ALABAMA: Liberty Counsel Loses Yet Again, Federal Court Rejects Lawsuit Over Roy Moore’s Suspension

The Associated Press reports:

A federal judge has refused to overturn the suspension of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, ruling Thursday that doing so would improperly interfere with the state judicial proceeding that could result in Moore’s ouster for an order he issued about same-sex marriage.

U.S. District Judge Harold Albritton threw out Moore’s lawsuit against the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission with a brief order and an accompanying opinion that said the state judicial ethics case against the conservative Republican should move ahead without federal interference.

The commission filed charges against Moore with the Alabama Court of the Judiciary, which has the power under state law to consider administrative cases brought against judges. Moore claimed his resulting automatic suspension with pay was a violation of his rights, but the judge said the case did not fit the circumstances required for federal action.

Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver says he doesn’t know if they will appeal.

  • The_Wretched

    You don’t have a civil right to ignore the federal Supreme Court. The Constitution is clear about that.

    • bkmn

      It is doubly bad for a lawyer to ignore the Supreme Court. It should be grounds to be disbarred.

      • The_Wretched

        It’s triple bad that a State level Chief Justice was the one saying that he didn’t need to follow the US SCT – and was trying to use the federal judiciary to do it.

        • It is quadruple bad that the citizens of Alabama will probably elect him to this office again even after he’s been removed.

          • Bruno

            He’s termed out (actually I think aged out) for the AL SC. The thought is he’ll run for governor.

          • Goddammit.

          • abel

            And if the good people of Alabama fail in their God-given duty to actually elect him, why then Judge Moore will simply DECLARE himself Governor, because, you know, it is the Will of the Lord!

          • Franciscan

            If the good people of Alabama vote him in as governor (and if the right of all eligible Alabamans to vote is observed and upheld), then they are welcome to him. And I’ll just cross this state off my list.

          • Prixator

            Why is it on your list?

            Just kidding – I’m sure there must be some (more than one) nice, kind people in Alabama. Right?

        • ben-andy

          Really, the irony is delicious.

          “I want you, a Federal Judge to tell my state Judicial Inquiry Commission that I cannot be suspended while they look into my eventual removal from my State Supreme Court Chair [again] by the state Court of the Judiciary because of defying the US Supreme Court [who’s two levels above YOU, turkey]. So just do that right quick for me, K?”

          “No.”

          You are part of a “system”, Mr. Moore. You are trying to game a court from ruling on whether you can be ON a Court and defy the boss of the boss of the court your are trying to game. But you’re really going to use it to be elected Gub’na in a few years. So, enjoy the ride, keep your name in the news cycle, play the victim and hope the Rapture happens before your massive coronary, which might look like the same event to those of us “left behind”.

          • IamM

            I don’t even want to know how they tried to spin a “right” to not be suspended for abusing his office.

    • Lawerence Collins

      They prove time and time again that they don’t care about the laws that govern this country!

    • olandp

      Not only that, we fought a war over the supremacy of the US Constitution.

      I sometimes wonder if people know which side won.

  • Rex

    Liberty Counsel looses, it must be Thursday.

    • WebSlinger

      It must be any day of the week

    • kaydenpat

      Why yes, it is.

  • BearEyes

    my kind of click-bait.

    • Smokey

      Upvote for combining two threads.

  • bkmn

    With Libety Console at his side his fate is sealed.

    • WebSlinger

      I hope their work is pro bono

      • bkmn

        The owners of Hobby Lobby give them a nice chunk of money every year to do what they do (for free). Friends don’t let friends shop at Hobby Lobby.

      • abel

        More like “pro malo.”

    • TrollopeReader

      do you think they console Roy when they lose?!!

  • PickyPecker
    • Paula

      In Roy’s case it would be a pig flying.

      • TrollopeReader

        or more likely one of these little ones ….

        • TrollopeReader

          or more likely one of these little ones ….

