Circuit Judge (1992–2000) Appointment In 1992, Etowah County circuit judge Julius Swann died in office. Republican
governor H. Guy Hunt was charged with making an appointment until the next election. Moore's name was floated by some of his associates, and a background check was initiated with several state and county agencies, including the Etowah County district attorney's office. Moore's former political opponent Jimmy Hedgspeth, who still helmed the D.A.'s office, recommended Moore despite personal reservations, and Moore was installed in the position he had failed to win in 1982. Moore told the
Montgomery Advertiser that his intention in hanging the plaque was to fill up the bare space on the courtroom walls and to indicate the importance of the Ten Commandments. He stated that it was not his intention to generate controversy. He told
The Atlantic that he understood the potential for controversy existed, but "I wanted to establish the moral foundation of our law." While Moore presided over a murder case shortly after his appointment, the defendant's attorney objected to the plaque. This attracted the attention of critics who also objected to Moore's practice of opening court sessions with a
prayer beseeching divine guidance for jurors in their deliberations. In at least one case, Moore asked a clergyman to lead the court's jury pool in prayer. The local branch of the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent a letter in June 1993 threatening a lawsuit if such prayers did not cease. On June 20, 1994, the ACLU sent a representative to Moore's courtroom to observe and record the pre-session prayer. Although the organization did not immediately file suit, Moore decried the action as an "act of intimidation" in a post-trial press conference. The incident drew additional attention to Moore while he was campaigning to hold onto his circuit court seat. In that year's election, Moore won the seat in a
landslide victory over attorney Keith Pitts, who had unsuccessfully prosecuted the "Silk and Satin" murder case.
Lawsuit In March 1995, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against Moore, stating that the pre-court session prayers and the Ten Commandments display were both unconstitutional. This original lawsuit was eventually dismissed for technical reasons, but Governor
Fob James instructed state attorney general
Bill Pryor to file suit in
Montgomery County in support of Moore. The case was tried before state circuit judge Charles Price, who in 1996 declared the prayers unconstitutional but initially allowed the Ten Commandments plaque to remain on the courtroom walls. Immediately after the ruling, Moore held a press conference vowing to defy the ruling against pre-session prayers and affirming a religious intent in displaying the plaque. Critics responded by asking Price to reconsider his previous ruling, and the judge issued a new ruling requiring the Ten Commandments plaque to be removed in ten days. Moore appealed Price's decision and kept the plaque up; ten days later the Supreme Court of Alabama issued a temporary stay against the ruling. The Court never ruled in the case, throwing it out for technical reasons in 1998. The crowning element would be two large carved tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments. High-grade granite from
Vermont was ordered and shipped, and Moore found benefactors and a sculptor to complete the job. Moore's actions were made without the consent or knowledge of the eight associate justices. , erected in 2001 On the evening of July 31, 2001, Moore had the completed monument transported to the building and installed in the rotunda. Videotapes of this event were sold by
Coral Ridge Ministries, an evangelical media outlet in
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which later used proceeds from the sales of the tapes to underwrite Moore's ensuing legal expenses. The next morning, Moore held a press conference in the rotunda to publicly unveil the monument. In a speech following the unveiling, Moore declared, "Today a cry has gone out across our land for the acknowledgment of that God upon whom this nation and our laws were founded ... May this day mark the restoration of the moral foundation of law to our people and the return to the knowledge of God in our land."
Federal lawsuit On October 30, 2001, the
ACLU of Alabama,
Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the
Southern Poverty Law Center were among groups that
filed suit in the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, asking that the monument be removed because it "sends a message to all who enter the
Heflin-Torbert Judicial Building that the government encourages and endorses the practice of religion in general and
Judeo-Christianity in particular". The trial, titled
Glassroth v. Moore, began on October 15, 2002. Evidence for the plaintiffs included testimony that lawyers of different religious beliefs had changed their work practices, including routinely avoiding visiting the court building to avoid passing by the monument, and testimony that the monument created a religious atmosphere, with many people using the area for prayer. Moore argued that he would not remove the monument, as doing so would violate his oath of office: [The monument] serves to remind the Appellate Courts and judges of the Circuit and District Court of this State and members of the bar who appear before them, as well as the people of Alabama who visit the [Heflin-Torbet 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'. However, in Moore's view this did not violate the doctrine of
separation of church and state; as the presiding judge later summarized it, Moore argued "the Judeo-Christian God reigned over both the church and the state in this country, and that both owed allegiance to that God," although they must keep their affairs separate.
