Roy Moore’s Hate Group Cheers Texas Supreme Court Ruling That Married Gays Don’t Deserve Benefits

Via press release:

The Foundation for Moral Law applauded the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Pidgeon v. Turner, which declined to extend benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples to same-sex pairings contrary to Texas law.

The legal issue in Pidgeon was whether the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges should be applied narrowly—limited to the issue of marriage licenses—or broadly, affecting spousal benefits associated with marriage.

The Texas Supreme Court declined to hold that Obergefell automatically required the state to extend its benefits to same-sex pairings. The court remanded the lawsuit to the trial court for further proceedings.

Along with the Institute for Creation Research, the Foundation filed an amicus brief urging the Texas Supreme Court to reject Obergefell altogether as having no basis in the Constitution. In its opinion the Texas Supreme Court acknowledged the filing of the Foundation’s amicus brief.

Foundation President Kayla Moore said: “The Texas Supreme Court demonstrated the critical thinking needed to see the difference between Obergefell and the case before it, as well as the courage to follow the law instead of bowing to political correctness. We are grateful that there are still courts that are willing to do what is right, even under pressure.”

“The Texas Supreme Court’s courage is praiseworthy in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last week in Pavan v. Smith, which extended Obergefell to apply to birth certificates,” added Matt Clark, one of the Foundation’s attorneys.

“We hope that the Texas Supreme Court will show even more courage by rejecting Obergefell altogether should the case be appealed to them again,” Clark said.

The Foundation For Moral Law openly advocates for a Christian theocracy in the United States. Moore allegedly stepped down from its leadership when he was reelected to the Alabama Supreme Court and his wife has been the group’s nominal head since then.

  • Tawreos

    How sad that he has to keep hating to keep his reputation as a christian intact.

    • Matt

      It’s their way.

    • Jeff

      Sad? How ’bout pathetic and disgusting.

  • olandp

    “‘We hope that the Texas Supreme Court will show even more courage by rejecting Obergefell altogether should the case be appealed to them again,’ Clark said.”

    Yeah, America: Love it or Leave it. Um-uh.

  • Dejerrity

    This is in clear violation under the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.

    Gay marriage is legal, so married gays must have all the rights as married straights.

    The slap down should come very fast.

    • Treant

      It’ll be fun to see how Gorsuch and Thomas twist themselves to give the dissenting opinion for this piece of crap, but other than that? I’m not sure even Alito could manage to swallow this one.

      • John30013

        He dissented in Pavan v. Smith, so I don’t see him overturning the Texas ruling.

        • Treant

          Maybe not, but even he does supposedly have some respect for precedent. Which Pavan v. Smith now is…

          • tristram

            There are a thousand rationales for discarding precedent. It won’t even slow Gorsuch down. One more Trump appointee, and we’ll see if Roberts has the balls to follow precedent if it benefits the gays.

      • Ninja0980

        They’ll come up with something, bigots always do.

      • Bryan

        Oh I’d love to read a Gorsuch dissent on this hot pile.
        From his nomination hearing: “It is absolutely settled law,” Gorsuch answered Sen. Franken. Except he qualifies that statement with the follow-up, “There is ongoing litigation about its impact and its application right now.”
        As if its application is in question…

        • Treant

          “‘Cause Jeebus,” Gorsuch wrote in today’s Supreme Court opinion. In crayon.

          • J Ascher

            Crayon is a step up from finger paints, no?

        • david fairfield

          He was just joking.

          • Bryan

            More of a… suggestion, really.

    • Only if Kennedy is still on the bench when it gets there. They needed four justices to agree to hear the case. If Roberts and Alito planned to slap this down they will just vote against hearing the case at all. But if this gets delayed and FSM forbid we lose Kennedy or any of the left-of-the-far-right justices, we are fucked.

    • tristram

      Only if there’s no more turnover on SCOTUS. One more Trump justice & both Obergefell and Windsor are effectively gone. Here’s one commenter who’s right on track – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/michelangelo-signorile

    • Vista-Cruiser

      Within the next five years, the Supreme court will overturn Obergefell, and declare all same-sex marriages void ab iniitio. That’s because Republicans have firm control over the federal courts for the foreseeable future. And that’s because our side no longer bothers to vote.

  • Skokieguy [Larry]

    “The Foundation For Moral Law openly advocates for a Christian theocracy in the United States”

    And does so as a non-profit, subsidized by your and my tax dollars.

    • Oh’behr in Minnesota

      … and Net Giver State Tax Dollars from many other states.

