This has nothing to do with the Tenth Amendment or states' rights. The federal government didn't remove Moore from his position for insubordination - the State of Alabama did, twice.
If Moore's conscience couldn't permit him to follow a lawful court order, his duty was to resign. Not to defy the law, as an officer of the court. Alabama removed him, in order to uphold the rule of law.
I'll say it again - Moore deserves no respect from conservatives. The rule of law is the glue that keeps our Republic together, not Moore's brand of religion-fueled nihilism.
Yawn. You're just pissed because you disagreed with the Alabama court ruling and Alabama Law.
Gee whiz, if the Governor had had the stones George Wallace did, there would have been Federal Troops down there making sure homosexuals could get a "marriage" license.
It would have been more honest than just throwing Moore under the bus.
The order in question:
“Effective immediately, no probate judge of the State of Alabama nor any agent or employee of any Alabama probate judge shall issue or recognize a marriage license that is inconsistent” with the Alabama Constitution or state law, the chief justice wrote in his order.
To be accurate, the ruling against Alabama law came from a District Court, not the SCOTUS. The SCOTUS didn't rule until its 5-4 decision a couple years later.
Since Judge Granade moved last month to declare Alabama’s prohibitions against same-sex marriage unconstitutional, the chief justice has insisted that the probate judges were not required to abide by her decisions. But, in an interview on Wednesday, he said he thought he could do little more than guide the probate judges on how to respond.
“I think I’ve done what I can do: advise the state court probate judges that they’re not bound by any ruling of the Federal District Court,” he said.
But by Sunday night, the chief justice, faced with the prospect of many judges allowing same-sex marriages to move forward, acted, in part, “to ensure the orderly administration of justice within the State of Alabama.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/us/gay-marriage-set-to-begin-in-alabama-amid-protest.htmlThe chief justice’s misgivings speak to widespread concerns here about federal overreach and same-sex marriage in Alabama, where about 81 percent of voters in 2006 supported a constitutional amendment banning gay nuptials. Few here doubt the force of his belief that Judge Granade’s orders hold only “persuasive authority,” and not binding power, on Alabama judges.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/us/gay-marriage-set-to-begin-in-alabama-amid-protest.htmlOne guy in a black robe vs 81% of Alabama voters and the State Constitution.
For you it appears the "Rule of Law" is not the factor, here, but which 'ruler' is making them.
So, who is that Judge who ruled against the Rule of Alabama Law?
A Former employee of Jeff Sessions. Bush Appointee.
In addition to the gay marriage ruling, Hillyer pointed to what he called Granade's "appalling" ruling last summer against the Catholic-affiliated Eternal World Television Network in its challenge to a federal law requiring it to provide employees with health insurance that included contraception.
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/02/activist_judge_careful_jurist.htmlOne of the justifications for striking down that law was the alleged change in public opinion about 'gay marriage'. So Federal judges are making rulings against State Constitutional Law based on allegations of public opinion, and not on the law?
She wasn't upholding the rule of law, she was butchering it.
Anti Christian, anti traditional marriage, and one who ties in with the current AG. Those mangroves sure have tangled roots.