  • WebSlinger

    The Supreme Court is your one TRUE God Roy and you had better listen carefully

  • Cuberly

    OT: Starting the Trumpmagedon meltdown list early today.

    https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/761283936672686080

    • Treant

      Heavens, it’s already 3:30 PM! What took him so long?

      • Mike in Texas

        He was attending his intervention. See what good results it got?

        Edit: I think I had a senior moment. I thought I was in the Trump thread.

        • Balderdashing

          Is that what they call the briefings after Manafort gets phone calls from Putin?

    • PickyPecker
      • Bruno

        Anybody seen Hillary Clinton lately? I thought I heard tell of her buying a lot of popcorn at her local store before retiring to her house for some reason.

        • UrsusArctos

          I heard she was out shopping for an anchor to throw Drumpf to “save” his drowning numbers.

      • Cuberly

        Happy Panda!!!! πŸ˜‰

        • Minaaforrest2

          <<xk. β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…::::::!ir154m:….,…..

    • Bruno

      Did he find it on the shelf in the VHS store next to “Millions of Muslims Point Fun & Laugh at Twin Towers Falling”?

      • Rex

        Foreign Films – Russian.

        • GeoffreyPS

          So next to the future wife audition tapes?

      • Cuberly

        …on a dusty shelf sitting on top of his tax returns.

      • Adam King

        The Blockbuster in his busted brain.

    • SoCalGal20

      Also note, Obama’s approval rating is at 54%!

      • Bruno

        But…but…Benghazi! Kenya! Socialismos!

        • Balderdashing

          Bla…sphemous!

      • kaydenpat

        Should be higher but I’ll take 54%. That’s good news for Secretary Clinton.

    • PickyPecker
    • PickyPecker
    • Adam King

      He’s delusional. Clinically delusional. Off his rocker. Bats in the belfry.

    • kaydenpat

      He seems to see a lot of things which don’t exist. Scary.

    • StSean

      what? all of iran?

  • Tor

    I don’t get it. States’ Rights people filing a case to a Federal Judge?

    • Bruno

      In Alabama, one doesn’t actually need to understand the law in any significant way to be elected Chief Justice. Or governor. Which he probably will be soon.

      • Frostbite

        The idiots in Alabama elect that idiot as Governor then they get what they deserve.

      • SFBruce

        He lost the governorship twice before, and he last very badly. In 2006, he ran against incumbent Republican Bob Riley. Moore lost to Riley in the primary by 33 points. In 2010 he ran again, but failed miserably when he came in 4th, again in the primary race. Let’s hope his bad luck continues.

        • Bruno

          Hope so. He may be elevated in status now that Bentley has collapsed.

      • Adam King

        We should get rid of elected judges, state by state. It’s like they’ve written cronyism, incompetence and corruption right into the state constitutions.

  • Bigot Be Gone!
    .

  • Tallahassee

    I have read the constitution. Judge Moore’s name is not mentioned in it once. Maybe his right to be on the bench is a matter of Organic Law, like the Bill of Rights.

  • That_Looks_Delicious

    And Liberty Counsel continues its perfect record.

  • Jerry Hinnant

    Oh go ahead and appeal Matt. It’s not like one more loss is going to seriously effect Liberty Counsel’s record now! πŸ˜‚

    • TrollopeReader

      Hey! He could go from 0 -836 to , oh yeah. 0 – 837. My bad.

  • Bruno

    AFAIK there are still a dozen or more counties in Alabama not marrying people because of this shitbag’s cover. And they’re getting away with it. Hopefully he won’t.

  • teeveedub

    This might be Joe’s best URL to date: …roy-moore-eats-worms

    • Hue-Man

      Not to be confused with worms-eat-scalia

  • That_Looks_Delicious

    O/T – Steve LaTourette died. I never really liked him when I lived in Ohio, but he was one of the last of the more intelligent, non-crazy Republicans in the Voinovich/Snowe/Lugar mold. A vanishing breed.

