Neely v. Wyo. Comm'n on Judicial Conduct & Ethics (In re Neely)

Citation390 P.3d 728
Decision Date07 March 2017
Docket NumberJ-16-0001
Parties IN RE An Inquiry Concerning the Honorable Ruth NEELY, Municipal Court Judge and Circuit Court Magistrate, Ninth Judicial District, Pinedale, Sublette County, Wyoming. Judge Ruth Neely (Petitioner), v. Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics (Respondent).
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wyoming

Representing Petitioner: Herbert K. Doby, Torrington, Wyoming; James A. Campbell, Kenneth J. Connelly, and Douglas G. Wardlow of Alliance Defending Freedom, Scottsdale, Arizona. Argument by Mr. Campbell.

Representing Respondent: Patrick Dixon and Britney F. Turner of Dixon & Dixon, LLP, Casper, Wyoming; Timothy K. Newcomb, Laramie, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Dixon.

Representing Amici Curiae Mayor and Town Council Members of the Town of Pinedale and Sutherland Institute Center for Family & Society: William H. Twichell, Pinedale, Wyoming.

Before BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.

FOX, Justice.

[¶1] Judge Ruth Neely objects to the Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics' (Commission) recommendation that she be removed from her positions as municipal court judge and part-time circuit court magistrate because of her refusal to perform same-sex marriages in her judicial capacity as a part-time circuit court magistrate. We conclude, as have all the state judicial ethics commissions that have considered this question, that a judge who will perform marriages only for opposite-sex couples violates the Code of Judicial Conduct, and we hold that Judge Neely violated Rules 1.2, 2.2, and 2.3 of the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct. However, we do not accept the Commission's recommendation for removal, and instead order public censure, with specific conditions.

ISSUES

[¶2] While the parties state numerous and divergent issues, we consider the issues in this case to be:

1. Does the United States Constitution permit this Court to discipline Judge Neely for announcing that her religious beliefs prevent her from officiating same-sex marriages?
2. Does the Wyoming Constitution permit this Court to discipline Judge Neely for announcing that her religious beliefs prevent her from officiating same-sex marriages?
3. Are the provisions of the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct alleged to have been violated by Judge Neely void for vagueness?
4. Did Judge Neely violate the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct?

[¶3] This case is not about same-sex marriage or the reasonableness of religious beliefs. We recognize that "[m]any who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here." Obergefell v. Hodges , ––– U.S. ––––, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 2602, 192 L.Ed.2d 609 (2015). This case is also not about imposing a religious test on judges. Rather, it is about maintaining the public's faith in an independent and impartial judiciary that conducts its judicial functions according to the rule of law, independent of outside influences, including religion, and without regard to whether a law is popular or unpopular.

FACTS

[¶4] Judge Neely was appointed as a municipal court judge for the Town of Pinedale, Wyoming, in 1994, and has served continuously in that capacity ever since.1 As a Pinedale municipal court judge, Judge Neely hears all cases arising from the town's ordinances, such as traffic and parking violations, animal control, public intoxication, underage drinking, breach of peace, nuisances, and similar matters. Municipal court judges are not authorized to perform marriages. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-1-106(a) (LexisNexis 2015). Municipal court judges are appointed by the governing bodies of the towns where they sit. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15-4-202(d) (LexisNexis 2015). It is undisputed that the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct applies to them, and that they are subject to the disciplinary authority of the Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics and this Court. Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct, Application I.(B); see also Wyo. Const. art. 5, § 6. The evidence is uncontroverted that Judge Neely is highly respected as a municipal court judge in her community, including by at least one member of the gay community.

[¶5] Since approximately 2001, Judge Neely has also served as a part-time circuit court magistrate; she was most recently appointed by circuit court Judge Haws to assist him. Part-time magistrates are in a unique position in that they perform judicial functions only as needed. They are not on the state payroll, but instead are compensated for particular services by voucher. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 5-9-213 (LexisNexis 2015). One of her powers in that capacity is to perform marriage ceremonies, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 5-9-212(a)(iii) (LexisNexis 2015), and in fact performing marriages was her primary function as a part-time circuit court magistrate. Judge Neely was compensated for marriages by the marrying couple and not by the state. Under Wyoming law, marriage is "a civil contract...." Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-1-101 (LexisNexis 2015). Marriage ceremonies have minimal requirements:

In the solemnization of marriage no particular form is required, except that the parties shall solemnly declare in the presence of the person performing the ceremony and at least two (2) attending witnesses that they take each other as husband and wife.

Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-1-106(b) (LexisNexis 2015).

[¶6] Judge Neely has performed over 100 weddings. Part-time magistrates can and do decline to perform marriages for various reasons. Stephen Smith, who also serves as a part-time circuit court magistrate, testified that he only performs marriages for people he knows. Judge Haws testified that he would turn down a request to perform a marriage if his schedule would not permit it, and that it would be acceptable for magistrates to turn down such a request if they were going to a football game, getting their hair done, or were sick.

