Alabama Judges Refuse To Issue Same-Sex 'Marriage' Licenses
Taking
the admonishment of legal scholars to heart that the Supreme Court's marriage
ruling in Obergefell is illegitimate, several Alabama
probate judges have petitioned the state
Supreme Court for a judgement upholding
the state constitution and prohibiting the state from issuing same-sex
'marriage' licenses. The judges acknowledge that the state must
"recognize" same-sex 'marriage' licenses issued elsewhere that are
valid under the laws of other states, but that the federal government is
powerless to force the state to itself issue licenses that violate its state
constitution. Saying that the Obergefell ruling was "born from a strained
interpretation of the US Constitution, the new same-sex marriage license is a
child of the federal government, not the State of Alabama...Therefore, the
recognition of same-sex marriage as a civil right under the United States
Constitution vests the U.S. Congress with the authority and responsibility to
enforce the right and to provide the appropriate licensing, the same as it
exclusively does in many other areas of federal law."
The
actions by these Alabama Probate Judges are welcome, because it puts into focus
the constitutional limitations between the three federal branches of
government. It's one thing for the US Supreme Court to issue a ruling, but they
have no power to force other branches of government, or the states, to enforce
it. There is no such thing as "judicial supremacy" under the
constitution. The Supreme Court is supreme only as to its position within the
federal court system. They are not superior to the legislative or judicial
branches of government. These branches of government, and the states as well,
have the power to assess the legitimacy of any ruling issued by the Court and
determine for themselves how, if at all, to give it force and effect. This was
the principle invoked by President Lincoln when he refused to consider the
ruling of the Supreme Court in the Dred
Scott case as binding
on anyone but the specific parties to the case.
Thus, as
the legal scholars pointed out in their statement, the Obergefell ruling should be considered binding
only on the plaintiffs in that particular case. It's up to the Congress to
determine if it wishes to enact statutes providing for the issuance of federal
same-sex 'marriage' licenses. No state can be compelled to issue marriage
licenses in violation of the laws or constitution of that state.
