Now a Federal Judge Wants to Extend Her Jurisdiction Beyond Her District
This week, U.S. District Judge Callie Granade attempted to permanently overrule the Alabama Supreme Court regarding the issue of marriage.
She issued an order to bar state officials from enforcing the provision of the Alabama Constitution that bans same-sex “marriage.” But, as several attorneys and legal organizations have pointed out, she lacks the jurisdiction to do so.
“Judge Granade has no authority over the Alabama Supreme Court but she is acting as if she is the top appellate court in the state,” Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel said. “The only Court that has authority over the Alabama Supreme Court is the U.S. Supreme Court. The other parties are free to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case but they have refused to do so. Judge Granade is not the U.S. Supreme Court.”
The Alabama-based Foundation for Moral Law, a legal institution dedicated to the defense of the Constitution as written and understood by its Framers, took issue with Granade’s order, as well. Foundation President Kayla Moore, wife of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore—who faces removal from the state Supreme Court for his role in the matter—said the judge’s jurisdiction extends over only the Southern District of Alabama, and she lacks the authority to bind officials in other parts of the state.
“It’s not over just because Judge Granade says it’s over,” she added. “In fact, her order acknowledges that the Alabama Supreme Court’s March 4, 2016, order denying the parties’ motions and petitions did not vacate or set aside the Court’s March 3, 2015, writ of mandamus directing probate judges to follow the Alabama Constitution. That’s what we’ve been saying all along.”
Kayla Moore’s comments are with regard to events that followed the conflicting 2015 orders of the Alabama Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. Probate judges had sought clarity as to what they should do.
In January 2016, Chief Justice Moore issued an administrative order advising the judges that the 2015 orders remained in effect and the Alabama Supreme Court would be issuing an opinion on their final disposition. That came in March 2016, when the Alabama Supreme Court left its 2015 orders in place.
So as Staver has also been pointing out, that calls into question the actions of the state’s Judicial Inquiry Commission against Chief Justice Moore.
“While it was not her intent to help the case of Chief Justice Roy Moore, federal Judge Granade’s order proves our argument that the charges against the Chief have no foundation,” he said. “How then can the Judicial Inquiry Commission single out Chief Justice Moore when he issued an accurate order regarding the status of the case and when the Court as a whole agreed with him? The JIC is not a court of law, is wrong on the law, and has no business wading into legal disputes. The JIC charge is politically motivated and must be dismissed.”
Foundation for Moral Law Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe said “much more than same-sex marriage is at stake here,” because the case now involves the federal-versus-state relationship within the American constitutional system. He said the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell opinion was “procured by illegitimate means.”
“Two justices who had personally performed same-sex marriages refused to recuse, and it is utterly devoid of constitutional support,” he said. “Article VI, Section 2 says the Constitution, federal laws and federal treaties are the supreme law of the land; it says nothing of federal court decisions. Nothing in the Constitution says every federal, state and local official has to march to the beat of a federal judge’s drum, no matter how erratic that drumbeat may be.”
