Chief Justice Moore refuses to remove 10 commandments

[Brown]

From an editorial in the Montgomery Advertiser:

But if Moore insists on forcing this confrontation by refusing to remove the monument, the state Judicial Inquiry Commission and Court of the Judiciary should begin proceedings against him for violating judicial canons of behavior.

In addition, it is time for the remaining eight members of the Alabama Supreme Court to show some backbone on this issue. Moore is chief justice, but he is still just one among nine.

Two very good points. The federal vs. state contest is the one that is receiving the spotlight, but there may be state-based checks and balances, too.

 

[Upchurch]

I'm still very interested in how they enforce this ruling. When Moore looses, I'm assuming that he will still refuse to remove the monument. What'll happen to him?

 

[Brown]

From CNN:

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Chief Justice Roy Moore's request for a stay Tuesday morning, and Moore immediately asked the panel to reconsider. Tuesday afternoon, the appeals court turned him down once more, saying he had failed to ask for a stay within the legal time frame after it ruled against him July 1.

The judge missed a deadline? Oops.

Note: The headline on the main CNN page, "Ten Commandments shall be moved," is a poor headline. It suggests that there has been some capitulation on this matter, when there appears to have been none. (Grammatical purists might use this headline to demonstrate the distinction between "shall" and "will.")

Nine pastors led about 30 worshippers from across the country in prayer just after midnight, the date by which a federal judge ordered Moore to remove the 5,300-pound monument.

"Even if they should remove this monument -- and God forbid they do -- they'll never be able to remove it from our hearts," said the Rev. Greg Dixon of Indianapolis Baptist Church.

Well, Reverend, should God not forbid it, what lesson ought we learn from that experience? (How dare this guy presume to tell the Almighty what to do?)

 

[Upchurch]

NPR mentioned today was the deadline to remove the monument (which Brown's article confirms). I think it's fairly obvious that Moore won't comply. This story may be far more interesting this time tomorrow.

 

[Checkmite]

Note: The headline on the main CNN page, "Ten Commandments shall be moved," is a poor headline. It suggests that there has been some capitulation on this matter, when there appears to have been none. (Grammatical purists might use this headline to demonstrate the distinction between "shall" and "will.")Well, Reverend, should God not forbid it, what lesson ought we learn from that experience? (How dare this guy presume to tell the Almighty what to do?)

I think it's more of a play on the Ten Commandments themselves; in CNN's tendency to try and come up with cutesy or clever headlines fitting the particular article, they decided to make this article's title sound like a commandment.

 

[Sundog]

I think it's more of a play on the Ten Commandments themselves; in CNN's tendency to try and come up with cutesy or clever headlines fitting the particular article, they decided to make this article's title sound like a commandment.

Ugh. I think you're right.

 

[Checkmite]

Nine pastors led about 30 worshippers from across the country in prayer just after midnight...

30 worshippers from across the country? They're coming out in droves!

 

[DrChinese]

Considering:

1. This judge was elected;
2. The posting of the 10 commandments was to fulfill a campaign promise;
3. The display was essentially intended to endorse the Christian religion;
4. And a poll on MSNBC is running 2 to 1 in favor of letting the 10 commandments remain in place;

My conclusion is that it is a good thing that the first amendment is in place. I don't want the majority to tell me what my religion will be. I wonder if it would be possible to repeal the first amendment? Yikes, there's a scary thought!

 

[Upchurch]

From MSNBC

“This case is not about a monument, it’s not about politics or religion, it’s about the acknowledgment of God,” he said on CBS’ “The Early Show.”
“We must acknowledge God because our constitution says our justice system is established upon God. For (the judge) to say ’I can’t say who God is’ is to disestablish the justice system of this state.”

How is acknowledgement of God not a religious matter?

Originally posted by DrChinese

2. The posting of the 10 commandments was to fulfill a campaign promise;

Actually, Moore's campaign promise was "to restore the moral foundation of law.” (as said in the above link) I wonder if the people of Alabama knew that this is what he meant when he made that promise.

Thompson has said he may fine the state about $5,000 a day if the monument is not removed by the end Wednesday.

Which answers my question about consequences.

He has said it would be permissible for the monument to be moved to a less public site, such as Moore’s office.

Which would be fine by me as well. How is this not an acceptable compromise?

 

[Brown]

Newest update, from CNN:

The appeal was assigned to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has the power to decide the matter himself or take it to the other eight justices for consideration. Kennedy handles appeals from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Alabama, Georgia and Florida.

According to CNN, the issue is whether the high court should temporarily to block enforcement of the lower courts' rulings, pending further appeals. If so, Justice Kennedy's decision would not be a decision on the merits of the case. And, it's fair to say, that there may be legitimate reasons for temporarily staying enforcement of the lower courts' orders.

 

[zakur]

Here is an example of how politically-charged this issue is, and how enmeshed it is with religion. From this article:

Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor told the Mobile Register that he expects the monument "to be removed very soon." Pryor has said that while he supports the monument and believes it is constitutional he is bound to uphold the law.

