The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that justices of the peace, along with anyone legally authorised to perform wedding ceremonies in the Lone Star State, may refuse to conduct a ceremony based on a “sincerely held religious belief”.
In a three-page document outlining the new interpretation of the Judicial Code of Conduct, the state’s highest court stated: “It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief.”
According to KXAN, the change follows a federal appeals court’s request earlier this year for the Texas Supreme Court to clarify a question about state law. A North Texas county official had sued the state in federal court, expressing concern that he could face punishment if he refused to perform same-sex marriages while continuing to perform weddings for opposite-sex couples.
Jack County Judge Brian Umphress argued that performing a marriage for same-sex couples would go against his religious beliefs, and that being compelled to do so would violate his First Amendment rights.
A major concern arising from the Texas Supreme Court’s decision is whether it could set a precedent affecting interracial marriages. Jason Mazzone, Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, warned that the court’s broad language could potentially open the door for such cases.
“Given the wording of the comment by the Texas Supreme Court, it does seem, as you suggest, that a judge who says, ‘For religious reasons, I’m not going to perform the interracial marriage,’ would also fall within the scope of the comment that the Texas Supreme Court issued, and would not trigger any form of disciplinary action,” he told KXAN.
Neil Thomas, senior pastor at the Cathedral of Hope in Dallas – the world’s largest progressive church – criticised the Texas Supreme Court for its interpretation of the law, according to Baptist News.
“This ruling is nothing less than state-sanctioned discrimination and a betrayal of the fundamental promise of equality before the law,” he said. “This decision gives prejudice a platform and power it does not deserve.”
He added: “To deny couples the right to marry because of who they love is an affront to both our Constitution and the gospel of Jesus Christ. Let us be clear: this is not about religious freedom; it is about institutionalising bias.”