|
By Bryan K. Fair
Those persons who have been following Chief Justice Roy Moore’s
legal showdown over his installation of the Ten Commandments monument
in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building might be surprised
to read Article 1, Section 3 of the Alabama Constitution:
That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference
shall be given by law to any religious sect or society, denomination
or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to
attend any place of worship or for maintaining any minister or ministry;
that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any
office or public trust under this State; and that the civil rights,
privileges and capacities of any citizen shall not be, in any manner,
affected by his religious principles.
Alabama law is clear. No religion shall be established; no preference
shall be given by law to any sect or denomination. There is no state’s
rights defense for Chief Justice Roy Moore’s actions.
Not only does Alabama law prohibit religious establishments, the
federal Constitution does as well. The First Amendment, made applicable
to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits laws respecting
an establishment of religion. The U.S. Supreme Court has said this
prohibition prevents government actors from giving preferences to
one religion or all religions. The Court has warned that state actors
should not sponsor religious activities, give direct financial aid
to institutions that teach religion, or involve themselves officially
in the affairs of religious institutions.
More important, Article VI of the U.S. Constitution provides that:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
be made in pursuance thereof and all Treaties made, or which shall
be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the
supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be
bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State
to the contrary notwithstanding.
Thus, even if Alabama’s law did not prohibit religious establishments
and religious preferences, the U.S. Constitution is supreme and
judges of each state are bound by federal constitutional law. There
is no exception for Chief Justice Moore. No judicial officer is
above the law.
One will find little, if any, legal support of Chief Justice Moore’s
activities regarding his monument. There is no support in Thomas
Jefferson’s Bill for Religious Liberty. There is
none in James Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance.
Although both men were personally religious, they supported religious
liberty for all. They believed a true religion did not need the
support of government; that alliances between religion and government
would corrupt both; and that each person should be free to decide
which, if any, denomination he would support. For them, religion
was a private matter, protected by keeping government out of it.
Like Jefferson and Madison, we must all be fierce champions of
religious liberty. In our constitutional democracy, all religious
believers of whatever creed, as well as all non-believers, must
stand equally relative to our state and federal governments. There
is no religious caste under United States law. Religious liberty
means no government official can declare what is orthodox in religion.
No judge can legally proclaim his religion as the supreme law of
the state or nation. A government of many people from throughout
the world, with many diverse religions and with many non-believers,
cannot have a declared religion. Chief Justice Moore can exalt God
as a private citizen, but cannot do so when exercising powers derived
from all the people of Alabama, including many who do not subscribe
to his creed. His actions are antithetical to the rule of law and
to religious equality.
Some commentators believe that Chief Justice Moore has staged this
legal drama for personal gain or perhaps higher office. He has garnered
international coverage as the Ten Commandments Judge. Whatever his
motive, few can miss his disregard for the laws of Alabama, the
United States Constitution, and the federal courts. Surely, he is
not above the law.
Chief Justice Moore’s alleged crisis of conscience is of
his own creation. If he could not uphold the laws of Alabama and
of the United States, he should not have taken his oath of office.
If he does not believe in religious liberty and religious equality,
he should not wear the robe of a judge elected to serve all the
people of Alabama.
The eight Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of Alabama, all
who are deeply religious persons of different faiths, have been
able to set aside their religious beliefs and apply the laws of
the people of Alabama. Finally, they have overruled Moore’s
decision to install his monument, directing its removal from the
rotunda. Courage aside, they, too, were bound by state and federal
law.
Their unanimous action will suspend the two year saga and the immediate
threat of fines against the state. However, the broader constitutional
issues remain unresolved because Chief Justice Moore and others
around the country have pledged to continue this fight for God and
because the United States Supreme Court has avoided recent opportunities
to decide this controversy. As with all the other great legal disputes,
the Court will not be able to remain on the sidelines much longer.
Bryan K. Fair is the Thomas E. Skinner Professor
of Law at The University of Alabama School
of Law.
|