"I don't want to speculate on how or exactly when it is going to happen," Pryor told the newspaper. "I will be advising the appropriate state officials on how to proceed, and I expect they will do so."

Pryor, a pro-life Catholic, has been nominated for a seat on the federal court of appeals and has gained the support of pro-family voters nationwide, although his position on the monument has drawn the scorn of some pro-family activists.

Vision America co-chairman Rick Scarborough criticized Pryor.

"The Attorney General of Alabama says he personally agrees with ... Moore, but must uphold the law, sounding very much like Pontius Pilate as he found no fault in our Lord, then gave him over to be crucified," Scarborough wrote in a statement on the Vision America website Aug. 19.

Whoever has made the argument that this stink is bordering on idolatry hit the nail on the head. Here we have a guy comparing the Alabama AG's position on removal of the monument to Pilate's crucifixion of Christ.

Also from the same article:

The monument is about the size of a washing machine.

I've said it here before. This oft-used size comparison tickles me. I don't know why.

 

[arcticpenguin]

Supreme Court rejects 10 commandments appeal

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court refused Wednesday to block the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from an Alabama judicial building, rejecting a last-minute appeal from the judge who installed the display.

The justices said they would not be drawn, at least for now, into a dispute over whether the monument violates the Constitution's ban on government promotion of religion.

The high court was Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's last hope to avoid a federal judge's midnight deadline to remove the display. It was unclear if Moore would comply. Other state officials have said the monument would be moved.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Sounds like the Supreme Court's decision was fair and balanced!

 

[WildCat]

This monument to Moore's stupidity should be removed as cheaply as possible for the taxpayers of Alabama. You know, w/ a jackhammer so it can be carted away in small pieces. Or maybe those 30 protestors and the 9 pastors would donate the money to take it away in one piece?
Moore is the worst thing to happen to Alabama since George Wallace.

 

[Brown]

The latest, from Yahoo and Reuters:

Tom Parker, Moore's spokesman, said Alabama's top judge had "no intention" of removing the monument and that it would be guarded by security personnel on Thursday.
...
Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor has vowed to obey the court order, but Moore's supporters have shown equal determination to prevent any effort to move the monument.

It's time for the ethics board in Alabama to review the canons of judicial ethics. I do not know what ethical code applies in Alabama, but judical ethics codes typically require a judge to uphold the integrity of the judicial branch and to carry out all judicial duties. A flat refusal to obey properly entered orders is no longer a matter of honest disagreement about the law, but it is a matter of fitness to hold office.

Moore has not obtained a stay, but this is not unusual. Stays are supposed to be hard to get. (I say "supposed to be" because there is one famous case in which the Supreme Court granted a stay quite improvidently. That case involved the stay of recounting of the Florida vote, which effectively decided the presidential election of 2000.) Even though he has failed to obtain a stay, Moore may be entitled to try to get the Supreme Court to hear his case and get a decision on the merits. This entitlement, however, does not give him the right to refuse to follow duly entered judicial orders, no matter how much he may disagree with them.

 

[Brown]

From the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

CANON 1.
A JUDGE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY
AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY.
An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing, and should himself observe, high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.

The judges that I know hold this principle, which is not unique to Alabama, in the highest regard.

CANON 2.
A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE
APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL HIS ACTIVITIES.
A. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
...
C. A judge should not allow his family, social, or other relationships to influence his judicial conduct or judgment. He should not lend the prestige of his office to advance the private interests of others; nor should he convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him.

The circumstances under which the monument was erected are suspect. It was erected with deliberate stealth, with only a religious group being given notice of its erection.

CANON 3.
A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES
OF HIS OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY.
The judicial activities of a judge take precedence over his other activities. His judicial duties include all the duties of his office prescribed by law.

There does not appear to be any rule that specifically says that a judge shall not be willfully in contempt of court, but neither is does there appear to be a rule that specifically says that a judge shall not commit a serious crime. Refusal to carry out legal orders may result in contempt of court, and I doubt that there is any judge in this country (with the possible exception of Moore) who would consider a contempt citation as irrelevant to the question of judical fitness.

 

[Tony]

For the good of the country, Moore needs to comply.

I disagree, for the good of the country he should NOT comply, the ACLU and the Supreme Court are engaging in judicial tyranny. There needs to be another civil war, the un-constitutional elements of America have to be eliminated if our country is going to be the free country that it was intended to be.

 

[Cinorjer]

I disagree, for the good of the country he should NOT comply, the ACLU and the Supreme Court are engaging in judicial tyranny. There needs to be another civil war, the un-constitutional elements of America have to be eliminated if our country is going to be the free country that it was intended to be.

For "the good of the country" there needs to be a civil war? Certain "elements" have to be eliminated so this can be a free country? Wecome to Fanaticism 101, folks.
Jerry

 

[Mr Manifesto]

JIHAD!

Oops... Wrong religion. Uhm, what's X-ian for 'Jihad'?


FOR THE GLOOOORY OF RONALD REAGAN!

 

[Tricky]

There needs to be another civil war, the un-constitutional elements of America have to be eliminated if our country is going to be the free country that it was intended to be.

Gosh Tony. We'll miss you.