      Since Alabama is a Net Taker State from D.C.

      Like Christianity on TV and in church, pass those dollars over folks!, grifting is good for white, Christian, heterosexual, Alabamans.

      • (((GC)))

        … good for white, Christian, heterosexual, Republicon, cisgender, male (or under a male’s “control” or “protection”) Alabamans.

        • Oh’behr in Minnesota

          Thanks, I forgot about that part. Thank you again.

      • Aracelijshaw

        my classmate’s sister-in-law makes $76 each hour from home. she’s been out of work for 12 months… the previous month her earnings was $17069 working on the internet for three hours a day. ➤ check out this➤ link
        ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancialCashJobs86DailyPress/Home/Wage….
        ☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭::::fd86..

  • AmeriCanadian

    Since when does a state supreme court decide how the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision is to be applied?

    • John30013

      Only until a federal court slaps them down, which they surely must in light of the Pavan ruling this term.

    • Todd20036

      It doesn’t, but with SCOTUS turning hard right, that may change.

    • scream4ever

      They don’t. The “ruling” was merely for political show and has no teeth at all.

  • bkmn

    They can cheer all they want – it will be overturned.

    • Dreaming Vertebrate

      Not if Trump succeeds in packing the court.
      Gosuck is only his first appointment.

      • I think that if the GOP allowed Obama to seat SCOTUS judges, RBG would have retired then. Knowing that her liberal seat wouldn’t be lost to a conservative.

  • Matt

    This entire family lacks basic decency towards other people. If it were real, they would have a special place in hell waiting for them.

  • Jmdintpa

    you guys know a second civil war or at least a break up of some states is coming. This country is very very divided. these people are of the mindset that there skygod is telling them to take back america. they think that god is on their side and they cant lose. they have been buying guns and ammo in record numbers waiting for this moment to use them. they think they are some new modern age minute men. they are deranged, frightened , heavily armed and think they are on a divine mission. history has shown us this combination always ends in a horrible war or massive death. you need to get serious and prepare yourself if you have not already done so.

    • safari

      As soon as the social security checks stop coming, that’ll stop real quick.

      • djcoastermark

        Or the Hover’round subsidies stop, whichever comes first.

    • Treant

      Personally, I’d be quite content to wave bye-bye as the Second Confederacy assembles. Forget a Civil War, just let them go.

      As Safari noted, they’ll start screaming when the SS checks stop and disability disappears and Medicaid ceases and the roads aren’t repaired…

      • safari

        There was an article recently about how Colorado Springs reacted to the great recession. In short, they cut everything they could and setup voluntary programs like “adopt a street light”. It’s funny how the rich had well lit neighborhoods and the rest of the town was dealing with copper thefts.

    • Tawreos

      Nice try Jim Bakker, we are not going to be fooled into buying your buckets o’ slop.

    • The_Wretched

      Russian troll, go away.

      • KCMC
      • Lazycrockett

        Gonna be a lot of blocking going on the next 2 days. Folks with a lot of spare time on their hands.

      • Jmdintpa

        fuck you… i live in tampa florida and am not a troll. if you cant see that our country is being slowly torn apart and you cant see history repeating itself then thats on you. these right wing alt right nazis are violent and unhinged. timothy mcveigh was one of them , the 96 olympic bomber was one of them. they may not pull off a wide spread war but one religious right wing nutjob with an ar15 can do a lot of damage.

        • The_Wretched

          I can see two Americas. One which watches John Oliver and laments the insanity of the idiots in the counter-reality bubble and one which doesn’t. That does not mean the US should be shattered as a nation. Those are two separate idea with only superficial overlap.

          If you’re going to advocate for break up, then you need to see who else is making the break up arguments. Here’s a taste to get you started. Leading CALEXIT voice is pushed by a litteral russian troll. http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/19/politics/calexit-leader-russia/index.html

          AKIP — (Sarah Palin’s husband is one) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaskan_Independence_Party

    • JWC

      something has to be done about Texas In a union one state can not continually challange the federal government The same goes for California

      • m_lp_ql_m

        As a Californian, I’m all for both states peacefully seceding.

      • BobSF_94117

        In what way does California “challenge” the federal government?

        • JWC

          in the same manner of Texas Not at all Texas is adamant CA just rumbles about it

    • They don’t need to do that. They are close to having enough states on board to convene a Constitutional Convention and if that happens we are all fucked. Why would they split off when they are the ones in charge. And the problem for those left-of-the-far-right is that we are isolated in cities. Are we going to airlift food and supplies to deep blue cities in deep red states? Liberal cities without an ocean or gulf port will be in trouble.