    • Bruno

      I’ll never forget this one. He had a charm even when being a dick about something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE_0UdjElNQ

      • That_Looks_Delicious

        I will give him his due props for calling out the Tea Party for what they were/are.

    • Rex

      I called him “LaToilet” I suppose I should be more respectful now that Jesus called and Steve answered.

      • No.

        • Same as with scalia.

        • Canadian Observer

          YES YES YES – love the graphic (and have, of course, saved a copy). The sentiment is perfect for oh so many occasions – and bonus points for it being a puffin!

        • kaydenpat

          Looking at you both, Breitbart and Scalia.

      • TuuxKabin

        What was his answer?

  • JT
  • Oikos
    • PickyPecker

      Do we get to see the tranny before making a choice? asking for a friend.

      • Stubenville

        It’s the tranny Esefus pulled from a ’68 Chevy, I recon.

    • Adam King

      What if the “tranny” is named Libety? How do you decide?

      • Oikos

        Flip of a coin.

    • kaydenpat

      Oh dear. As President Bush asked: “Is our children learning?”

    • BudClark

      $7.70 for both?

  • David F.

    This pic is so useful

  • ben

    OT: New Orleans is the replacement host for the NBA All-Star Game.

    http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17216630/new-orleans-close-being-named-host-2017-nba-all-star-game

    • UrsusArctos

      NOLA can handle it, even on short notice. big crowds don’t make the city sweat. BUT doing something this size on this date is going to be, uh, special. It’s 9 days before Mardi Gras. Getting a room will be hell. At least it’s not Carnival weekend (the 26th, 25th).

  • Ninja0980

    I guess Gawd wasn’t on your side for this was he Roy?

  • greenmanTN

    I can tell you right now that Matt Staver has never been appealing.

  • boatboy_srq

    1) Couldn’t happen to a more deserving asshat.

    2) Isn’t Moore one of the ones that insists that the federal gummint shouldn’t interfere with the states’ business? Odd how he thinks it should when the state’s business is pursuing him for ethics violations.

  • TrollopeReader

    Moore of this, please!

  • Todd

    You lose your job when you tell others not to do theirs.

    Karma and all that ……

    Bwaaaa Haaaaaa Haaaaaa

  • bambinoitaliano

    Liberty Counsel has such an amazing track records only Trump University would envy.

    • Herald

      I was glad to see their track record of wins continues.

      • TrollopeReader

        i read that as “track record of whines” … but that’s just as accurate !!

        • Herald

          That is good!

  • Stubenville

    And the Liberty Counsel losing streak continues. Seriously, with this crappy a record, why do people who should know better even hire them? Free legal advice is worth exactly what you paid for it; nothing.

  • Octavio

    Such drama in the house of Moore. Cheap, tawdry drama not fit for prime time.

    • Robert Conner

      Housewives of the Alabama Judiciary.

  • kaydenpat

    LOSER!

  • Bill Post

    That guy has closet case written all over his face. He’s about as straight as Paul Lynde, Liberace or Bruce Willis.

    • Tor

      Just watched that movie on Tuesday. Shirt by Jean Paul Gaultier. It’s open in the back with some wide straps. Quite hot. I want! The Fifth Element.
      This is the best image I could find, unfortunately.

  • anne marie in philly

    bwhahahahahahahahahahaha! LOSERS! WEAK!

  • Jim

    States’ rights, Roy, states’ rights. Remember how you insisted that the authority of the state can’t be overridden by the federal courts? And now you want the federal courts to override the authority of Alabama state courts in your favor. You hypocrite! Even you don’t believe your own neo-confederate legalese BS.

  • Rick Zajac

    Has Liberty Counsel EVER won a case?

    • Martin

      Juan Fleuover v. Cuckoo’s Nest?

      • TuuxKabin

        Snork!

  • Richard B

    Roy Moore will once again will be removed from office because he is incompetent to fulfill his duties of the office he holds.

