Moore v. JUDICIAL INQUIRY COM'N OF STATE
Decision Date | 30 April 2004 |
Citation | 891 So.2d 848 |
Parties | Roy S. MOORE v. JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION OF the STATE OF ALABAMA. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Andrew D. Dill, Foundation for Moral Law, Inc., Montgomery; and Phillip L. Jauregui, Birmingham, for appellant.
William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen.; Rosa H. Davis, chief asst. atty. gen.; and Charles B. Campbell and Melissa K. Atwood, asst. attys. gen., for appellee.
1
The material facts are not disputed. Roy S. Moore was elected to the office of Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court in a statewide general election in November 2000. On January 15, 2001, Moore was sworn in as Alabama's 28th Chief Justice. Pursuant to the Judicial Article adopted in 1973 by constitutional Amendment No. 328 to the Alabama Constitution of 1901, Chief Justice Moore also became the administrative head of Alabama's Unified Judicial System . )
After being elected Chief Justice, Moore designed and commissioned the construction of a granite monument that would, in Chief Justice Moore's words, "depict the moral foundation of law." Without notifying the eight Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Moore installed the monument in the rotunda of the Judicial Building in Montgomery. The Judicial Building houses the Alabama Supreme Court, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, the Alabama Administrative Office of Courts, and the State Law Library. The monument was installed during the night of July 31, 2001.2 The monument was positioned in the rotunda of the Judicial Building so that it could be seen by every person entering the Judicial Building through the main entrance and by everyone who crossed the rotunda going to or from the State Law Library, the offices of the clerks of the intermediate appellate courts, and the public stairway, elevator, and restrooms. The monument was aptly described in the opinion of the federal district court in Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp.2d 1290, 1294-95 (M.D.Ala.2002):
When he unveiled the monument, Chief Justice Moore delivered prepared remarks, copies of which were made available to those present at the unveiling. Chief Justice Moore stated that the monument depicted the moral foundation of the law and that it "serves to remind the appellate courts and judges of the circuit and district courts of this State and members of the bar who appear before them, as well as the people of Alabama who visit the Alabama Judicial Building, of the truth stated in the Preamble to the Alabama Constitution that in order to establish justice we must invoke `the favor and guidance of almighty God.'"
Shortly after the monument was installed, two actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, seeking injunctions requiring Chief Justice Moore to remove the monument from the Judicial Building. These actions were consolidated for trial. Glassroth v. Moore, 229 F.Supp.2d at 1293. Following a trial that lasted several days, United States District Judge Myron Thompson issued an opinion on November 18, 2002, holding that by placing the monument in the rotunda of the Judicial Building, Chief Justice Moore had violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution of the United States. Judge Thompson ordered Chief Justice Moore to remove the monument within 30 days of the date of his opinion. The district court did not issue an injunction at the time it issued its opinion, but it stated that if the monument was not removed within 30 days, it would enter an injunction requiring the monument's removal within 15 days of the entry of the injunction. Chief Justice Moore appealed Judge Thompson's ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Chief Justice Moore refused to remove the monument within the 30 days allowed by the November 18 order, and the district court, on December 19, 2002, issued a permanent injunction requiring Chief Justice Moore to remove the monument within 15 days (i.e., by January 3, 2003). Glassroth v. Moore, 242 F.Supp.2d 1067 (M.D.Ala.2002). Chief Justice Moore petitioned the district court for a stay of the injunction pending the disposition of his appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The district court granted the stay. Glassroth v. Moore, 242 F.Supp.2d 1068 (M.D.Ala.2002). On July 1, 2003, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court. Glassroth v. Moore, 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir.2003).
Chief Justice Moore did not seek a stay of the judgment of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and did not ask for a rehearing of that decision. On July 30, 2003, the court of appeals issued its mandate directing the district court to enforce its order to remove the monument. Pursuant to the mandate, the district court issued a mandatory injunction on August 5, 2003, requiring that the monument be removed no later than August 20, 2003. In response to this order, Chief Justice Moore issued a public statement on August 14, 2003, in which he said he had "no intention of removing the monument."
Chief Justice Moore did not appeal from the mandatory injunction; however, after the time for filing an appeal had expired, Chief Justice Moore asked the district court to stay the injunction pending the disposition of a petition for a writ of mandamus and prohibition he had filed in the United States Supreme Court.3 On August 18, 2003, the district court denied the stay:
On August 15, 2003, Chief Justice Moore filed with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals a motion to recall the mandate and a motion to stay the injunction. That motion was denied on August 19. On August 20, 2003, Chief Justice Moore filed with the United States Supreme Court an application for recall and stay. The Supreme Court denied the application that same day.
When the monument was not removed by the August 20, 2003, deadline as ordered by the district court, some of the original plaintiffs filed a motion in the district court asking that court to hold Chief Justice Moore in contempt for refusing to obey...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Neely v. Wyo. Comm'n on Judicial Conduct & Ethics (In re Neely)
...monument to the Ten Commandments that he had placed in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building. Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Comm'n of State of Alabama , 891 So.2d 848, 851 (Ala. 2004). Justice Moore argued that he was being removed from office because of a "religious test," in violation ......
-
City of Bessemer v. McClain
...to in cases as § 6.10, Amend. No. 328, Ala. Const.1901, and as Amendment No. 328. 4. The Cities argue that, in Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Commission, 891 So.2d 848 (Ala. 2004), this Court changed its practice. They argue that we should follow the practice used in Moore, which would require t......
-
Moore v. Ala. Judicial Inquiry Comm'n
...Court shall review the record of the proceedings on the law and the facts.’ § 6.18(b) [now § 157 (b) ]." Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Comm'n of Alabama, 891 So.2d 848, 855 (Ala. 2004).Standard of Review " ‘The applicable standard of review for an order from the Court of the Judiciary is that t......
-
Beckerle v. Moore
...to remove the monument. The decision of the Court of the Judiciary was affirmed by a Special Supreme Court. See Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Comm'n, 891 So.2d 848 (Ala.2004). The plaintiffs in the monument litigation based their claim on 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Congress has authorized the recovery o......
-
Chapter 6: Family Law
...Ten Commandments which he had placed in the Alabama State Judicial Building. See Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Comm. of State of Alabama , 891 So. 2d 848 (Ala. 2004). 18. Ex parte H.H., 830 So. 2d 21, 26 (Ala. 2002). ABAPub Howell Transgender Final Pass.indd 67 8/23/13 9:47 AM 68 TRANSGENDER PE......