      • Jmdintpa

        THANK YOU…people dont even see that. there here calling me a russian troll. meantime the country and our rights are slowly being taken away. it may not be a civil war as in the 1860s but our country is going to be changed to the bad if we dont wake up and see these violent people for what they are and answer them back.

  • JWC

    Roy Moore is a tin horn crooked son of a Bitch who did wrong several times and was reprimanded for it He lost his status and still won’r quit His wife Kayla is his #1 support People you have spent your time you lost go AWAY

    • tristram

      The U.S. Attorney General is one of his pals, as are recent appointees throughout the federal gov. His positions are being pushed aggressively by state governments across the South. There’s a realistic chance that people who think like him will constitute a majority on SCOTUS before the TrumPence administration ends. Why should he think he has lost?

      • JWC

        Jeffy and Roy and about 8 others are good ole boys crooked as hell

        • tristram

          lotsa crooks have died happy

          • JWC

            and lots haven’t

  • Xiao Ai: The Social Gadfly

    Democrats, your Representatives intend to do nothing about Trump or his policies. It’s entirely up to you to fight for your rights and your beliefs.

    I just spoke with the office of my AZ Dem Representative #RaulGrijalva. He intends to do nothing regarding my voter information being turned over to Trump. Nothing. If your waiting for help, your on your own. When you idiots realize that, maybe you’ll actually do something.

    You want to know why Hillary lost, this is it. It wasn’t asshat Bernie. It was that, Dem politicians aren’t concerned about anything, other than their income.

    • scream4ever

      Really? 25 states and counting are refusing to hand over their voter rolls to the federal government.

      • Xiao Ai: The Social Gadfly

        Yes really.

        Twenty-five states and counting, or otherwise, is not an impedance. Of those twenty-five, some are Republican dominated. They’ll rollover eventually. Further, most states have Republican Governors which will likely find a way to overrule a refusal. The Democratic Party is now the minority It’ll continue to cower and capitulate, when it serves.

  • The_Wretched

    Uhhh – Pavan shows that the TX SCT is full of it. Pavan is the expected legal outcome with standard legal reasoning.

  • KnownDonorDad

    Along with the Institute for Creation Research,

    Wait a minute, it’s as if it’s not a scientific research organization at all, but an evangelical advocacy group! Oh, wait….

    • Bad Tom

      How can you research an event that never happened?

  • Sam_Handwich

    if some same-sex married couples are currently being treated differently than their opposite sex counterparts in TX, has a federal lawsuit been filed yet? seems like there would be no shortage of plaintiffs who have standing. and there’s no need to wait for this particular case to get kicked around state courts.

    • scream4ever

      Exactly. The ruling had no teeth had all and were merely a political stunt.

      • tristram

        It’s designed to generate a case that will work up thru the 5th Circuit to SCOTUS and arrive soon after Trump’s next nominee is seated. Roberts will be the swing vote, and we’ll find out how his backbone is holding up. If Trump gets two more appointments before the case is decided, Roberts will get to watch from the sidelines as the past 8 years are erased.

        • scream4ever

          First a jurisdictions must refuse to grant some/all of the rights of marriage to same-sex couples. So far the city of Houston has said they will not.

          As far as Roberts, he showed a backbone in Pavin v Smith, so I have hope.

          • tristram

            Not that much backbone since he was joining a majority opinion. Might be different when he’s a swing vote in a Republican world.

          • scream4ever

            True, but he does value consistency and integrity in the court, unlike the far-right wing.

  • Richard B

    All Roy Moore has ever accomplished was being kicked out of high office twice for promoting his religious hate of anyone not like him…
    The crazy part he is so un-Jesus like – he just a festering old boil of hate looking for attention.
    We must be getting close to a time for all these ancient southern bigots preaching hate to just fade off into the sunset and die of old age.
    What is up with that Karma?

    • Bryan

      Kicked out of office TWICE.

    • (((GC)))

      Un-Jesus-like? Jesus was quite a chameleon, at least according to the words attributed to him:

      Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. (Matthew 10:34-36, KJV)

      Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. (Luke 12:51-53, KJV)

      • M Jackson

        Jesus is the ultimate Bendable Buddy.

