, Forthcoming).

Australian Anti-Discrimination Law Exempts Religious Foster Care Agency

In OW and OV v Members of the Board of the Wesley Mission Council, (NSWADT, Dec. 10, 2010), the Administrative Decisions Tribunal of the Australian state of New South Wales held that the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act does not require a religiously-sponsored social service organization to approve same-sex couples as foster care providers. Section 56 of the Act exempts any act or practice of a religious body "that conforms to the doctrines of that religion or is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of the adherents of that religion." Here, Wesley Mission believed that a monogamous heterosexual partnership in marriage should be the role model for children for whom it provides foster care. Sydney's Daily Telegraph today reports on the decision.

Obama Cites Sermon on Mount In Support of Civil Unions

Yesterday's Christian Post reports that Sen. Barack Obama created some consternation among evangelicals while campaigning in Ohio last Sunday. He cited Jesus' Sermon on the Mount to back his support for gay civil unions. Responding to a question from a local pastor, Obama said: "I believe in civil unions that allow a same-sex couple to visit each other in a hospital or transfer property to each other. I don't think it should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial, then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." Commenting on Obama's position, Pastor John Barner, manager of pastoral care at Focus on the Family, said: "We believe isolated portions of Scripture should not be used to justify a personal preference or a social position that goes in a different direction than the overall message of Scripture."

Alabama Commission Hires Law Prof To Prosecute Charges Against Chief Justice

As previously reported, earlier this month the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission filed ethics charges against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore over his administrative order to all probate judges telling them that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples despite federal court orders to the contrary. Now, as reported by AL.com, the Judicial Inquiry Commission has hired John Carroll,   professor and former dean of the Cumberland School of Law and former interim director of the Alabama Ethics Commission to prosecute the case against Moore.  In a strongly worded press release yesterday, Moore's attorneys, Liberty Counsel, objected to Carroll because of his service 32 years ago as Legal Director of the Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC includes Liberty Counsel on its list of Extremist Groups.

Court Applies Younger Abstention To Alabama Chief Justice's Suit Over Temporary Removal

In Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Commission of the State of Alabama, (MD AL, Aug. 4, 2016), an Alabama federal district court, applying the Younger abstention doctrine, dismissed a suit brought by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore challenging a provision of the Alabama Constitution that provides a judge formally charged with misconduct shall be disqualified from acting as a judge while the complaint is pending.  Moore is charged with judicial misconduct because of his issuance, after the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision, of an administrative order to all probate judges telling them that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (See prior posting.)   As reported by the Washington Times, Alabama is the only state with an automatic removal provision for judges charged with misconduct.   A hearing before the Judicial Inquiry Commission on the case is scheduled for Monday.

Kim Davis Loses Re-election Bid

According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, in Rowan County, Kentucky on Tuesday, county clerk Kim Davis lost her re-election bid by some 650 votes. Davis garnered national attention in 2015 by her adamant refusal to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples. (See prior posting).

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Kara Loewentheil, When Free Exercise Is A Burden: Protecting 'Third Parties' in Religious Accommodation Law, (August 6, 2013).
• Susan C. Hascall, Islamic Commercial Law and Social Justice: Shari’ah Compliant Companies, Workers’ Rights, and the Living Wage, (St. John's Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 1, 2014).
• Engy Abdelkader, To Judge or Not to Judge: A Comparative Analysis of Islamic Jurisprudential Approaches to Female Judges in the Muslim World (Indonesia, Egypt and Iran), (Fordham International Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Iain T. Benson, Religious Interfaith Work in Canada and South Africa with Particular Focus on the Drafting of a South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms, (HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 69(1), Art. #1319, DOI: org/10.4102/hts.v69i1.1319 (2013)).
• Muhammad Munir, Freedom of Expression, Information, Thought and Religion in Islam and Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), (July 13, 2013).

From SmartCILP:

• William E. Nelson, The Persistence of Puritan Law: Massachusetts, 1660-1760, [Abstract], 49 Willamette Law Review 307-409 (2013).

New Books:

• Steven D. Smith, The Rise and Decline of American Religious Freedom, (Harvard Univ. Press, Feb. 2014).
• Kimberly D. Richman, License to Wed: What Legal Marriage Means to Same-Sex Couples, (NYU Press, Dec. 2013).

