Alabama supreme court halts same-sex marriages

The Alabama supreme court has ordered the state’s probate judges to stop issuing marriage licences to gay couples, saying a previous federal ruling that gay marriage bans violate the US constitution did not preclude them from following state law, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

The all-Republican court in Montgomery on Tuesday sided with the argument offered by a pair of conservative organisations, appealing against a decision by US district judge Callie Granade of Mobile, who ruled in January that both Alabama’s constitutional and statutory bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional.

It was not immediately clear what impact the latest ruling would have, or whether it would stand. While a six-member majority of the nine-member court did not explicitly invalidate the marriages of hundreds of same-sex couples who obtained licences in the state in recent weeks, the decision used the term “purported” to describe those licences.

The court’s most outspoken opponent of gay marriage, Chief Justice Roy Moore, disqualified himself from the case and did not take part in the writing of the unsigned 134-page decision.

After Granade’s ruling, Moore told probate judges across the state not to issue same-sex marriage licences. His stance created widespread confusion, prompting some judges to refuse to issue the licences and others to shut their operations for all couples, gay and straight, until they could get a clear answer. Some, however, decided to issue the licences.

Of the other judges on Alabama’s high court, one agreed with the ruling while citing some reservations, and one, Justice Greg Shaw, dissented.

In his dissent, Shaw said it was “unfortunate” that federal courts refused to delay gay marriage in the state until the US supreme court could settle the issue nationally. But, Shaw said, the state supreme court did not have the power to consider the issue and was creating more confusion by “venturing into uncharted waters” outside its jurisdiction.

A spokeswoman for governor Robert Bentley said the administration was reviewing the decision and had no immediate comment.

The court’s ruling came in response to a request from the Southern Baptist-affiliated Alabama Citizens Action programme and the Alabama Policy Institute, a conservative think tank, which asked the justices to halt same-sex unions.

Joe Godfrey, executive director of the Alabama Citizens Action Program, said he was excited about the decision. “We are concerned about the family and the danger that same-sex marriage will have.

“It will be a devastating blow to the family, which is already struggling,” Godfrey added. He said the decision would provide some stability in Alabama until the US supreme court ruled later this year. The nation’s high court will hear oral arguments in April and is expected to issue a ruling by June on whether gay couples nationwide have a fundamental right to marry and whether states can ban such unions.

An attorney representing couples who filed suit to allow gay marriages in the state said the Alabama supreme court showed “callous disregard” and overstepped its bounds by declaring the state’s ban on same-sex marriages constitutional, something she said the justices hadn’t been asked to consider.

“It is deeply unfortunate that even as nationwide marriage equality is on the horizon, the Alabama supreme court is determined to be on the wrong side of history,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Centre for Lesbian Rights.

David Kennedy, a lawyer for the couple in the case that resulted in Granade’s ruling overturning Alabama’s gay-marriage ban, said the supreme court spoke on the Alabama case when it refused to block Granade’s decision.

The Alabama court ruled that state bans on gay marriage were not discriminatory since they banned both men and women from marrying people of the same sex, and it said the laws had a rational basis because they were meant to recognise and encourage ties “between children and their biological parents”.