Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, ordered suspended for the remainder of his elected term in a move that critics have condemned as extralegal, isn’t going away quietly.
He’s not only filed an appeal of the ruling from the Court of the Judiciary, he’s also asking that four justices on the current state Supreme Court and three former justices be disqualified from hearing his arguments.
The individuals are named in a sealed affidavit, according to Moore’s representatives at Liberty Counsel.
“Prior to the current case, the past practice has been that the justices recuse when asked to review a matter involving a sitting justice of the court,” Liberty Counsel explained.
And Moore is asking that “replacement justices be selected by a random and publicly observable drawing from a pool of sitting circuit judges.”
“The chief justice wants to have a fair and objective panel of nine judges to review his appeal. Anyone who has sat on any prior proceedings involving this case and anyone who has a conflict of interest should recuse and not preside over this appeal. Chief Justice Moore is asking for a fair and transparent process,” said Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel.
Staver said suspending Moore for the remainder of his term is a “miscarriage of justice and the same as removal.”
“The COJ lacked the unanimous votes to remove the chief, so the majority instead chose to ignore the law and the rules,” he said. “We will continue the fight for justice to prevail in this case.”
Liberty Counsel said a new panel of judges will need to convene to hear the case “and all the sitting justices should be recused.”
The state’s Judicial Inquiry Commission, at the behest of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has publicly criticized Moore for years and repeatedly has worked to oppose him and other conservative justices, accused Moore of violating judicial ethics in an order from last winter to probate judges regarding a marriage case.
The COJ failed to obtain the required 9-0 vote to remove Moore from office.
“Absent a 9-0 unanimous vote, the COJ cannot remove a judge from the bench. But in an unbelievable violation of the law, the COJ suspended him without pay for the remainder of his term. When his term expires, he will be ineligible to run again for election as judge due to his age. So the suspension until the end of his term is a de facto removal from the bench,” Liberty Counsel explained.
The COJ decision was under the leadership of J. Michael Joiner, a criminal appeals judge, who was unresponsive to a WND request for comment.
But Staver blasted the COJ’s apparent bias. “The rule of law should trump political agendas. Sadly, today that is not the case. What this decision tells us today is that Montgomery has a long way to go to weed out abuse of political power and restore the rule of law,” he said.
The COJ decision said: “A majority of this court also agrees with the JIC that the only appropriate sanction for Chief Justice Moore is removal from office. Removal of a judge from office, however, requires ‘the concurrence of all members sitting.’ Rule 16, R.P. Ala. Ct. Jud.”
Staver explained: “It is clear there was not a unanimous concurrence to remove the chief from office, so the COJ suspends him for the remainder of his term. In other words, the COJ did what the rules say they cannot do. There is no meaningful difference between suspension for the remaining of the term and removal from office.”
He said the evidence presented at a recent hearing showed Moore “should be reinstated.”
“He did nothing wrong. The JIC presented no live testimony or affidavits. The charges should be dismissed. Today’s decision by the COJ to suspend the chief for the rest of his term throws the rule of law out the window. This system must be changed.”
The ruling from the COJ was signed by W.N. Watson, L. Gwaltney McCollum, Laura Petro, Lucinda Samford Cannon, Joiner, Jeffrey Brock, James W. Woodrock Jr., S. Dagnal Rowe and Daryl O. Perkins.
Moore told WND that the case was flawed from the beginning, and, consequently, the attorney general refused to prosecute.
“This was a politically motivated effort by radical homosexual and transgender groups to remove me as chief justice of the Supreme Court because of outspoken opposition to their immoral agenda,” Moore said. “This opinion violates not only the legal standards of evidence but also the rule of law which states that no judge can be removed from office except by unanimous vote.”
In defense of Moore, Liberty Counsel contended the basis of SPLC’s attack on Moore is nothing but his personal stance on marriage.
SPLC has a long history of unrelenting attacks on anyone who fails to toe its line of support for homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.” The organization, in pursuit of that agenda, earlier this year had to backtrack when it labeled Dr. Ben Carson, former GOP presidential candidate and one of the most admired men in America, as a “hater” because of his views on marriage.
All six of the charges against Moore stem from his administrative order that, Liberty Counsel said, “merely advised probate judges that the prior Alabama Supreme Court orders from 2015 remained in effect while the court was reviewing the matter.”
The JIC had claimed Moore’s order “directed the probate judges to violate federal court rulings,” but Liberty quoted from its text, where Moore said, “I am not at liberty to provide any guidance to the Alabama probate judges on the effect of Obergefell on the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court. That issue remains before the entire court which continues to deliberate on the matter.”
Liberty Counsel, which also has been a target if SPLC attacks, said in a report last fall that by “falsely and recklessly labeling Christian ministries as ‘hate groups,’ the SPLC is directly responsible for the case of a man who intended to commit mass murder targeted against a policy organization in Washington, D.C.”
“On August 15, 2012, Floyd Corkins went to the Family Research Council with a gun and a bag filled with ammunition and Chick-fil-A sandwiches. His stated purpose was to kill as many employees of the Family Research Council as possible and then to smear Chick-fil-A sandwiches in their faces (because the founder of the food chain said he believed in marriage as a man and a woman). Fortunately, Mr. Corkins was stopped by the security guard, who was shot in the process. Corkins is now serving time in prison. Mr. Corkins admitted to the court that he learned of the Family Research Council by reading the SPLC’s hate map.”
WND reported only weeks ago a poll showed Moore was the favorite among Republicans in Alabama for governor in 2018.
According to a Yellowhammernews report, Moore has huge support among Alabama Republicans.
“The Alabama Forestry Association, one of the state’s most influential conservative groups, commissioned a survey of 600 likely Republican primary voters and found that Moore’s sky-high name recognition makes him the GOP’s current top choice for governor in 2018 in what promises to be a crowded field,” the report said.
The report said 28 percent picked Moore, 24 percent were undecided, Attorney General Luther Strange got 9 percent and another handful each drew support in the single digits.
The report said Moore was viewed favorably by 58 percent of the respondents, unfavorably by 29 percent and 11 percent had no opinion.
