Alabama resists Federal Fiat

On March 3rd the Alabama Supreme Court held that the state's Probate judges must refuse to issue marriage licenses to any two applicants of the same sex. This complies with Alabama law which does not permit homosexual marriages. I cannot say I have read the decision closely. It is 134 pages, with another 14 added by a concurrence and a dissent. I only gave half an hour to the study of the Opinion, which is a little less than fifteen seconds per page on average. About half the decision addresses the jurisdiction of the Court and the standing of the parties. At about the mid-way point, the majority Opinion turns to several recent rulings and orders by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama in two civil cases, their reach, and their effect. The Opinion holds that the parties do have standing, the Court does have jurisdiction, and the federal District Court orders apply only to the litigants in those two cases and do not set legal precedent binding on the courts of Alabama. The last thirty-five pages or so address the underlying issue more directly and make for interesting reading. Of the nine justices of the Alabama Supreme Court, six joined the majority Opinion, one concurred in most of the opinion and in the result, Chief Justice Moore recused himself and did not participate. One justice wrote a short dissent, in which he lamented the refusal of the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to grant a stay of the federal rulings and orders at issue, but dissented because he did not think the Alabama Supreme Court had jurisdiction over the case that was presented to it.