The Supreme Court of Arkansas summarily denied a request that any high court justice who planned to run for office or seek re-election consider recusing himself from the decision on whether to uphold the state's ban on gay marriage.
The request for recusal was filed in early August by plaintiffs seeking to overturn the ban. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Chris Piazza struck down the ban in May saying it violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process and equal protection in the 14th Amendment.
More than 500 gay couples were married around the state before the state Supreme Court suspended Piazza's ruling.
Attorneys for those plaintiffs at the Wagoner Law Firm in Little Rock did not return phone calls Thursday.
Attorney General Dustin McDaniel said previously that it would be inappropriate for a justice to steer clear of a decision because of the possible effect on his re-election bid.
"As the Attorney General stated when the motion was filed, it is a nonstarter to file recusal motions simply because justices must hear controversial cases and then stand for election. We respect the Court's decision," McDaniel's spokesman, Aaron Sadler, wrote in an email.
The court did not issue a detailed opinion or state its reason for denying the motion unanimously.
In their original motion for recusal, attorneys Jack Wagoner and Cheryl Maples did not ask any specific justices to recuse themselves, but suggested that all of the justices consider recusing themselves if they planned to run for judicial office again in the future.
According to court documents, the request was based on a resolution passed by the Arkansas Legislative Council in late June that condemned Piazza for his ruling and urged other judges to uphold the ban.
That ruling stated that Amendment 83 of the Arkansas Constitution, approved by voters in 2004, and Act 144 of 1997, a separate law prohibiting same-sex marriage, both violated provisions of the state and federal constitutions.
The state appealed that ruling, which is still pending before the Supreme Court. No timeline has been set for an opinion in that case, but a deadline of Sept. 15 was set for the state to file its brief.
The state is also defending the ban in federal court, where two gay couples have also challenged it.
Metro on 09/05/2014