U.S.
Eric Gay / AP Photo
Texas' conservative Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton called the Supreme Court decision extending the right to marry to same-sex couples nationwide a “lawless ruling” and said state workers may cite their religious objections in refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
He warned in a statement Sunday that because of the ruling, any clerk, justice of the peace or other administrator who declines to issue a license to a same-sex couple could face litigation or a fine.
But in a nonbinding legal opinion requested by Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Paxton said “numerous lawyers” stand ready to defend, free of charge, any public official refusing to grant one.
In its 5-4 opinion Friday, the Supreme Court did nothing to eliminate rights of religious liberty, Paxton's opinion stated.
“This newly minted federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage can and should peaceably co-exist with longstanding constitutional and statutory rights, including the rights to free exercise of religion and freedom of speech,” the attorney general wrote.
While many Republicans have said they disagreed with the Supreme Court ruling, officials in most states have said that they will abide by it. Paxton's comments echoed those Friday of Gov. Greg Abbott, who said Texans can't be forced by the court ruling to act contrary to their religious beliefs.
“Despite the Supreme Court's rulings, Texans' fundamental right to religious liberty remains protected,” Abbott said Friday.
In his two-page memo, he instructed agency leaders that no one in their ranks may take “adverse action” against someone acting on their religious beliefs, including “granting or denying benefits.” That led to early confusion and questions over whether state agencies may deny health or retirement benefits to spouses of gay or lesbian employees.
Abbott spokesman John Wittman later issued a clarifying statement Friday, saying the directive doesn't order the denial of benefits to same-sex couples. He said it only “ensures that individuals doing business with the state cannot be discriminated against because of their religious beliefs.”
Paxton in his statement Sunday said the justices “weakened the rule of law” and “fabricated a new constitutional right.”
Texas was not part of the cases before the Supreme Court. A federal judge ruled that the state's ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional but declined to enforce the ruling while it was on appeal. Since Friday's ruling, a federal district court in Texas has prohibited Texas from enforcing state laws that define marriage as a union exclusively between one man and one woman.
The Associated Press
Move follows a court order and the county clerk says it is not planning to issue more licenses to same-sex couples
Conservative officials and right-wing groups vow to fight decision, saying no court can overturn natural law
The majority and four separate dissenting opinions contain powerful language about the institution of marriage
Error
Sorry, your comment was not saved due to a technical problem. Please try again later or using a different browser.