Recently, the Texas Supreme Court sided with a Christian judge who refused to officiate homosexual weddings, as it did not conform with her beliefs. Dianne Hensley, a justice of the peace in Waco, was previously reprimanded for refusing to perform same-sex weddings.
Hensley was given a public warning for her refusal to officiate the marriages, claiming her conduct violated judicial impartiality based on sexual orientation. However, the Texas Supreme Court ruled in an 8-1 decision that Hensley’s decision not to appeal the commission’s warning to a Special Court of Review before filing a lawsuit in civil court does not prevent her from pursuing her lawsuit.
“We hold that, apart from one declaratory request against the Commission, petitioner’s suit is not barred by her decision not to appeal the Commission’s Public Warning or by sovereign immunity,” according to the majority decision, written by Chief Justice Nathan Hecht.
“Accordingly, we affirm the part of the court of appeals’ judgment dismissing the one declaratory request for lack of jurisdiction, reverse the remainder of the judgment, and remand to the court of appeals to address the remaining issues on appeal,” the decision added.
Hensley’s legal team has argued that her refusal to officiate same-sex weddings is protected under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which permits her to exercise her Christian religious beliefs and not be forced into compelled speech. Furthermore, Hensley reportedly went out of her way to offer suggestions for other marriage services that would officiate homosexual marriages.
“No one complained to Hensley, her staff, or the Commission about her marriage-referral system or her ability to be fair — or even her appearance of fairness — in any judicial proceeding,” the ruling added. “Nevertheless, the Commission learned of her system from an interview she gave a newspaper and opened a preliminary investigation in May 2018.”
Justice Jimmy Blacklock and Justice John Devine wrote in a concurring opinion that the commission’s punitive actions against Hensley constituted illegal religious discrimination. They explained that her actions of politely declining to participate in a same-sex wedding for religious reasons do not constitute an inability to judge impartially.
“By going out of its way to take sides in a contentious moral and political debate about conflicts between the right to same-sex marriage created by [U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015] Obergefell [ruling] and the rights of religious dissenters long enshrined in our founding documents — an ongoing debate that Obergefell itself acknowledged would continue — the Commission has done far more, in the eyes of many Texans, to undermine public confidence in Texas’s judicial branch than a lone justice of the peace in Waco ever could.”
Hiram Sassar, executive general counsel at The First Liberty Institute, one of the organizations legally representing Hensley, celebrated the ruling. Sassar illustrated that the Waco judge’s actions were a strong example for Christian public officials.
“Judge Hensley’s way of reconciling her religious beliefs while meeting the needs of her community is not only legal but should stand as a model for public officials across Texas,” Sasser stated. “This is a great victory for Judge Hensley and renews her opportunity to seek justice under the religious liberty protections of the law.”
Featured image credit: Jeff Belmonte from Cuiabá, Brazil, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wedding_rings.jpg