AUSTIN, Texas (LifeSiteNews) – The Texas Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Christian judge who has refused to officiate over same-sex “weddings,” which she holds as contrary to her faith.
The court ruled Friday, June 28, in favor of Judge Dianne Hensley in Waco, Texas, who had received a public reprimand and a warning of future sanctions from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct for refusing to perform same-sex “weddings” based on religious grounds. The Commission claimed Hensley was violating judicial impartiality and discriminating based on sexual orientation.
The 8-1 ruling allows a lawsuit Hesley filed against the State Commission to move forward. According to reports, she argues that “her refusal to officiate over same-sex weddings is protected under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and an exercise of her religious beliefs.” Hensley has also challenged the charge of violating impartiality, arguing that she is not required to officiate over weddings and that the matter does not affect the performance of judicial duties.
After the State Commission issued a public warning in January 2019, Hensley continued to refuse to officiate, referring those seeking a same-sex “wedding” to other venues and officiants, and sought a court order to block future sanctions form the Commission.
The Texas court’s majority opinion insisted that judges are not required to officiate at weddings as part of their judicial duties and that Hensley’s actions did not imply bias or prejudice.
Justice Jimmy Blacklock slammed the State Commission’s move against Hensley, contending that, “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 Obergefell 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.”
RELATED: Jack Phillips returns to Colorado Supreme Court for right to refuse baking ‘transgender’ cakes
In a concurring opinion, Justice Blacklock, joined by Justice John Devine, praised Hensley’s actions and expressed his wish that the court had fully concluded the case in favor of Hensley instead of sending it back to the lower to move forward.
He wrote, “We could have all but ended this regrettable case today. We should have done so by holding that the Judicial Conduct Commission lacks the lawful authority to sanction Judge Hensley or any other Texas judge who politely declines to perform same-sex marriages but respectfully refers same-sex couples to a nearby officiant who will gladly do so. Judge Hensley’s eminently reasonable policy honored her personal convictions and showed courtesy to same-sex couples, who the U.S. Supreme Court has said are entitled to a marriage—not to a particular marriage officiant, and especially not to an officiant with religious objections to participating in the ceremony.”
Defending the constitutionality of Hensley’s actions, Blacklock continued, “Judge Hensley’s actions were not unethical, unconstitutional, or illegal in any way. Politely declining to participate in a same-sex wedding for religious reasons does not demonstrate bias or prejudice against gay people. Nor does it demonstrate an inability to impartially judge their lawsuits.”
Blacklock praised Hensley for adhering to her Christian faith and refusing to “bend the knee” to new “orthodoxy” of same-sex “marriage.”
Citing Hensley’s “courteous” redirecting of persons seeking a same-sex “wedding” to other officiants, Blacklock wrote, “Imagine a couple in that situation trying to coerce the courteous and helpful Christian judge to violate her convictions for their convenience, when other local officiants are happy to accommodate. What purpose could that possibly serve — other than to prove that adherents to the old orthodoxy will be made to bend the knee to the new one?”
He continued, “I find it encouraging that we have no indication any same-sex couple even considered handling the situation that way. What decent person would? Judge Hensley treated them respectfully. They got married nearby. They went about their lives. Judge Hensley went back to work, her Christian conscience clean, her knees bent only to her God.”
RELATED: Texas Supreme Court upholds ban on mutilating transgender hormones, surgeries for children
Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute that represented Hensley in court, praised the ruling as a victory for religious liberty, saying, “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. This is a great victory for Judge Hensley and renews her opportunity to seek justice under the religious liberty protections of the law. We appreciate that Justices Blacklock and Devine were willing to rule right now that what the Commission on Judicial Conduct did was unlawful religious discrimination. But we will continue this fight against religious discrimination as long as the Commission insists on their form of a religious test for public office.”
Judge Hensley expressed gratitude for the favorable ruling as well, saying, “I am truly grateful to the Supreme Court for giving me the opportunity to continue to stand for religious liberty and the rule of law.”
RELATED
Melania Trump raises $1 million for homosexual Republican group at Mar-a-Lago event
Domestic violence in LGBT relationships 8 times higher than that of heterosexuals: DOJ report
‘Married’ homosexual arrested for child pornography allegedly planned to abuse surrogate baby