      • jonfromcalifornia

        That’s the same quote TWICE. Jesus was right. He was predicting that he would be the cause of division because of people’s perception of him. The progressives see Jesus one way and the conservatives see him in another. There is nothing “chameleon”-like in this. He was definite in his denunciation of the hypocrites, the self-righteous. He made social and religious outcasts like tax-collectors and Samaritans heroes in his parables. His staunchest supporters were women in a patriarchal society – one, a former prostitute was the first to see Jesus after His resurrection. He was not afraid to preach the people were more important than the Law. For going against the grain, he was tortured and killed. So no, he was not two faced like these Evangelicals and other conservatives. I have to disagree with you about this.

        • Cucker “Dick” Tarlson

          Precisely. Thank you.

  • Hanwi

    “The Texas Supreme Court demonstrated the critical thinking….”

    Words never uttered before…

    • The_Wretched

      Funny how Moore etal otherwise hate ‘critical thinking’. It’s like when the scientists or pro-lifers say ‘science is on our side’.

      • KnownDonorDad

        They still hate critical thinking, since what the TSC did was not critical thinking. 🙂

  • Jamie Wilson

    As I posted yesterday, Justice Kennedy has informed those applying for clerkship positions for the October 2018 term that he is “considering retiring.” That means that he will be on the Court for the October 2017-June 2018 term. Which means that he will be there for us when the Texas marriage benefits case reaches the Court.

    It is difficult to see how the same Court which handed down Obergefell (with Gorsuch replacing Scalia) could now allow discrimination in benefits. It should be a 5-4 win for us, and it is not out of the question that Roberts and/or Alito might join the Obergefell majority for a 6-3 or 7-2 win.

    • The_Wretched

      Goresuch on Pavan and his other history tells me he’ll vote with Thomas / Alito so 6/3 is the best possible outcome for the TX case at SCT.

    • Ninja0980

      Roberts might be the only one who flips.
      Alito has made it clear he will have no qualms undermining or overturning Obergefell, same with Thomas.

    • scream4ever

      How do you know this? I would think that would be huge/public news if true for obvious reasons.

      I’m not sure if the Texas case will reach the Supreme Court by then (if it ever does) since it’s been remanded back to state district court. Regardless, it means he’ll also be there for the Masterpiece Cake shop case as well (which likely will be heard this fall).

      Roberts will not vote to undermine Obergefell. His majority vote in Pavin v Smith is proof of this, and he actually believes in integrity/consistency from the court.

      • Jamie Wilson

        The remand order does not prevent an appeal to SCOTUS. It would just become part of the appeal and part of the order SCOTUS would be asked to reverse.

        The story was buried in a report by Nina Totenberg and picked up here: http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93506

        I agree that it is surprising how it flew under the media radar.

        • scream4ever

          An interesting point regarding the appointment of a new justice being put off until after the mid-terms. Hopefully Democrats will know not to make the same mistake twice (I’m looking at you Bernie or Busters).

          Can the order be appealed now, even as it’s pending in the state district court?

          • Jamie Wilson

            The order is not in the state district court because the remand will be put on hold once the petition for cert is filed with SCOTUS. If cert is denied, then it will be remanded to the state district court.

            As for Kennedy retiring, he didn’t say he definitely would retire after June 2018, only that he is considering it. However, that notice to the clerk applicants is a strong signal and we should assume that he will. If he retires at the end of June 2018, Trump and the GOP Senate majority will have 6 months to replace him before the new Senate convenes in January 2019. Unfortunately, that is plenty of time to get the replacement in, barring some unforeseen development. So even if the Dems retake the Senate in November 2018, I think Trump and the GOP still get to fill that seat.

    • bsinps

      Fortunately Roberts just reported that he will “NOT” be retiring for at least another year. Thank you Justice Roberts

    • That depends on how long it takes this case to get there. There are a few steps before SCOTUS. Yes, they could just give them a smack-down but if they hear the case at each point just to drag this out, we could be delayed until there is a replacement on the court. Look at how they stalled the anti-gay baker case until they got Gorsuch seated.

      • Jamie Wilson

        The baker case went from the CO Supreme Court to SCOTUS. There was no stalling. The TX case is prepped to follow the same route. There are no other steps necessary other than a petition for cert, which should be filed in the next few weeks and ruled upon in the fall. Of course, SCOTUS could deny cert. but it only takes 4 votes to grant.

        • Aren’t there a couple of federal appellate courts before a case goes from the state supreme court to the US supreme court? The baker case is a few years old now. It’s unlikely that the Texas case will get to SCOTUS next year and after that Kennedy may have resigned. That’s a problem.

