Liberty Counsel Mat Staver is flailing his arms in the air trying to get our attention! “Hey people, Yoo Hoo! Remember me?” he says in an apparent panic. “The media seems to have missed the significance of Alabama’s historic action on same sex marriage! Didn’t you see that I won? It was a
clear victory!” he announced.
http://www.christianexaminer.com/article/liberty-counsel-news-media-missed-alabamas-supreme-court-historic-action-on-same-sex-marriage/50483.htm
The next thing he’ll probably do is announce Napoleon’s
clear victory at Waterloo.
Staver’s petition for writ of mandamus was dismissed. But Staver doesn’t want you to acknowledge that inconvenient fact … no, no, no! He wants you to focus on Justice Moore’s prior unilateral act ordering all probate judges, except probate judges subject to a federal court injunction, to enforce Alabama statutes banning same-sex marriage. Because a federal court order exists enjoining ALL state probate judges from enforcing those unconstitutional statutes, Justice Moore’s order accordingly applies to no one. Thus, it has no force or effect whatsoever. The ACLU’s motion to reverse that order was rendered moot and was dismissed along with Mat Staver’s petition.
Let’s take a look at the alleged “clear victory”:
http://lc.org//PDFs/Attachments2PRsLAs/2016/030416OrderDismissingPetitionsandMotionswConcurrence.pdf
It says, “IT IS ORDERED that all pending motions
and petitions are dismissed.”
Justice Moore concurred with that Order and wrote a lengthy dissertation ending with the “clearly wrong” conclusion that his prior unilateral action ordering state probate judges (those who are not subject to a federal injunction) to enforce anti-gay state marriage laws, somehow survives to “uphold the constitutionality” of anti-gay state marriage statutes even though there are no probate judges who are subject to Moore’s order because all probate judges are subject to a federal injunction. The only thing Justice Moore’s writing shows us is that he lacks reason and impartiality shouldn’t be sitting on the bench or holding any public office at all.
On page 107 of the document, Justice Stuart wrote his special concurrence telling the whole world that Justice Moore’s writing explains Justice Moore’s vote
only. He is telling the whole word that he doesn’t want to be associated with that writing. He wrote, “Attributing the reasoning and explanation in a special concurrence or a dissent to a Justice who did not issue or join the writing
is erroneous and unjust.”
Justice Shaw’s special concurrence starts at page 146. Justice Shaw noted that all of Alabama’s probate court judges are subject to an injunction forbidding them from enforcing Alabama’s ban on the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses. Justice Shaw wrote, “[T]he law is well settled that this Court can do nothing to allow the probate judges of this State to ignore a federal court injunction and a Supreme Court decision.” But, that’s the relief Mat Staver requested in his petition for mandamus. He was asking the Alabama Supreme Court to mandate all probate judges to violate a federal court injunction and ignore a Supreme Court decision. Justice Shaw wrote, “
Our decision today refuses to grant the relief requested and should not be construed to mean anything else.” (Liberty Counsel Mat Staver apparently didn’t see that when he declared a “clear victory”.)
Justice Shaw rebuked the content of Justice Moore’s arguments. He said, “I charitably say the arguments are ‘unconvincing’ because
virtually no one has ever agreed with their rationales.” (See Page 155.) He writes other meaningful stuff … feel free to read it.
CLEAR VICTORY for Mat Staver? Not even close.
they take more than they give fyi
