Ex-SJC chiefs rap Moore for violating gay marriage ruling
The judiciary is only as strong as society’s willingness to abide by its decisions.
So when former Alabama Chief Justice and current Senate candidate Roy Moore instructed judges in his state to defy federal court orders on same-sex marriage, it was a jarring blow to a fundamental tenet of democracy.
That was the position taken by former Bay State chief justices Roderick Ireland and Margaret Marshall, who last night celebrated the Supreme Judicial Court’s 325th anniversary.
“While he was sitting as a justice, and when the court issued the order, he declined to obey judicial orders,” Marshall said, referring to Moore’s decision to tell Alabama probate judges to ignore the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling that declared gay marriage legal nationwide. “I think that should trouble you.”
Marshall penned the SJC’s landmark 2003 decision legalizing gay marriage in Massachusetts, and Ireland, the state’s first African- American chief justice, joined her in the 4-3 ruling. They took the stage last night at the John Adams Courthouse with current Chief Justice Ralph Gants and Herbert Wilkins, who led the court from 1996 to 1999.
Ireland speculated that Moore probably made the controversial decision because he presided in a state that still elects its judges.
“He was playing to the electorate,” he said, adding later, “He knew when he told the trial judges not to accept the same-sex ruling that the electorate would re-elect him because that played right to their sense of religion and propriety.”
Moore has been embroiled in controversy after reports surfaced alleging that he sexually assaulted minors in the past. The judges, who were asked about Moore by WBUR moderator Tom Ashbrook, kept the focus on how he undercut the judiciary with his gay-marriage decision.
The judges also noted how the SJC has stayed away from the kind of hyper-political ideologies that tend to crop up in jurisdictions where judges are elected and even on the Supreme Court.
Ireland also said the oncesacrosanct idea that judges and their decisions are to be obeyed is no longer on stable ground.
“I think reasonable people will reach the conclusion that the court decisions should be obeyed, but you look around at the tenor of the times, and people are suggesting that maybe you don’t have to follow the law,” he said.
And what happens if society heads in that direction? “Chaos,” Ireland said. As his powerful comment hung in the air, a heavy silence fell over the room.