Sebok on Moore

FindLaw commentary writer, Anthony Sebok, wrote an interesting piece on the controversy created by Judge Moore's refusal to remove the Ten Commandments statue; to wit, the question of whether the judge's disobedience can rightly be compared (as the judge has so compared) to Dr. M.L. King's civil disobedience.

In interviews, Moore has argued that he is doing no less than what Dr. Martin Luther King did when he disobeyed police and ended up in jail in Birmingham in 1963. He has also remarked, "I believe you should obey higher courts except when that higher court is not going by the law."

If we take Justice Moore at his word that this principle - rather than, say, political advancement - is his reason for refusing to move the statue, then is he correct to make a parallel between himself and Dr. King? And if not, why not?

In this column, I will argue, however, that there is a big difference between Dr. Martin Luther King's saying that he thought that the segregationist laws of Alabama were "wrong," and the Chief Justice of Alabama's saying that the federal court's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution was wrong - for three main reasons.

Those reasons are 1) The Order does not single out a minority for burdens; 2) Judge Moore is in a position ofpPower, not vulnerability; and 3) (and I think most importantly) Judge Moore is a judge, not a private citizen--as such, he has a particular obligation to abide by the rule of law.
Of interest, is Sebok's discussionof judges' reactions to the Fugitive Slave Act. Go give a read.