/Some support for HB 1523 cools after ruling

Some support for HB 1523 cools after ruling

LGBT advocates and others had scrutinized the bill before it was signed into law. During debates on the Senate floor lawmakers often wander off their desks to chat with their neighbors, or use their smartphones and computers. The mood is usually positive and jovial. On the night of March 30th, desks were full, voices were muffled, and the mood was dark. On the floor, Sen. Jenifer Brannning, R.Philadelphia, supported the bill. Many of her Democratic counterparts asked her questions. Branning, a freshman senator who is also an attorney and serves on the committee that reviewed the bill, defends the bill’s constitutionality. Branning stated that HB1523, which doesn’t violate the first amendment freedom to speech, is constitutional and does not contain a denominational clause. “There is no violation of the Establishment Clause. Equal Protection Clause is not in violation. This bill is constitutional all the way.” U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves ruled that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause and the Establishment Clause late Thursday night. As a result, the state’s denominational argument – what Reeves called the “we-prefer-some-members-of-all-religions argument” – is null. Reeves had earlier invalidated a section of the law that permits circuit clerks to withdraw from issuing gay couples marriage licenses. The bill was being debated in the Senate and House. Generally, legislators voted along party lines: Republicans voted for the bill while Democrats voted against it. However, many lawmakers who voted in favor of the bill have expressed dismay at the decision. It wasn’t something that I was passionate about. “I wasn’t passionate about it,” said Terry Burton (R-Newton), President Pro-Tempore Senator Terry Burton. “I voted for it. It didn’t come up for me to speak on. It does reflect the thinking of most people in my district. However, the Senate Judiciary A Committee failed on March 30 to pass the bill to the Senate floor for a vote. This was despite the fact that it was due by the deadline. The bill was only considered by a second committee called later that afternoon by Senator Sean Tindell (R-Gulfport). It was then sent to the Senate for a vote. Tindell, who voted in favor of the bill, stated Friday that he believes state legislators should focus on issues that will make Mississippi a better country. “I can understand 100 percent trying to defend religious freedoms. I also appreciate the intent and concern about the bill from other states,” Tindell stated. “From a legislative standpoint, I think it is time that we focus on the economy, improving the quality of our life in Mississippi, and less on other issues that we have dealt with.” Senator Brice Wiggins (R-Pascagoula) said this week that he supported the bill, but that he believes that “we need to better understand the outcomes” of legislation such as House Bill 1523. Rep. Jeff Smith (Republican from Columbia) stated this week that the bill has received the majority of the responses from constituents. He said that the majority of the responses have been positive. However, some people have asked why such a law was necessary. Smith stated, “And I’ll tell you, I don’t have an answer.” Many supporters of the bill remained firm despite the federal decisions. Rep. Randy Boyd (R-Mantachie), co-sponsor of the bill, stated Friday that he believed the judge had made a mistake. I don’t believe there was anything wrong. To me, the law only protected Christian rights… You can win some and lose some. “We’ll continue to believe the same way we do.” House Speaker Philip Gunn defended the bill during Tuesday’s special legislative session. Gunn stated that the bill’s intent was to protect religious freedom, and does not compromise anyone else’s rights. Gunn stated that the gay and lesbian communities can now do more than they ever could before. It’s quite telling that the ACLU lawsuit that (Reeves), was dismissed, I believe he actually stated that there has been no harm to anyone. So, I think that’s representative of the whole bill. It’s not harmful to anyone.” Although lawmakers generally voted in favor of the bill on party lines, there were some exceptions. On April 1, four Republicans – Rep. Shane Aguirre (R-Tupelo), Rep. Scott DeLano (R-Biloxi), Rep. Toby Barker (R-Hattiesburg) – voted against the bill in the final House vote to send it to the governor’s office for signature. Rob Roberson (R-Starkville) voted against it. One House Democrat, Rep. Carl Mickens (D-Brooksville), voted in favor of the bill. Mickens stated this week that he would vote against it if presented again. Mickens stated this week that he doesn’t believe we need the bill. It won’t serve us any purpose in the growth of our state, or bring us closer together in this state. It seems that this bill will hurt our state, given the current situation. On March 30, Sen. Russell Jolly (D-Houston) and Sen. J.P. Wilemon (D-Belmont) voted in favor of the bill. Senator Billy Hudson, R.Hattiesburg did not vote. Jolly stated this week that he voted in favor of the bill because he believed the people in his area supported it. Jolly was asked if he would vote today for the bill. He said that he would talk to his district to find out what their feelings are about the bill. Rep. Roun McNeil (R-Leakesville) voted in favor of the bill when it was introduced to the House on February 19, but he voted on the final vote on April 1st. He stated that he didn’t vote for the bill because he was aware of the possibility of lawsuits being filed against it. McNeil stated that he understood why people feel uncomfortable and wanted to provide these protections in House Bill 1523. “But 1523 is not a great approach… I became convinced this would make the federal judiciary more involved in what religious liberty looks in Mississippi than our Constitution or our Legislature.” The Republican leadership, Bryant and Lt. Governor, met on Friday. Tate Reeves expressed his desire that the state appeal Reeves’ decision to the U.S Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, New Orleans. Gunn expressed disappointment at the federal decision but did not comment on an appeal. Burton concluded: “I wish it had accomplished what I wanted with religious freedoms without any of the other things getting in our way,” Burton stated. This report was contributed by Kate Royals, Mississippi Today reporter. To support this important work, you can make a regular donation to the Spring Member Drive today.