Protests and monument removal On August 14, Moore announced his intention to defy Judge Thompson's order to have the monument removed. Two days later, large rallies in support of Moore and the Ten Commandments monument formed in front of the judicial building, featuring speakers such as
Alan Keyes, the Reverend
Jerry Falwell, and Moore himself. The crowd peaked at an estimated count of 4,000 that day, and anywhere from several hundred to over a thousand protesters remained through the end of August. The time limit for removal expired on August 20, with the monument still in place in the building's rotunda. As specified in Judge Thompson's order, the state of Alabama faced fines of $5,000 a day until the monument was removed. In response, the eight other members of the Alabama Supreme Court intervened on August 21, unanimously overruled Moore, and ordered the removal of the monument. Moore said that Thompson, "fearing that I would not obey his order, decided to threaten other state officials and force them to remove the monument if I did not do so. A threat of heavy fines was his way of coercing obedience to that order," an action that Moore saw as a violation of the
Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. The monument was not immediately removed from the building for several reasons – pending legal hearings, the monument's weight, worries that the monument could break through the floor if it was taken outside intact, and a desire to avoid confrontation with protesters massed outside the structure. The monument was not actually removed from the state judicial building until July 19, 2004.
Removal from office On August 22, 2003, two days after the deadline for the Ten Commandments monument's removal had passed, the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission (JIC) filed a complaint with the Alabama Court of the Judiciary (COJ), a panel of judges, lawyers and others appointed variously by judges, legal leaders, the governor and the lieutenant governor. The complaint effectively suspended Moore from the chief justice position pending a hearing by the COJ. The COJ ethics hearing was held on November 12, 2003. Moore repeated his earlier sentiment that "to acknowledge God cannot be a violation of the Canons of Ethics. Without God there can be no ethics." He also acknowledged that he would repeat his defiance of the court order if given another opportunity to do so, and that if he returned to office, "I certainly wouldn't leave [the monument] in a closet, shrouded from the public." In closing arguments, the assistant attorney general said Moore's defiance, left unchecked, "undercuts the entire workings of the judicial system ... What message does that send to the public, to other litigants? The message it sends is: If you don't like a court order, you don't have to follow it." The next day, the COJ issued a unanimous opinion ruling that "Chief Justice Moore has violated the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics as alleged by the JIC in its complaint." The COJ had several disciplinary options, including censure or suspension without pay, but because Moore's responses had indicated he would defy any similar court orders in the future, the COJ concluded that "under these circumstances, there is no penalty short of removal from office that would resolve this issue." Moore appealed the COJ's ruling to the Supreme Court of Alabama on December 10, 2003. A special panel of retired judges and justices was randomly selected to hear the case. Moore argued that the COJ did not consider the underlying legality of the federal courts' order that the monument be removed from the courthouse. The Alabama Supreme Court rejected this argument, saying that the COJ did not have the authority to overrule the federal courts, only to determine whether Moore violated the Canons of Judicial Ethics. Therefore, the Court reasoned, it was enough to show that a procedurally-valid order was in place against Moore. Moore also argued that the COJ had imposed a religious test on him to hold his office, and that the COJ's actions had violated his own rights under the
Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court of Alabama rejected each of these arguments as well, and ruled on April 30, 2004, that the COJ had acted properly. The court also upheld the sanction of removal as appropriate. In the November 2012 general election, Moore defeated the Democratic nominee,
Jefferson County circuit judge
Bob Vance, and returned to the bench. Moore received 913,021 votes, to Vance's 850,816 votes.
Views on same-sex marriage On January 28, 2015, the
Southern Poverty Law Center filed a judicial ethics complaint against Moore, stating that he had publicly commented on pending same-sex marriage cases and encouraged state officials and judges to ignore federal court rulings overturning bans on same-sex marriage. Moore issued an order to probate judges and their employees on February 8, the day before a federal court ruling legalizing
same-sex marriage in Alabama was set to take effect, ordering them to disregard the ruling and enforce the state's ban under threat of legal action by the governor. On February 9, after the
United States Supreme Court allowed the federal court ruling to take effect, probate judges in Birmingham, Montgomery, and Huntsville disobeyed Moore and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples. On January 6, 2016, after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in
Obergefell v. Hodges the previous June, Moore issued an administrative order to lower court judges stating, "until further decision by the Alabama Supreme Court, the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court that Alabama probate judges have a ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary to the Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment or the Alabama Marriage Protection Act remain in full force and effect."
2016 suspension from the bench and resignation On May 6, 2016, the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission (JIC) forwarded a list of six charges of ethical violations by Moore to the
Alabama Court of the Judiciary. Moore was suspended from the Alabama Supreme Court pending trial and ruling. Moore faced removal from office over the charges, which were more serious than those which removed him from office in 2003. The JIC's complaint charged Moore with violating the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics by: On August 4, the federal district court dismissed Moore's suit, ruling that under the
abstention doctrine, federal courts generally do not interfere with ongoing state court proceedings.
