Texas Judge Who Refused to Marry Same-Sex Couples Sues Judicial Conduct Commission
Justice of the Peace Brian Keith Umphress argues he "is engaged in numerous extra-judicial activities that evince disapproval of homosexual behavior, same-sex marriage, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell, and all of these activities are exposing him to discipline."
June 17, 2020 at 05:49 PM
4 minute read
In a lawsuit by a judge who doesn't want to face discipline for opposing same-sex marriage, the judge and Texas Commission for Judicial Conduct are squabbling over whether a federal court in Fort Worth or Austin should hear the dispute.
Jack County Justice of the Peace Brian Keith Umphress, who stated in his lawsuit that he's been marrying heterosexual couples and refusing weddings to same-sex couples because of his religion, had filed his lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Fort Worth.
The judge argued the lawsuit should be heard there because he's officiated 12 opposite-sex weddings in Jack County since 2019. It said he's afraid of facing a sanction because the judicial conduct commission has issued a public warning against another judge, Dianne Hensley, for turning away same-sex couples.
But in a court document filed Wednesday, the judicial conduct commission argued that the court should either dismiss the case or transfer it to the Austin division of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. Their argument is that the commission and all 12 of its commissioners—all are defendants—were meeting in Austin when they debated the Hensley case and voted to sanction that judge.
"Plaintiff's theory would allow any judge in Texas to sue these defendant commissioners in any division of any district within the state, and to do so based upon the plaintiff judge's residence, where he or she perceived impact from the defendants' conduct," the court document said.
John McKetta, partner in Graves Dougherty Hearon & Moody in Austin, who represents the commission, declined to comment. So did one of Umphress's attorneys, Dustin Fillmore of The Fillmore Law Firm in Fort Worth.
Separately, Hensley, a justice of the peace in McLennan County, has also sued the commission and its commissioners over her sanction. She turned away same-sex couples seeking a wedding officiant because of her Christian religious beliefs, and alleged in her suit that the defendants were violating her religious freedom under Texas law by sanctioning her.
The sanction found Hensley it violated a judicial ethics rule, Canon 4A(1) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, that requires a judge to conduct her extrajudicial activities in a way that does not cast doubt on the judge's ability to be impartial as a judge.
Read more: Experts Question Judge's Choice to Sue Over Sanction, Rather Than Appeal
Umphress's lawsuit takes issue with the way the commission has interpreted Canon 4A(1).
He "is engaged in numerous extra-judicial activities that evince disapproval of homosexual behavior, same-sex marriage, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell, and all of these activities are exposing him to discipline under the commission's current interpretation," the complaint said.
Aside from doing heterosexual ceremonies and not same-sex ones, the judge is part of a church that teaches that "homosexual conduct of any sort is immoral" and violates scripture, the complaint said. Umphress argued that being a member of his church would qualify as extrajudicial activities that show disapproval of same-sex marriage and therefore violate the judicial canon.
When he's up for reelection in 2022, the complaint said Umphress would campaign as a same-sex marriage opponent. He thinks that would also subject him to discipline.
Among other things, he wants the court to issue a declaratory judgment that the First Amendment protects his right to go to his church that disapproves of homosexuality, keep up his practice of refusing to officiate same-sex weddings and speak out about same-sex marriage during his campaign.
Umphress also wants a permanent injunction that would stop the judicial conduct commission from investigating or disciplining judges based on disapproval of same-sex marriage or homosexual conduct. He wants the court to find that his religious rights would stop such a sanction.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEven With New Business Courts, Texas Is a Long Way from Taking Delaware's Corporate Law Mantle
5 minute read'Courts Do Get It Wrong': Legal Experts Discuss State-Law Certification Pros and Cons
9 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250