« 25 year-old adolescents | Main | First Amendment suspended at Oklahoma? »
Monday, March 09, 2015
I see your mandamus and raise you a class action
In response to last week's Writ of Mandamus by the Supreme Court of Alabama, the plaintiffs in Strawser have moved to amend the complaint to add some new plaintiffs and one new probate-judge defendant and to have the entire thing certified as a plaintiff and defendant class action. (H/T: Lyle Denniston). If successful, the move will allow Judge Granade to enjoin every probate judge to issue a license to every same-sex couple in the state.
It also seems to set-up a direct conflict between orders of a state supreme court and a lower federal court, although that may be more illusory than real. The arguments surrounding the mandamus recognize that the mandamus only controlled judges not under a federal injunction requiring them to issue licenses; recall that Judge Don Davis (at the time the only probate judge subject to an injunction) was ordered to show that he was under the injunction, presumably to be released from the mandamus. By those terms, if a class injunction issues, every probate judge should be given an opportunity to make that showing, after which the mandamus should give way.
Posted by Howard Wasserman on March 9, 2015 at 09:31 AM in Civil Procedure, Constitutional thoughts, Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink
Comments
Not quite. Rooker-Feldman would not be to the individual license denial (which, you're right, is administrative), but to the Supreme Court's mandamus decision, which is judicial. The point is that the license-seekers are not party to that action, so R/F won't apply.
Posted by: Howard Wasserman | Mar 9, 2015 5:09:00 PM
Also, issuing marriage licenses doesn't seem like the kind of action that would be subject to Rooker-Feldman to begin with. It's more administrative than judicial.
Posted by: Neal Goldfarb | Mar 9, 2015 4:46:52 PM
It shouldn't, because the federal plaintiffs aren't "state court losers," since they are not party to the state action. Both Oklahoma and South Carolina tried this when they brought mandamus actions, but the federal courts rejected the argument in both cases.
Posted by: Howard Wasser134man | Mar 9, 2015 3:30:45 PM
Does the Alabama Supreme Court's mandamus create Rooker-Feldman issues for Judge Granade? Or is the mandamus properly viewed as administrative, rather than judicial, and not subject to Rooker-Feldman?
Posted by: Donald | Mar 9, 2015 2:41:52 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.