By James Demetriades

Last Monday, Alabama became the 37th state — plus the district of Columbia — where gay people can legally wed. Citing the equal protection and due process clause of the 14th Amendment, US District Judge Callie Grande ordered that counties begin issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. However, as of Friday, Feb. 13, only 43 of the 67 state counties are issuing those licenses. That number was in the mid-to-low 20s for most of last week.

The controversy sparked from Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, who told the county judges that the federal decision did not apply to them, cited the action as an example of “judicial tyranny.” Furthermore, he claimed that this was a violation of the state’s right to define marriage as it deems fit. In his argument, Moore cited that the state’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was approved by 81 percent of state voters, giving legitimacy to the state’s laws and authority to ignore federal rulings.

The argument of state court independence from federal court decisions is a dangerous one. Many, including myself, see a parallel to the 1958 decision allowing for desegregation of the schools in Little Rock, Arkansas or to the desegregation fights of Alabama’s own governor George Wallace. The prevailing rhetoric of Justice Moore relies on the same arguments that Wallace purported: a measure has popular state support and the federal government has no right to intrude on state’s actions.

This could not be further from the truth. Brown v. Board of Education, in addition to desegregating schools, demonstrated the supremacy of federal law over state law. President Eisenhower had National Guard members escort the Little Rock Nine to the Little Rock Central High. Since then, there has been a very clear understanding that states must adhere to the authority of high federal court’s interpretation of the constitution.

Alabama’s rocky transition into allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed represents the deep cultural rift between court decisions and prevailing local opinions. The best way to clarify this disunity and confusion would be a Supreme Court ruling settling the issue once and for all. In April, it has the opportunity to do just that. Justice Moore admits that “state courts are bound by the rulings of the United States Supreme Court.”

Despite the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals’ urging, Moore asserts there is no law right now that overcomes the Alabama Constitutional ban. What is needed now is clarity, and the only way to achieve it is clear federal court language that, hopefully, will extend marriage equality to all 50 states.