Posted on 08/22/2003 10:42:26 PM PDT by anymouse
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - Alabama's chief justice was suspended Friday for his refusal to obey a federal court order to remove his Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of his courthouse.
Roy Moore was automatically suspended with pay when the nine-member Judicial Inquiry Commission referred an ethics complaint against him to the Court of the Judiciary, which holds trial-like proceedings and can discipline and remove judges.
Ruby Crowe, an assistant clerk working with the court, said Moore will have 30 days to respond.
Moore met with the commission earlier Friday as about 100 of his supporters, several blocks away at the federal courthouse, ripped and burned a copy of U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson's order for the monument's removal.
Moore said he told the commission that he upheld his oath of office by acknowledging God. Moore has said Thompson has no authority to tell the state's chief justice to remove the monument.
Moore had no immediate comment after his suspension was announced. His spokesman, Tom Parker, said Moore's attorneys would respond to the complaint Monday.
Although Moore's supporters have said they will try to prevent court officials from moving the monument, Moore's attorneys offered assurances that their client will not interfere with the removal during a conference call Friday with Thompson, two plaintiffs' attorneys who also took part in the call said.
A Moore spokesman said Friday that the justice still intends to formally appeal the order to the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites).
Attorney General Bill Pryor said the public corruption and white collar crime unit in his office will handle the prosecution of Moore, who cannot perform any judicial duties while disqualified. Pryor said senior Associate Justice Gorman Houston will perform the chief justice's duties.
"I'm not happy we have to deal with these matters, but it is part of our duties and we will continue to do so," Pryor said.
Thompson ruled last year that the monument, installed by Moore in a highly visible public spot in the Alabama Judicial Building, violates the Constitution's ban on government promotion of a religious doctrine.
Thompson had ordered the monument removed by Wednesday the same day the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Moore's appeal for an emergency stay.
The state Supreme Court's eight associate justices, meanwhile, overruled Moore and ordered the monument out of the rotunda.
Joe Conn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which sued to remove the monument, said Moore brought the suspension on himself.
"He knew all along that state court judges cannot defy the federal courts and yet he went ahead with this anyway," Conn said.
A Moore supporter, Alabama Christian Coalition president John Giles, said the commission was "trying to take down one of America's finest."
The monument remained in the rotunda Friday as court officials discussed where in the building the 5,300-pound granite marker could be moved and given proper security. Thompson said it could be moved to a private place in the building.
The ethics complaint, filed by Montgomery lawyer Stephen Glassroth, now goes to the Court of the Judiciary, a panel currently made up of four judges, three lawyers and two non-lawyers that has handled numerous judicial ethics cases.
Attorneys who sued to get the monument out of the rotunda, meanwhile, put their contempt filing against Moore on hold, now that Alabama Supreme Court associate justices have agreed to move the marker.
Moore supporters have held an around-the-clock vigil since Wednesday, and said they planned to continue to prevent the monument from being moved.
On Friday, about 100 protesters moved from the steps of the judicial building to a sidewalk in front of the federal courthouse, where Thompson works. Some ripped to pieces and burned a copy of Thompson's ruling. Demonstrators also held a mock trial, in which Thompson was charged with breaking the law of God.
"We hold you, Judge Thompson, and the United States Supreme Court in contempt of God's law," said Flip Benham, director of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue.
Inside the state judicial building, court officials were trying to determine where the monument would go and when it would be moved.
Ayesha Khan, an attorney for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, one of the groups seeking removal of the monument, said Thompson told the parties in a conference call Friday that he would schedule another conference call for late next week. She said plaintiffs would drop their request to hold Moore in contempt, or fine the state, if the monument is moved by then.
"Our concern all along has been compliance with the Constitution. Once the monument has been removed, our concerns will have been addressed," she said.
Khan said the attorney general, speaking for the eight associate justices who overruled Moore, told Thompson that building officials were looking for the best location for the monument and considering security problems that might occur because of the ongoing demonstrations.
One of the demonstrators, retired Birmingham school teacher Murray Phillips, said she knows the monument will probably be gone from the rotunda soon.
"I'm upset, but I'm not surprised. At least I am going to be able to say to my grandchildren that at least I tried to do something," Phillips said.
The 1st admendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Religion as defined by Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary: 1) The service and worship of God or the supernatural, 2) commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance, 3) a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs and practices; 4) a cause, principle, or system of belief held to with ardor and faith
Congress as defined by Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary: The supreme legislative body of a nation and especially of a republic.
So for the literal meaning challenged the 1st Admendment really reads thusly: The supreme legislative body of this nation shall make no law respecting an establishment of 1) The service and worship of God or the supernatural, 2) commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance, 3) a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs and practices; 4) a cause, principle, or system of belief held to with ardor and faith, or prohibiting the free exercise of 1) The service and worship of God or the supernatural, 2) commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance, 3) a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs and practices; 4) a cause, principle, or system of belief held to with ardor and faith; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
So who's not following the rule of law? It appears Myron Thompson and the ACLU are not following the rule of law.
Just because Paul said to obey the authorities when it didn't force you to go against God's commandments doesn't mean that those authorities weren't hell bound. In fact, many times God is making sure they are.
Paul also wrote: "Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden... What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction?" -- Romans 9:18,23
The story goes on to describe how the administrators and satraps went and tricked the King into issuing a decree that unbeknownst to the King was specifically intended as an ad hominem, ex post facto law to be used against Daniel. The law also forbid Daniel and believers from doing that which we cannot help but do (which I have explained on this thread are the times where disobediance to the laws of man are understandable, as Paul (and others) later demonstrated).
These are very different circumstances than the situation in Alabama. As I've said repeatedly, I am all for seeking to overturn these laws through the courts and supported Judge Moore all the way up until the time he lost his lawsuit at the state and federal levels. Now he is seeking to break the law (thus his recent suspension) on an issue, that were he to cede, would not prevent one single person in Alabama from hearing or living out the Gospel. Two issues here: U.S. law and the Gospel. I am not for disobeying the courts and laws of the U.S. whenever people disagree (save for when it denies the right of Christians to live in a way which, as people controlled by a Spirit, we cannot help but live), and this case does not inhibit the Gospel (my bigger concern) at all.
I've said repeatedly I supported them up until they lost the court rulings at every level. The people supporting their disobeying the rulings need to be consistent and support, or at least say nothing, when some leftist anarchists refuse to obey the next court ruling they disagree with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.