  • WarrenHart

    Judge Roy Moore is in the lead in polls for the 2018 race for Governor of Alabama.
    http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/roy-moore-tops-first-2018-alabama-gubernatorial-poll/

    • TallBearNC

      That’s because most voters in Alabama are bat shit crazy too. My advice to liberals and LGBT: move the fuck out of that wretched state. There’s about 47 other that’s that are better and about 20+ that are FAR BETTER.

      you can stay and fight while that state lags 5-15 yrs behind in civil rights and a borderline theocracy state which loves to twist the 1st amendment to mean USA=Christian, government = Christian. Wrong!

      USA=melting pot of religions and ppl who don’t believe in religion etc. THATS what the 1st. Amend guarantees. You can believe / choose your own religion and the govt can force you to stop nor force u to believe/comply with any specific or general religion. Which ALSO MEANS LAWS can NOT be based on any religious texts or beliefs. And that’s what’s been going away since the 70s..slowly now much faster. LAWS becoming more secular

      Government – can not support any one religion or denomination. They can not favor one over another.

      But there is one loophole so to speak due to many sours rulings ending in 1993. With the exception of hobby lobby. But hobby lobby really does affect this other area. 1st amend is TO BROAD, GENERAL. so scouts has narrowed it down more and more. Prior to 1993, the govt (congress or scotus) can pass a law banning one or more religious practices. In the case of scotus it’d be a lawsuit to ban it. BUT they key thing was no one religion could be targeted. It must be a ban that applies to all religions and servers religions must engage in this practice. In 1993 that changed to where a SPECFIC religion or denomination CAB BE TARGETED to ban one or more of its practices and conditions were set: said practice(s) must violate constitutional rights (either grants by the constitution itself OR rights recognised as interpreted by SCOTUS. MARRIAGE EQUALITY falls to the latter. As marriage between 2 people no matter what sex/gender combo is now a constitutional RIGHT. ). Other 2 conditions: extreme mental and or physical harm (which is very subjective).

      An example would be congress passing a law or scotus banning the practice of letting a poisonous snake bite you to test your Christian faith (often done be radical Pentecostal branches). That would easily get banned if challenged as people have died from it.

      This is why all these religious protection laws CAN NOT and WILL NOT stand very long if passed.

      Technically a country clerk refusing a marriage license is PRACTICING at work. They are engaging in the PRACTICE of denying dame sex couples licenes based on RELIGION. granted doing so violates the scotus ruling, but to crack down harder if someone sued a “Kim Davis” scotus CAN BAN. If they wanted to, PRACTICING your religion while working at a job

      I’ve had many ppl say ” they can get away doing that!” Of course they can due to the 1st amend wording. ‘

      ONLY YOUR BELIEFS, NOT PRACTICES, are protected in the constitution. This was done on PURPOSE. this, combined with freedom of speech allows you to believe what you want, talk about it , worship in a church, etc in your home, car, property, and even in public. And your BELIEFS (or non as non belief is a belief in itself) are protected from govt interference…but practices?? No! Why? It’s simple:

      Think all the bat shit CRAZY stuff the Old Testament in the Bible asks? Or the Torah, or Koran ,mirror other religious texts. The government HAS to have a way to stop dangerous PRACTICES. and stopping a practice in no way harms your BELIEFS.

      Let’s take the famous CAKE BAKERIES. Why do you think they lose in a city, state, or county were LGBT has been added to civil rights laws. They’d lose nation wide if LGBT were added to the federal civil rights acts? Why??

      for one: when you get a business/privilege license YOU AGREE to follow all city/county/state/federal law. So denying a cake to a gay couple is a civil right violation and they ppl violated their agreement with the county that they’d abide by those laws.