Suspension by the Court of the Judiciary In June 2016, Moore filed a motion to dismiss the JIC proceedings, arguing, among other things, that the JIC and Alabama Court of the Judiciary lacked jurisdiction to review administrative orders that he issued and that the orders of the Alabama Supreme Court were still in effect from the
Alabama Policy Institute proceedings prohibiting the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses by probate judges in Alabama, despite the rulings in
Obergefell v. Hodges issued by the
U.S. Supreme Court,
Searcy v. Strange,
Strawser v. Strange, and the decision of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which held that the orders were abrogated by
Obergefell. The Court of the Judiciary set a hearing date for the motion to dismiss and ruled that it would be treated as a motion for
summary judgment pertaining to the charges filed by the JIC. The
Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT rights group, responded: "It is clear that Roy Moore not only believes he is above the law, he believes he is above judicial ethics ... Moore was tasked with upholding the law of the land when marriage equality was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, and he defied that task, in the process harming loving, committed same-sex couples across Alabama for his own personal, discriminatory reasons." In July 2016, the JIC filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, asking the Court of the Judiciary to issue summary judgment removing Moore from the bench. Attorneys for the JIC wrote: "Because the chief justice has proven – and promised – that he will not change his behavior, he has left this Court with no choice but to remove him from office to preserve the integrity, independence, impartiality of Alabama's judiciary and the citizens who depend on it for justice." In their reply, Moore (through his attorneys at Liberty Counsel) denied that Moore had directed Alabama's probate judges to disobey an injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, asserting that the orders of the Alabama Supreme Court, which required Alabama's probate judges to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, were still in effect. Moore argued that his January 6 administrative order was mischaracterized by the JIC, despite the fact that the January 6 order stated "Until further decision by the Alabama Supreme Court, the existing orders of the Alabama Supreme Court that Alabama probate judges have a
ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary to the Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment or the Alabama Marriage Protection Act remain in full force and effect." At an August 2016 hearing before the Alabama Court of the Judiciary on the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, Moore's attorneys continued to assert that Moore did not order probate judges to disobey the injunction issued by the U.S. District Court or the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage. The attorney for the JIC responded that Moore's argument "defies common sense" and said that Moore was defying a federal court order, just as he did in 2003, and should be immediately removed from office. The Alabama Court of the Judiciary subsequently denied both Moore's motion and the JIC motion and set a trial date. On September 30, 2016, Moore was found guilty of all six charges and suspended for the remainder of his term, slated to end in 2019. In its 50-page order, the Court of the Judiciary stated it did not find credible Moore's claim that the purpose for the January 6 order was "merely to provide a 'status update' to the state's probate judges".
Appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court and resignation In October 2016, Moore filed a
notice of appeal with the Court of the Judiciary appealing his suspension and the final judgment to the Alabama Supreme Court. Among other claims, Moore contended that neither the JIC nor the COJ had jurisdiction to investigate and punish him for his issuance of the Administrative Order of January 6, 2016; that the six charges against him had not been proven by clear and convincing evidence, and that by "suspending him" without pay for the remainder of his term, the COJ had effectively removed him from office without unanimous agreement of the COJ, as required under Alabama law. Pending the appeal, Moore refused to clean out his office. The Alabama Supreme Court randomly selected seven retired judges to review the appeal of Moore's suspension, Governor Robert Bentley issued an executive order formally appointing the special Supreme Court of these seven retired justices to hear Moore's appeal from the decision of the COJ that suspended him from the bench for the remainder of his term. In December 2016, Moore – represented by the group
Liberty Counsel – filed his appeal brief with the special Alabama Supreme Court. Eight current and retired Alabama judges filed an amicus brief in support of Moore, asserting in their filings that Moore's suspension was, in fact, a removal from office and contrary to Alabama law since it required unanimous agreement of the COJ, despite the fact the COJ did unanimously agree in their final judgment to suspend Moore for the remainder of his term. At Moore's request,
oral argument was canceled to speed up the proceedings, and the special Supreme Court agreed to rule on the case based on the written submissions of the parties. On April 20, the special Supreme Court upheld Moore's suspension. In its opinion, the special Supreme Court ruled that all of the JIC's charges against Moore were supported by clear and convincing evidence. The Court also ruled that it did not have authority to rescind the sanctions imposed on Moore because the charges were amply supported by clear and convincing evidence, and that the JIC was unanimous in their decision to suspend Moore for the remainder of his term. Six days following the court's ruling, Moore resigned from the Alabama Supreme Court. He then announced he would be running for the United States Senate. == Foundation for Moral Law ==