[¶7] When she was appointed as part-time circuit court magistrate, Judge Neely took the oath required by Wyoming law.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Wyoming; that I have not knowingly violated any law related to my election or appointment, or caused it to be done by others; and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity."

Wyo. Const. art. 6, § 20.2

[¶8] Judge Neely is a devout Christian and a member of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod. It is undisputed that she holds the sincere belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Shortly after the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming issued its order enjoining the state from enforcing or applying any "state law, policy, or practice, as a basis to deny marriage to same-sex couples," Guzzo v. Mead , No. 14-CV-200-SWS, 2014 WL 5317797, at *9 (D. Wyo. Oct. 17, 2014),3 Judge Neely met with Judge Haws "to explain to him that I would not be able to officiate same-sex marriages due to my sincerely held religious beliefs about what marriage is." Judge Haws advised her to "keep your head down and your mouth shut," until they received further guidance.

[¶9] On December 5, 2014, Pinedale Roundup reporter Ned Donovan called Judge Neely on her cell phone. She returned the call, Mr. Donovan answered "Pinedale Roundup," and he then asked her if she was "excited" to be able to perform same-sex marriages. In the article that followed the interview, two quotes were attributed to Judge Neely, which she later testified were accurate:

"I will not be able to do them.... We have at least one magistrate who will do same-sex marriages, but I will not be able to."
"When law and religion conflict, choices have to be made. I have not yet been asked to perform a same-sex marriage."

[¶10] Mr. Donovan's article appeared in the December 9, 2014 edition of the Pinedale Roundup . The Sublette Examiner published the article in its online edition on December 11, 2014. The matter came to the Commission's attention, and on December 22, 2014, the Commission's Executive Director forwarded the articles to the Commission's Investigatory Panel for their review. On January 6, 2015, the Investigatory Panel decided to commence an investigation and sent a letter of inquiry to Judge Haws and Judge Neely.

[¶11] Also on January 6, without knowledge of the Commission's actions, Judge Neely sent a letter to the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee to seek its guidance. She asked: "Can a magistrate recuse himself/herself from officiating at a same sex wedding due to religious conviction; and if so, without fear of civil rights repercussions?" She explained:

Without getting in too deeply here, homosexuality is a named sin in the Bible, as are drunkenness, thievery, lying, and the like. I can no more officiate at a same sex wedding than I can buy beer for the alcoholic or aid in another person's deceit. I cannot knowingly be complicit in another's sin. Does that mean I cannot be impartial on the bench when that homosexual or habitual liar or thief comes before me with a speeding ticket? Or the alcoholic appears before me for yet another charge of public intoxication? No. Firmly, no. I have been the municipal court judge for the Town of Pinedale for over 20 years; and there has not been one claim of bias or prejudice made by anyone who has come before me. Not the homosexual, not the alcoholic, not the liar, not the thief. Not one. [4 ]

The Commission provided no answer to Judge Neely's question, explaining that it could only "provide guidance for those judges seeking resolution to current or unresolved ethical dilemmas, rather than to confirm a judge's decision or provide a legal opinion." On January 15, 2015, Judge Haws met with Judge Neely and suspended her from her position as a part-time circuit court magistrate.

[¶12] In her response to the Investigatory Panel's inquiry, Judge Neely affirmed that "[m]y conscience, formed by my religious convictions, will not allow me to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • In re Day, SC S063844
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • March 15, 2018
    ...rights of same-sex couples. Many of those same issues are currently being litigated in state and federal courts. See, e.g. , In re Neely , 390 P.3d 728 (Wy 2017), cert. den. , ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 639, ––– L.Ed.2d –––– (2018) (imposing censure on judge who publicly refused to perform sa......
  • Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Manlove
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • April 4, 2023
    ...241, 246 (Ind. 2012) ; see generally Hinckley , 2022 WY 18, ¶¶ 6–99, 503 P.3d at 594–620 ; In re Neely , 2017 WY 25, ¶¶ 38–53, 390 P.3d 728, 741–46 (Wyo. 2017) (finding the provisions of the Wyoming Constitution permit the Court to discipline a municipal court judge for violating the Wyomin......
  • In re Kwan
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • May 22, 2019
    ...606–11 (2007) ; In re Judicial Campaign Complaint Against O’Toole , 141 Ohio St.3d 355, 24 N.E.3d 1114, 1120–28 (2014) ; In re Neely , 390 P.3d 728, 735–47 (Wyo. 2017).5 During the hearing, Judge Hagen referenced the September 26, 2016 posting and asked, "How is that not a comment on a part......
  • Asm v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • October 12, 2021
    ...exercise thereof[.]" U.S. Const. amend. I. This provision has been applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Neely, ¶ 16, 390 P.3d at 735 Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303, 60 S.Ct. 900, 903, 84 L.Ed. 1213 (1940)). "The free exercise of religion means, first and forem......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT