Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License By Louisiana Judge

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/interracial-couple-denied_n_322784.html

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press. But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.

"I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house," Bardwell said. "My main concern is for the children."

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

snip

"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzman. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."

The ACLU was preparing a letter for the Louisiana Supreme Court, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and see if they can remove him from office, Schwartzman said.

"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzman said.

That's the problem with Justices of the Peace. Many have no legal training at all and are little more than local glad handers who use the post to enrich themselves. They don't know enough law to write a ticket.

He could be sanctioned or removed from office, however, by a state judicial conduct commission, assuming Louisiana has one.

:banghead:

Todestrieb - Freudian death wish, to destroy oneself, often expressed in outward aggression.

And her unwed mother sister.

Seems straight up Caucasian marriages aren't all he's cracking them up to be either.

I lived there about ten years ago and it was the law at that time. I don't know that it was one that was enforced, but....

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)<1>, was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court, by a 9-0 vote, declared Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute, the "Racial Integrity Act of 1924", unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.

I just remember hearing it was on the books I'm a Yankee (and a liberal to boot) from way up north so I found it amazing and horrifying.

Federal law supersedes any discriminatory state laws.

And that case was ruled on in 1967.

So if that was being enforced ten years ago, they're in violation of the law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

A judge who refuses to marry people with a valid license is in violation of the law and will likely lose his job and his law license.

his license and his job. It's horible. It is just another example of why hate crimes must be labled hate crimes. Discrimination is definitely the worse motivation for crime.

*sigh* What planet do these people live on.

They have cable. No excuse!

President some day.

We don't need any more of them running and winning high public office. Best we nip it in the bud.:crazy:

NOT.

:sarcasm:

(do i really need to?)

His rationale behind denying the marriage license... or the logic behind that rationale.

What, does he think a woman's uterus doesn't work without a wedding ring or something?

And hopefully I'm not jumping to conclusions but from the names, I would guess the pair is white woman, black man. Were it reverse, I have my suspicions that the judge would have a different opinion.

"The paper quotes the justice of the peace as saying that “99 percent of the time” an interracial couple will consist of a black man and white woman, and “I find that rather confusing.”

thanks! :)

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/louisiana-denies-marriage-license-interracial/

:hi:

from the link you sent:

"Why didn't Katrina wash this old bastard out to sea so Moby Dick could have knawed his leg off."

Confusing? Yes. Funny? HELL Yeah!! :rofl: :rofl:

:scared:

a backhanded insult to the president.

Full stop.

Dude has managed to make Bob Jones University look progressive. That's no small feat.

It should become his experience that JPs who so abuse their offices do not last long.

But then I never thought I'd live to see 80 year old women tased by police, or 9 year old girls strip searched in school.

Incompetent buffoon.

There was a couple that several local minister's refuse to marry because the groom was Middle Eastern. My wife had no problem marrying the couple.

Just sickening.

or maybe we should have civil marriage for all. Maybe they can get a civil union. :sarcasm: if needed. But now maybe some of you will understand why we don't like hearing this ourselves.

If there are enough precedents set that states can define marriage at the state level and refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, is this leading to a roll-back of Loving? For some factions on the right, I expect that is part of the end goal (along with repealing Griswold v. Connecticut, which legalized contraception and paved the way for Roe).

Tucker

as it is hard to distinguish that from a similar line for marriage equality.

after Massachusetts became the first state to recognize marriage equality, the homophobes played the race card by invoking an old law barring out-of-state couples from marrying in the Commonwealth "if the marriage would not be recognized in their home state". Obviously, the law was aimed at interracial couples traveling from the South.

Fortunately, Mass. soon repealed the law, and now every adult can get married there.

:thumbsup:

and continued to allow it to happen.

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/louisiana-denies-marriage-license-interracial/

:( I can't believe no one ratted him out sooner.

The couple who complained had recently returned to Louisiana. The bigotry was overwhelming for them.

The people who live there have accepted the lifestyle. It's always been that way for them. They are afraid of consequences if they complain.

I wouldn't be surprised if she's on her way up there right now, madder 'n' a wet hen! Justice* Bardwell will soon wish he had never been born...

Poor little tyke.
What?
Oh Never Mind.

and was pissed as hell. What the F&*$ is wrong with that JotP? He's an idiot. I hope he loses all ability to perform marriages and sign marriage licenses. He's abhorrent.

... that opposing same-sex marriage doesn't necessarily make one a bigot...

I wonder if they'll drop to defend this guy from condemnation as a bigot?

:shrug:

n/t

Poor guy, thinks HIS rights will be violated. Offends his genteel racist sensibilities, I guess. Like those crazy pharmacists who refuse to give out contraception because it goes against what they believe in, he has no business being a J.P. and should find another line of work.


"Evidently, Bardwell has long had a policy of not marrying interracial couples, and admitted that Louisiana's attorney general had warned him years ago that he could "get into trouble" because of it.

“I told him if I do, I’ll resign,” Bardwell told the Daily Star. “I have rights too. I’m not obligated to do that just because I’m a justice of the peace.”

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/louisiana-denies-marriage-license-interracial/

And THIS is why I stand in solidarity with my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

an attorney. In many states, a person can serve as a justice of the peace, without having any degree. Justices, unlike judges, do not hear felony cases.

In NYS, where anyone can be elected to this position, we have the State Committee on Judicial Misconduct. I've had to report two justices for similar actions. They have the ability to remove the person from the bench.

sarcasm about another thread on DU.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6770727

Just yesterday, a whole gaggle of people were arguing right here in GD that simply because someone opposed gay marriage, it didn't necessarily make them a homophobe or a bigot. Some were even throwing out the argument that they were opposed to gay marriage "for the sake of children" (which makes no sense, but... there you are), and that it was insulting to suggest that they were holding a homophobic viewpoint. Comparisons were made to inter-racial marriage, yet it was pooh-poohed as not being the same thing and comparing apples to oranges. Well, here's someone who is opposed to inter-racial marriage "for the sake of children" and nobody has come to his defense that he's just "ignorant" or "mis-informed." So why is that? Easy- BECAUSE HE IS A RACIST BIGOT!!!!!! Just like someone opposed to gay marriage IS A HOMOPHOBIC BIGOT.

:mad:

Analogies are lost on some people.

What was said is that people can support other means of moving forward with equal rights without being a bigot. Nobody in that thread said they personally opposed gay marriage. It is going to take the Supreme Court ruling that gay marriage is an equal right. Until then, supporting any means available to extend rights to as many people as possible IS NOT homophobic. Funny that someone who insisted that only gay marriage is equal rights was thrilled to find out her school was extending all benefits to her and her spouse. Does being excited about getting those benefits make her a homophobe? Is the person who implemented the policy a homophobe?

That's how stupid the argument that everybody has to fight for gay marriage and nothing but gay marriage is.

THAT is what was said yesterday.

"Do you support or oppose gay marriage?" And 'twas your OP that it was in. Apparently the designation of homophobic (whether vehement or passive) hits a little too close to home for some here.

At least one person plainly stated that they were opposed to gay marriage (and others dodged the question completely).

The point is, simply put, that many people here have a serious double-standard going on when it comes to bigotry. Racism is completely and totally inexcusable. Nobody has popped into this thread and suggested that maybe this asshat JP is just misguided and/or misinformed. Yet, somehow homophobia, sexism and also anti-semitism fall into this magical shades of grey category. ("Oh, you can't call her a homophobe because she's old and stuck in her ways.... Oh, you can't call him a homophobe, because he's religious and it's his right to believe that gays are evil.... etc.... etc.... etc..... etc.... ad nauseum.....")

"everybody has to fight for gay marriage...", as you state? No- nobody is saying that. It's a free country, and people can and do oppose gay marriage. And, guess what? In my book, they're bigots. Perhaps they are truly misinformed and/or ignorant- In which case, they're misinformed, ignorant bigots. Can their minds be changed? Possibly- but not until they realize that they're bigots. Telling them so seems to be an effective way of starting that process.

"nothing but gay marriage is"? At this point, that is 100% true. Civil unions, even if the rights are identical to marriage, is "separate but equal." You can come to the same school, but you can't drink out of the same water fountain, because you're inferior. It was a crock of shit then, and it's a crock of shit now.

Now watch them twist and turn and say it's not the same thing.

Halley Barry.

Barack Hussein Obama

Slash, one of the best guitarists evah.

"The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."

I'm seeing a serious conflict with reality there...the government has said I can't marry a person I want to.
grr

"is for the children." Oh, bullshit. He's a racist ass. Who is he to make that determination?

He doesn't get the choice as to whether or not they marry or whether or not they have children.

I can see why the judge was concerned.

This judge is a complete anachronism. The year 1959 must sure be missing him.

at Tulane University in New Orleans, and clerked for three years with the State Supreme Court in the early nineties. It was a surprisingly moderate court with a number of true progressives, particulary Justice Dennis who is now with the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. But in Louisiana, even a so called liberal Democrat generally has some very racist baggage. They often openly speak disparigingly of black people in a manner that was shocking, but being good "liberals" they would avoid using the "N" word, or even worse, which I would hear regularly from non "progressives."

I love NOLA and the surrounding culture, but racism is so ingrained there that it is hard to ignore. I say this, moreover, as someone with deep familial ties to the region, including a cousin that was a prominent judge in Jefferson Parish -- a filthy racist one at that, whom we had to reverse on numerous occasions while I was with the Court. He sentenced a man (black, what a shock) to life in prison for masturabting on the riverfront just outside of New Orleans (albeit a 3rd offense). I kid you not.

Is he afraid they can't make it?

Keith Bardwell, new Chairman of the RNC.

Inconceivable, huh?

an interracial marriage would suffer (and, I imagine, out of fear that the boy would turn out to be a burden on society, rather than a contributor to it).

Idiots never learn.

that's very 'brave' of you, you neanderthal.

"not a racist" seems to be on the lips of all kind of assholes these days.

Wow,he let blacks use his bathroom,proberly the one out back,the outhouse.

Food for thought.

Yes, he's wrong and fucking racist as hell, but could this be part of the "defining" marriage movement that seems to be sweeping the country? Is that their next step once they get even the idea of gay marriage completely outlawed?

Boy his elk can never use that one enough.

and watch his pointed head explode.

who said for all the world to hear in his best southern drawl...

"I ain't prejudice, but I shore wouldn't want one of 'em marryin ma daughters"

I'm certain he wouldn't mind if one of his cousins married her.

So far, Piyush Jindal has denounced him and the President of Hammond has asked for his resignation. Mrs. Bardwell practically denied that they refused to marry them for racial reasons. Something about their schedule was complex.

97% of folks my age (18-30) have no problem with interracial relationships. I seriously can't comprehend how there are still bastards that pull such crap.