          • Jamie Wilson

            A case can start in federal district court, and then it needs to go to the US Court of Appeals before reaching SCOTUS. Alternatively, a case can begin in the state court system and make its way up to the state supreme court. After the state supreme court has ruled, the next appeal is directly to SCOTUS. The latter track is what we see in Colorado and Texas. Both cases have already spent years making their way up the state court system and both have been ruled upon by the respective state supreme courts. So now, SCOTUS is the next stop.

          • tristram

            The Texas case was not a final decision – it’s a remand. It is not ripe for appeal in federal court

          • Jamie Wilson

            It is a final decision on the legal issues presented. The remand is for further proceedings consistent with the ruling. That ruling can be appealed.

  • Igby

    Look at those scowling faces. They seem nice.

    (Snark. They all need to increase the fiber in their diets.)

    • djcoastermark

      I wonder why more fiber ? It looks as if their already clenching their chuttbeeks.

    • Well, first they need to remove that damned “I’m better than anyone else” stick up their butt.

  • JT

    Roy Moore can eat shit.

    • Oh’behr in Minnesota

      He needs one of Minnie’s pies.

  • Roy don’t you have a son to visit in prison or at the very least attempt to keep out of prison…

    • Oh’behr in Minnesota

      Exactly, when I saw this post, I thought, I wonder how his son, the role model heterosexual is doing these days.,

  • Rocco

    Cold comfort for you, King Trog, who will never be a Supreme Court (state or national)) Justice…ever again! Lol…bitter much?

    • kevin vincent

      And this will be swiftly overruled by a higher court

  • j.martindale

    Sure. When the SCOTUS ruled that laws prohibiting gay marriage were “invalid to the extent they exclude same-sex couples from civil
    marriage on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex
    couples,” they surely were not considering the financial benefits of a spouse as a term or condition of marriage. Why on earth would anyone suppose that?

  • david fairfield

    See you in court!

  • Adam Stevens

    Isn’t marriage without the benefits pointless and meaningless?

    Oh wait, perhaps that was their intention??

    This is SO stupid.

    Obergefell is CRYSTAL clear on this already. They MUST be treated EXACTLY the same.

    A waste of time and money.

  • david fairfield

    I hope all the married gay couples will be filing for tax exempt status. If we can’t have the same benefits as everyone else, we should not have to pay the same ‘protection’ fees as others who are protected….

    By the same token, since we are so insignificant and only represent 1% of the population, it wouldn’t be a financial burden to subsidize a tax exempt status for us. In fact, let’s take this one step further…we have been removed from the census, primarily so there will not be an accurate record of percentage of gay people, let alone gay married people. Texas has proclaimed many times over the last five years that we represent LESS THAN 1% of their population…

    Furthermore, since we have been removed from the census, I guess we don’t exist. But certainly if anyone can create a way to collect taxes from non-existent entities Texas can.

    There are 90,000 married gay couples in Texas. That’s 3% of Texas population. These numbers only represent MARRIED gay couples, which has held steady at about one third of the total of gay couples, not to mention gays who are not in a relationship…..

  • Xuuths

    They really revel in their own stupidity. How to such incompetent people manage to pass the bar?

    • Bad Tom

      A very low bar?

  • Friday

    Corrupt political anti-Constitutional twice-ex-judge says what?

  • Steve Smith

    “The Institute for Creation Research?” WTF? The insanity reaches ever newer heights.

  • TimJ

    Why is the Institute for Creation Research filing an amicus brief on same sex marriage? They must be expanding their portfolio since the creation thing is such a losing issue.

  • J Ascher

    Of course, as conservatives, the TX Supreme Court justices can justify anything, even when it flies in the face of established jurisprudence: Federal law supersedes state law!

  • Gianni

    I wouldn’t cheer to soon, assholes. If the lower court maintains it’s stance, the first appeal to the Federal courts will overturn it. It’s painfully obvious that the Texas Supremes didn’t want to touch this knowing full well what the Fed Supreme Court decision encompasses. They are elected justices and don’t want egg on their faces when a Fed court reverses the travesty.They know that if the marriage is legal then all the legal benefits and considerations go with it. This brand of ‘marital segregation’ won’t hold up.

  • Macbill

    They are patting each other on the back: every road block for people who love one another against their sky-god’s wishes makes them happy for their god.

    I think they need to build a big ark…..

  • Aracelijshaw

    my classmate’s sister-in-law makes $76 each hour from home. she’s been out of work for 12 months… the previous month her earnings was $17069 working on the internet for three hours a day. ➤ check out this➤ link
    ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancialCashJobs86DailyPress/Home/Wage….
    ☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭::::fd86…