      Now there’s another way LGBT can defeat business like this WITHOUT civil rights laws..how? If people use the PRACTICE of denying a wedding cake to a same sex couple. That PRACTICE interferes with a scotus ruling not only granting the gay couple a constitutional right to marry but it aldo say the process can be interfered with/hindered. And no cake violates that. But even if u didn’t go the rights violation, you could use extreme mental harm. And either one allows SCOTUS to BAN THE PRACTICE OF DENYING business services to LGBT ppl. And the beauty is their BELIEFS ARE NOT HARMED is a bus owner is forced to bake and sell that cake due to civil rights law OR the banning of the PRACTICE of refusing to do business with LGBT ppl. They are 10000000% able to still BELIEVE the couple will burn in hell, are sinners, evil… WHATEVER they want. And that statusfues the 1st amend πŸ˜‰

      In a NUTSHELL, the constitution give far far far far far less “religious protection” than most Judeo-Christians think. It actually does the opposite. It protects people from THEM.

      Scotus did NOT have to make churches and clergy exempt from being forced to wed same sex couples. THAT WAS A COURTESY done to lessen the shock of the ruling. But ur HAS BEEN DONE in 1969-1971. Scotus , AND FED LAW, FORCED, churches and clergy to marry white/black and other mixed marriages. And guess what the far right did/said back then. The same damn things that r going on now: unelected judges, congress at war with Christianity.

      I’d love to see Hillary elected with a dem senate and have her turn scotus into 6L3C judges over 4-8 yrs. scotus could easily go back and force churches and clergy to marry same sex couples.

      Side note : this is also why laws that say” people with strong / scincerly held religious beliefs … can do something or are protected from doing abc or having CHs done to them” that’s a law that FORCES those beliefs on others. But it also creates practices which a court can shoot down. Also a law can’t be made with the sole intention to discriminate. These types of laws are redundant also as the constitution orotects beliefs. The problem us many religious people think beliefs=a constitutional right to their actions/practices…THEY COUKD NIT BE MORE WRONG. ‘

      the problem is scotus and congress VERY rarely ban practices. I think if conservative religious people really understood just how little constitutional protection they have ,mtheyd probably REVOLT. so it’s being done slowly

  • JCF
  • Helena is my muse

  • TallBearNC

    That’s because most voters in Alabama are bat shit crazy too. My advice to liberals and LGBT: move the fuck out of that wretched state. There’s about 47 other that’s that are better and about 20+ that are FAR BETTER.

    you can stay and fight while that state lags 5-15 yrs behind in civil rights and a borderline theocracy state which loves to twist the 1st amendment to mean USA=Christian, government = Christian. Wrong!

    USA=melting pot of religions and ppl who don’t believe in religion etc. THATS what the 1st. Amend guarantees. You can believe / choose your own religion and the govt can force you to stop nor force u to believe/comply with any specific or general religion. Which ALSO MEANS LAWS can NOT be based on any religious texts or beliefs. And that’s what’s been going away since the 70s..slowly now much faster. LAWS becoming more secular

    Government – can not support any one religion or denomination. They can not favor one over another.

    But there is one loophole so to speak due to many sours rulings ending in 1993. With the exception of hobby lobby. But hobby lobby really does affect this other area. 1st amend is TO BROAD, GENERAL. so scouts has narrowed it down more and more. Prior to 1993, the govt (congress or scotus) can pass a law banning one or more religious practices. In the case of scotus it’d be a lawsuit to ban it. BUT they key thing was no one religion could be targeted. It must be a ban that applies to all religions and servers religions must engage in this practice. In 1993 that changed to where a SPECFIC religion or denomination CAB BE TARGETED to ban one or more of its practices and conditions were set: said practice(s) must violate constitutional rights (either grants by the constitution itself OR rights recognised as interpreted by SCOTUS. MARRIAGE EQUALITY falls to the latter. As marriage between 2 people no matter what sex/gender combo is now a constitutional RIGHT. ). Other 2 conditions: extreme mental and or physical harm (which is very subjective).

    An example would be congress passing a law or scotus banning the practice of letting a poisonous snake bite you to test your Christian faith (often done be radical Pentecostal branches). That would easily get banned if challenged as people have died from it.

    This is why all these religious protection laws CAN NOT and WILL NOT stand very long if passed.