Top Church-State and Religious Liberty Developments of 2017

Each year in December, I attempt to pick the most important church-state and religious liberty developments of the past year-- including developments internationally in the mix.  Usually I select the top ten, but this year I have expanded it to 11. The selection obviously involves a good deal of subjective judgment, and I welcome e-mail comment from those who disagree with my choices.  So here are my Top Eleven picks for the rather chaotic year that is currently coming to an end:

1.  President Trump issues and reissues restrictions on immigration and entry of refugees which are challenged in the courts as "Muslim bans."

2. Supreme Court's Trinity Lutheran Church decision opens the possibility of expanded governmental aid to religious institutions.

3. Christian Evangelicals remain core supporters of Donald Trump.

4. Trump Administration expands religious and moral exemptions from ACA contraceptive coverage mandate; court challenges filed.

5. The Masterpiece Cakeshop case attracts over 90 amicus briefs as it is argued before the Supreme Court.  The Christian baker's refusal to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple becomes a symbol of the cultural clash between ideals of religious freedom and equality, even though arguments focus on free speech issues.

6. Congress fails to repeal the Johnson Amendment, despite promises by President Trump.

7. Transgender discrimination and transgender service in the military remain high profile religious and cultural issues in the courts and in the political arena.

8. The Alt-Right march in Charlottesville reveals resurgence of traditional forms of  anti-Semitism.

9. Supreme Court's decision in Advocate Health Care Network v. Stapleton saves retirement plans of religiously affiliated health care networks from unanticipated and costly ERISA coverage.

10. In Israel, government's suspension of an agreement with Judaism's Reform and Conservative movements to construct a separate prayer space at the Western Wall for egalitarian prayer opens a rift with a large segment of the American Jewish community.

11. India's Supreme Court invalidates Triple Talaq marriage for Muslims in India.

For top picks by other observers of the legal and religious scene, see Don Byrd's Top Ten Religious Liberty Stories, and  Religion News Association's Top 10 Religion Stories of the Year Poll.

Roy Moore's Internal Court Memos Disclosed

As previously reported, in May the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission filed a Complaint against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore contending that Moore abused his authority and acted in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics when in January he issued an administrative order to all probate judges telling them that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Now, as reported by The Advocate, pleadings filed with the Judicial Inquiry Commission (full text) include redacted versions of two memos which Moore sent to the other Justices urging them to issue an opinion providing guidance to probate court judges.  He wrote in part:

Obergefell is particularly egregious because it mandates submission in violation of religious conscience (ask Kim Davis). Either go along or be disqualified from holding public office. In the near future Christians like Clerk Kim Davis will be driven out of public life, forced to forsake their faith or their livelihood....

 As Justice Alito stated, Obergefell "will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy" and "to stamp out every vestige of dissent." ... The suppression of all dissent is now underway.

To paraphrase Martin Niemoller: They came for the florists, but I didn't deal in flowers; They came for the bakers, but I didn't bake cakes; They came for a county clerk in Kentucky, but that seemed far away; Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out.

Alabama's CJ Roy Moore Files Brief In Appeal of His Suspension

As previously reported, in September Alabama's 9-member Court of the Judiciary (COJ) concluded that Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore violated various Canons of Judicial Ethics in issuing an order to state probate judges telling them they had a duty under Alabama law to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The COJ suspended Moore from office for the remaining two years of his term.  This decision is now on appeal to a specially constituted bench of the Alabama Supreme Court, the regular Justices having recused themselves. Yesterday, Moore filed a 95-page brief setting out his arguments. The brief summarizes them in part as follows:

The JIC [Judicial Inquiry Commission and the COJ did not have the jurisdiction or authority to review the Administrative Orders of the Chief Justice, as such authority is placed solely in this Court.

The COJ violated Rule 16 by imposing a de facto removal (i.e., permanent suspension without pay) upon Chief Justice Moore without the unanimous concurrence of all sitting members....

All charges against Chief Justice Moore must be dismissed because they have no legal basis and are not supported by clear and convincing evidence.... 

Section 159 of the Alabama Constitution, which imposes an automatic suspension upon the mere filing of a complaint with the COJ, represents a gross violation of due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment....

The JIC violated the confidentiality mandated by the Alabama Constitution and Rule 5 by disclosing information about Chief Justice Moore’s matter prior to filing charges and the penalty should be dismissal of all charges.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the brief.