Roy Moore suspended... again.

[TLK Valentine]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/judge-roy-moore-alabama-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0

An Alabama judicial oversight body on Friday filed a formal complaint against Roy S. Moore, the chief justice of the state’s Supreme Court, charging that he had “flagrantly disregarded and abused his authority” in ordering the state’s probate judges to refuse applications for marriage licenses by same-sex couples.

As a result of the charges, Chief Justice Moore, 69, has been immediately suspended from the bench and is facing a potential hearing before the state’s Court of the Judiciary, a panel of judges, lawyers and other appointees. Among possible outcomes at such a hearing would be his removal from office.

All the usual caveats are in place -- this is not a discussion on gay marriage, but on whether or not Roy Moore overstepped his authority as a state judge by continuing to openly defy federal law -- and by ordering those under him to do likewise.

For my part, I say, sic semper tyrannis.

Thoughts?

 

[MennoSota]

Does Alabama have a law that acknowledges same-sex unions? If not, there is no requirement that the judge allow them. The federal government is subservient to the States in regard to marriage license. The judge would be within his legal rights.

 

[Belk]

Does Alabama have a law that acknowledges same-sex unions? If not, there is no requirement that the judge allow them. The federal government is subservient to the States in regard to marriage license. The judge would be within his legal rights.

The federal government overrides the state in constitutional rulings. Hence why interracial marriage bans at the state level were struck down.

 

[Armoured]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/judge-roy-moore-alabama-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0



All the usual caveats are in place -- this is not a discussion on gay marriage, but on whether or not Roy Moore overstepped his authority as a state judge by continuing to openly defy federal law -- and by ordering those under him to do likewise.

For my part, I say, sic semper tyrannis.

Thoughts?

Can't you guys send him, Trump and Arpaio (sp?) off to an island somewhere where they can be an arm each of their own government and leave normal people alone?

 

[MennoSota]

The federal government overrides the state in constitutional rulings. Hence why interracial marriage bans at the state level were struck down.

So there is no law on the issue. Since there is no law, there is nothing that makes this judges action illegal.

The State of Alabama will need to rewrite their law. Until then, there is no law to go by. States control marriage licenses, not the Federal government. The judge is well within his legal rights and he knows it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So there is no law on the issue. Since there is no law, there is nothing that makes this judges action illegal.

There's a legal decision that says it's protected by the Constitution.

The State of Alabama will need to rewrite their law. Until then, there is no law to go by. States control marriage licenses, not the Federal government. The judge is well within his legal rights and he knows it.

The judge is ordering his subordinates to defy the Supreme Court.

 

[Belk]

So there is no law on the issue. Since there is no law, there is nothing that makes this judges action illegal.

The State of Alabama will need to rewrite their law. Until then, there is no law to go by. States control marriage licenses, not the Federal government. The judge is well within his legal rights and he knows it.

The supreme court says otherwise. The judge is not within his rights which is why he has been suspended.

 

[MennoSota]

There's a legal decision that says it's protected by the Constitution.



The judge is ordering his subordinates to defy the Supreme Court.

Their is no law written. Until a law is written, the judge is not legally in the wrong.
The SCOTUS did not make a law. They only said the current law was unconstitutional.
This judge is not breaking any Alabama laws.
That's the great thing about checks and balances, it helps keep one branch from gaining full power. Regardless if the SCOTUS wants to legislate morality from the bench, they are checked by the fact that they don't make laws for this country.
The judge is within the law.

 

[MennoSota]

The supreme court says otherwise. The judge is not within his rights which is why he has been suspended.

The SCOTUS is not the law making body of our government. Why do you want a theocracy where the SCOTUS acts as the high priests of morality?

 

[Belk]

The SCOTUS is not the law making body of our government.

You don't say.

The
Why do you want a theocracy where the SCOTUS acts as the high priests of morality?

Where on earth did you come up with the delusion that I wanted this?

 

[MennoSota]

You don't say.



Where on earth did you come up with the delusion that I wanted this?

You are advocating that people follow a court ruling as though it is law, which it isn't. The SCOTUS legislated morality from the bench and you are applauding it. Determining morality is an act of religion. If the SCOTUS can tell us what is moral or not, then they have become religious priests and thus have thrown down the 1st Amendment.
Since you applaud their religious ruling, you are advocating for a theocracy.
All hail the church of humanism.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Their is no law written. Until a law is written, the judge is not legally in the wrong.

That is utter nonsense, and you would do well to study how the US legal system actually works.

The SCOTUS did not make a law. They only said the current law was unconstitutional.

The law in question being the one which prohibited SSM... Alabama has a law which prohibits SSM. Connect the dots.

This judge is not breaking any Alabama laws.

He's ignoring the 14th Amendment and ordering his (now former) subordinates to do likewise. That's a violation of federal law.

Or did you not realize the Constitution is the Supreme law of the land?

That's the great thing about checks and balances, it helps keep one branch from gaining full power. Regardless if the SCOTUS wants to legislate morality from the bench, they are checked by the fact that they don't make laws for this country.

They interpret the laws that already exist.

The judge is within the law.

Actually, he's not...And who keeps Roy Moore in check?

 

[MennoSota]

That is utter nonsense, and you would do well to study how the US legal system actually works.



The law in question being the one which prohibited SSM... Alabama has a law which prohibits SSM. Connect the dots.





He's ignoring the 14th Amendment and ordering his (now former) subordinates to do likewise. That's a violation of federal law.

Or did you not realize the Constitution is the Supreme law of the land?



They interpret the laws that already exist.



Actually, he's not...And who keeps Roy Moore in check?

He's not ignoring the 14th Ammendment. The 14th Ammendment has nothing to do with homosexual choices and unions.

Try again.

 

[Belk]

You are advocating that people follow a court ruling as though it is law, which it isn't. The SCOTUS legislated morality from the bench and you are applauding it. Determining morality is an act of religion. If the SCOTUS can tell us what is moral or not, then they have become religious priests and thus have thrown down the 1st Amendment.
Since you applaud their religious ruling, you are advocating for a theocracy.
All hail the church of humanism.

OBKB. You have fun with that.

 

[MennoSota]

Have fun promoting your Humanist theocracy.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He's not ignoring the 14th Ammendment. The 14th Ammendment has nothing to do with homosexual choices and unions.

Try again.

It has to do with State courts deferring to federal courts.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Have fun promoting your Humanist theocracy.

"Humanist theocracy." We accept your surrender.

 

[TerranceL]

I'm so surprised that this joke has once again proven he's a joke.

 

[MennoSota]

LOL, the ignorance of the spiritually dead leads to the foolish belief that humanism has won.

Keep worshipping your human gods.

Roy Moore didn't break any laws. He just followed the laws that are already established in Alabama.

 

[MennoSota]

It has to do with State courts deferring to federal courts.

Once again, no laws have been made. The judge didn't break any laws.