Posted Thursday, February 17th, 2011 by HLPR blog editorial staff
Roy Moore is No Judge
This guest post was written by Dusty Farned, a masters student in Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine School of Law and a J.D. student at Faulkner University’s Jones School of Law, where he is president of the local chapter of the American Constitution Society. His interests include politics, technology, and legal processes, including alternative dispute resolution.
Roy Moore has been called many things; one thing he should not call himself, however, is Judge. Moore lost that privilege when the Alabama Court of the Judiciary decided his ethics violations demanded immediate removal from office in 2003. The then-Chief Justice Moore of Alabama’s Supreme Court had refused a U.S. District Court’s order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state’s Judicial Building because it violated the Establishment Clause.
When Moore held his ground, the world was once again reminded of Alabama’s habitual disrespect for federal authority. I am not suggesting Moore is without honor; he is a graduate of West Point. But campaigning for Governor in 2006 and 2010 as “Judge Moore” indicates deceitful politics, not respectful civil disobedience.
In Moore’s most recent failure to reach the governor’s mansion, his signs and press releases prominently referred to him as Judge. And, for only $15 you could get a “White Judge Moore T-shirt.” Moreover, the already abandoned campaign website may have been the first one in politics to lack a biography of the candidate. There is one at the Foundation for Moral Law, where Moore is president, yet it shows that even off the gubernatorial trail Moore still calls himself Judge.
Unfortunately, Alabama’s Canons of Judicial Ethics does not apply to former judges. Alabama’s Rules of Professional Conduct does cover lawyers and Moore can still be found in the Alabama State Bar Directory, listed as Hon. Roy Stewart Moore. However, If grandstanding defiance of court orders are not grounds for disbarment, as the Southern Poverty Law Center sought for Moore after Glassrooth, then it is doubtful that self-proclaiming himself to be Judge will result in any professional punishment for Moore.
This is actually surprising considering that Alabama was the first state to adopt formal professional responsibility standards. In 1908, the American Bar Association borrowed what Thomas Goode Jones had written for Alabama to create the first national canons of legal ethics. In 1973, Howell Heflin brought Alabama to the forefront again with a monumentally progressive reorganization of the state judiciary. So, if Moore’s latest political trickery falls through the cracks, it is perhaps a sign Alabama has lost one of its only #1 spots (besides college football).
Speaking of Heflin, he was still called Judge after voluntarily leaving the position of Chief Justice to run for the U.S. Senate. In fact, his intriguing biography is titled, A Judge In The Senate. And, I recall attending a fundraiser for Stephen Black (grandson of Alabama’s most famous judge, Hugo Black) when in came the ailing Heflin. All stood and greeted the elder statesman as “Judge.”
Yet, in contrast to Moore, I never recall Heflin referring to himself as Judge. To do so would have been utilizing authority and power which he no longer rightfully possessed. Should Roy Moore continue to use such an influential title, even if for once little stands in his way? If anyone knows about a higher calling, it should be Roy Moore, formerly a judge.





Proud of you buddy!
JUDGE Morre served his country with honor, and defended his religion, the religion this country was founded on. if you want some one to lose a title, lets talk about obama. He has ran this country into the ground and nearly brought it to ruin, but dont worry, he still has 2 years to finish it. lets take away his title after he leaves his office for dishonoring this country, and denying the people the some of the great right we had (freedom of healthcare choice).
“[T]he world was once again reminded of Alabama’s habitual disrespect for federal authority.”
Though I generally agree with the author’s point, I think it’s unnecessary (and overreaching) to fault an entire state for one man’s conduct. I fear what reputation the other 49 would have if this was the common practice.