When we last heard from Roy Moore, the theocratic chief justice of Alabama’s Supreme Court, he was suggesting that he may or may not follow federal court orders regarding the removal of his unconstitutional Ten Commandments display in the state judicial building. Moore had, as he put it, “discretionary power.”
This week, Moore picked up where he left off a month ago. Moore and his lawyers told a federal judge this week that federal courts lacked the authority to rule on the constitutionality of his religious monument — a 5,280-pound granite Commandments display.
“The federal district court has no jurisdiction, power or authority to remove this public acknowledgment of God, which is authorized in the constitution of the state,” a spokesman for Moore said.
Putting aside for the moment the merits of Moore’s bizarre argument — he’s obviously wrong — this does not sound like the kind of remark someone would make if they were planning to follow the rule of law and abide by a federal court order.
Moore has now lost at the federal district court and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. With that in mind, a district court judge issued an order yesterday that gave Moore an August 20 deadline for the religious monument to be removed from the building.
Moore doesn’t appear to care. To him, federal court orders don’t really count because, as far as he’s concerned, federal courts don’t have jurisdiction over his religious crusade.
One therefore gets the impression that August 20 will come and go while the washing-machine shaped religious display will stay right where it is. Moore, I suspect, will all but dare the federal courts to do something about his active defiance.
Religious right groups in Alabama, meanwhile, including the Alabama Christian Coalition, are encouraging their supporters to use civil disobedience to prohibit the removal of Moore’s display.
Judge Myron Thompson, who issued the order yesterday, said that if the monument is not removed by the deadline, he will hold Moore in civil contempt and would fine Moore $5,000 a day for the first week, with the amount doubling at the beginning of each week thereafter.
Thompson has, however, all but ruled out the train wreck scenario — direct confrontation.
In his eight-page order yesterday, Thompson said, “It is the initial obligation of the State of Alabama, not this court and not any federal official, to remove the monument. The court, at this time, does not envision a scenario in which there would be an opportunity for any physical confrontation between federal and state officials or between federal officials and anyone else.”
As far as Thompson is concerned, Moore took responsibility for installing the religious display, so Moore has the responsibility for moving it.
That’s not an unreasonable approach, but I’m not sure if Thompson appreciates the fact that he’s not dealing with a reasonable person. Moore doesn’t believe Thompson has the authority to direct him to do anything. As Moore sees it, Thompson’s federal court orders are merely suggestions that he can ignore at will. If a 15-day deadline for moving the monument is irrelevant, then so too is Thompson finding him in contempt, as well as the levied fines, which Moore will almost certainly see no reason to pay.
I don’t blame Judge Thompson for wanting to avoid a “physical confrontation,” where someone — federal marshals? the national guard? — has to go in and take this monument away. But if justice will be served and the rule of law followed, Thompson may inevitably have to consider how this can be done if and when Moore refuses to cooperate, which at this point, seems like a distinct possibility.
Moore, meanwhile, is on the clock. August 20 is two weeks away. I’ll keep you posted.