Court allows North Carolina gay marriage recusal law

RALEIGH, N.C. — North Carolina’s law allowing magistrates to refuse to perform same-sex marriages survived a challenge Wednesday when an appeals court determined that three couples weren’t harmed enough to fight the state’s use of taxpayer money to apply the law.

The Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed their lawsuit, rejecting arguments by the couples that their status as North Carolina taxpayers gives them standing to sue. Because two of the couples are already married and the third is engaged, the law hasn’t hurt their ability to wed, the judges said.

“The outcome here is in no way a comment on same-sex marriage as a matter of social policy. The case before us is far more technical—whether plaintiffs, simply by virtue of their status as state taxpayers, have alleged a personal, particularized injury for the purposes of [federal court] standing,” Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote in the 3-0 ruling.

The plaintiffs are considering whether to seek a hearing before the full 4th Circuit or take their challenge of the law known as SB2 to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to the Campaign for Southern Equality.

“The fundamental question here is when a legislature acts to target a specific community, which is clearly what happened with SB2, there has to be a way to challenge a law that’s based on animus and bias. And SB2 absolutely fits those criteria,” the group’s executive director, the Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, said in an interview.

The 2015 law allows magistrates to recuse themselves from performing marriages “based on any sincerely held religious objections.” Those who file such notices are prevented from officiating at all marriages — gay and heterosexual — for at least six months. The law also allows some court clerks to decline to issue marriage licenses.

Two other states — Utah and Mississippi — also have laws allowing public officials to recuse themselves from performing marriages because of religious beliefs, according to a tally by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The North Carolina plaintiffs had challenged the law’s authorization of magistrates to travel between jurisdictions to perform marriages — at taxpayer expense — if counterparts in another area all recuse themselves.