    Technically a country clerk refusing a marriage license is PRACTICING at work. They are engaging in the PRACTICE of denying dame sex couples licenes based on RELIGION. granted doing so violates the scotus ruling, but to crack down harder if someone sued a “Kim Davis” scotus CAN BAN. If they wanted to, PRACTICING your religion while working at a job

    I’ve had many ppl say ” they can get away doing that!” Of course they can due to the 1st amend wording. ‘

    ONLY YOUR BELIEFS, NOT PRACTICES, are protected in the constitution. This was done on PURPOSE. this, combined with freedom of speech allows you to believe what you want, talk about it , worship in a church, etc in your home, car, property, and even in public. And your BELIEFS (or non as non belief is a belief in itself) are protected from govt interference…but practices?? No! Why? It’s simple:

    Think all the bat shit CRAZY stuff the Old Testament in the Bible asks? Or the Torah, or Koran ,mirror other religious texts. The government HAS to have a way to stop dangerous PRACTICES. and stopping a practice in no way harms your BELIEFS.

    Let’s take the famous CAKE BAKERIES. Why do you think they lose in a city, state, or county were LGBT has been added to civil rights laws. They’d lose nation wide if LGBT were added to the federal civil rights acts? Why??

    for one: when you get a business/privilege license YOU AGREE to follow all city/county/state/federal law. So denying a cake to a gay couple is a civil right violation and they ppl violated their agreement with the county that they’d abide by those laws.

    Now there’s another way LGBT can defeat business like this WITHOUT civil rights laws..how? If people use the PRACTICE of denying a wedding cake to a same sex couple. That PRACTICE interferes with a scotus ruling not only granting the gay couple a constitutional right to marry but it aldo say the process can be interfered with/hindered. And no cake violates that. But even if u didn’t go the rights violation, you could use extreme mental harm. And either one allows SCOTUS to BAN THE PRACTICE OF DENYING business services to LGBT ppl. And the beauty is their BELIEFS ARE NOT HARMED is a bus owner is forced to bake and sell that cake due to civil rights law OR the banning of the PRACTICE of refusing to do business with LGBT ppl. They are 10000000% able to still BELIEVE the couple will burn in hell, are sinners, evil… WHATEVER they want. And that statusfues the 1st amend πŸ˜‰

    In a NUTSHELL, the constitution give far far far far far less “religious protection” than most Judeo-Christians think. It actually does the opposite. It protects people from THEM.

    Scotus did NOT have to make churches and clergy exempt from being forced to wed same sex couples. THAT WAS A COURTESY done to lessen the shock of the ruling. But ur HAS BEEN DONE in 1969-1971. Scotus , AND FED LAW, FORCED, churches and clergy to marry white/black and other mixed marriages. And guess what the far right did/said back then. The same damn things that r going on now: unelected judges, congress at war with Christianity.

    I’d love to see Hillary elected with a dem senate and have her turn scotus into 6L3C judges over 4-8 yrs. scotus could easily go back and force churches and clergy to marry same sex couples.

    Side note : this is also why laws that say” people with strong / scincerly held religious beliefs … can do something or are protected from doing abc or having CHs done to them” that’s a law that FORCES those beliefs on others. But it also creates practices which a court can shoot down. Also a law can’t be made with the sole intention to discriminate. These types of laws are redundant also as the constitution orotects beliefs. The problem us many religious people think beliefs=a constitutional right to their actions/practices…THEY COUKD NIT BE MORE WRONG. ‘

    the problem is scotus and congress VERY rarely ban practices. I think if conservative religious people really understood just how little constitutional protection they have ,mtheyd probably REVOLT. so it’s being done slowly …

  • BudClark

    It’ll take Stave awhile to find the right book to look it up in.

  • BudClark

    a SILVER stake through his heart at midnight at a crossroads during a full moon would be more effficient.

  • Minaaforrest2

    <<xk. β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…βœ«β˜…β˜…::::::!ir154m:….,…