Gay Couples Ask Court of Appeals to Revive Challenge to NC’s Gay-Marriage Recusal Law

A federal appeals court will consider Wednesday whether three North Carolina couples have legal standing to challenge a law allowing magistrates with religious objections to refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

The couples are asking the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond to revive the lawsuit because they say the state is spending their tax dollars to accommodate magistrates’ religious views. The couples — two gay and one interracial — argue those expenditures give them the right to sue, despite a district court ruling to the contrary.

The 2015 law, known as SB2, allows magistrates to recuse themselves from performing marriages “based on any sincerely held religious objections.” Those who file such notices are prevented from officiating at all marriages — gay and heterosexual — for at least six months. The law also allows some court clerks to decline to issue marriage licenses.

The plaintiffs’ argument to revive their lawsuit hinges on the law’s authorization of magistrates to travel between jurisdictions to perform marriages — at taxpayer expense — if counterparts in another area all recuse themselves. The law also allows for restoration of some retirement benefits if a magistrate resigned after gay marriage became legal but was reappointed around when the recusal law took effect.

The oral arguments in the Richmond court come as President Donald Trump wades into the question of protections for religious beliefs. He signed an executive order last week aimed at easing an IRS rule that limited political activity. Supporters had hoped for more sweeping protections for ministries, schools and federal workers.

As of late 2016 two other states, Utah and Mississippi, had laws allowing public officials to recuse themselves from performing marriages because of religious beliefs, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Two of the North Carolina plaintiffs are from McDowell County, where all magistrates recused themselves after the state law was passed, requiring North Carolina to pay a magistrate to come several days a week from nearby Rutherford County. Only a fraction of magistrates statewide have recused themselves.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote in their appeal that the state spent their “tax dollars to aid and endorse the religious views of all of McDowell County’s magistrates who refused to perform their judicial duties, and to uphold the oath required of all judges.”



Have a hot tip for First In Freedom Daily?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to All hot tips are immediately forwarded to FIFD Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here