Alabama Supreme Court orders halt to gay marriage, violating federal rulings

On Tuesday night, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled, 7-1, to bar state probate judges from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The order is a direct violation of several orders by U.S. District Judge Callie Granade, allowed to take effect by the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices also issued a lengthy defense of defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sat out the vote, but the six-justice majority asserted in its unsigned ruling that the state court could "interpret the United States Constitution independently from, and even contrary to, federal courts." One judge on the all-Republican court partially assented, and Justice James Gregory Shaw was the lone dissenter, warning his colleagues that they are overstepping their authority and "and potentially unsettling established principles of law."

Since Moore originally ordered the probate judges to disregard Judge Granade's ruling, Alabama has been a confusing jumble of marriage law. Before Tuesday's ruling, at least 48 of the state's 67 counties were issuing same-sex marriage licenses. The state order didn't say what it proposes to do with the "purported" same-sex marriage licenses already issued.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

The gay-rights group Human Rights Campaign called the ruling "bizarre," "outrageous and baffling," and "extralegal." "The Alabama State Supreme Court does not have the authority to interfere with a federal court order," legal director Sarah Warbelow said in a statement.

University of Alabama constitutional law professor Ronald Krotoszynski agreed, suggesting to The New York Times that the state court is "trying to lobby" the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of its big same-sex marriage case this term. "You might read it as kind of a brief or a political document to the Supreme Court of the United States," he said.