Mayor Slay Chooses Love Over Law
BY LINDSEY WANBERG
In late June, despite clear laws banning same-sex marriage in Missouri, the mayor of St. Louis, Francis Slay, married four same-sex couples in his office. When Attorney General of Missouri Chris Koster heard of the marriages he was not pleased. Koster is a public supporter of same-sex marriages, but firmly opposes Mayor Slay’s violation of state law. In a statement issued on June 26, 2014, Koster declared, “While I personally support the goal of marriage equality, my duty as Attorney General is to defend the laws of the state of Missouri… Missourians have yet to change their constitution [to legalize same-sex marriage]… such vital questions cannot be decided by local county officials acting in contravention of state law.” Koster sued the City of St. Louis the day after the weddings and asked for the cancellation of the newlyweds’ licenses.
Surprisingly, this conflict is not about two politicians butting heads over the definition of marriage—both Slay and Koster agree that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. Instead, they disagree over what constitutes justice in government. Koster believes one must follow the law or go through the established processes to change the law. In contrast, Slay, as evidenced by his actions, believes it is legitimate to bypass laws if those laws are unjust. So is Koster’s legalistic thinking or Slay’s moralistic thinking preferable in a government?
Western legalism pushes the idea that following the law is the most ethical option. Koster demonstrates legalistic sentiment when he explains that his “duty… is to defend the laws of the state of Missouri.” According to the philosophy of legalism, when Slay broke the law he endangered civil order. The United States government was established to make ethical rules based on a representative opinion. As soon as executives start ignoring the law and therefore representative opinion, the government changes from serving the good of the people to the good of the executive. Cue the Hobbesian chaos.
The drawback of legalism, however, is that the rules one must uphold can be “static” and dated. In other words, they are unaffected by special circumstances and changing public opinion, and therefore may no longer be effective when exercised. The only way to change laws requires venturing through the convoluted processes of democracy. Mayor Slay’s plan to illegally marry the couples was meant to speed up the process, thrusting a same-sex marriage case into the state courts. In a press conference Slay stated, “We have created a clear, direct legal challenge to Missouri’s unconstitutional ban on marriage equality. We hope to get this before the courts to settle this issue on behalf of all gay and lesbian people in our state.” Sharon Carpenter, the Recorder of Deeds for St. Louis, explained that because many states have recently declared their own same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional (Utah and Indiana happened to do this the same day of St. Louis’s same- sex weddings) it was an ideal time to test if Missouri would follow suit. “It is time to show that the people of St. Louis support equality and will fight for it,” she said.
The four same-sex couples’ happiness after their weddings was undeniable, and this in itself is a convincing argument that Slay’s actions were just. St. Louis Public Radio posted a video of one of the couples, John Durnell and Richard Eaton. In the video, the song “Stay” by Rihanna swelled as the couple (looking stylish in checkered and striped bowties) sat on a couch together to discuss their thoughts before the ceremony.
Durnell spoke thoughtfully. “I would have never thought in my life that what we’re going to experience would happen ever. You know, just that we’d ever get married.” At this point, his voice broke. He chuckled and gestured to his face, which was slowly losing composure. “Damn, I had that under control.”
The video then cut to Durnell and Eaton’s wedding ceremony. The pastor mentioned the marriage was confirmed on behalf of Mayor Slay and the City of St. Louis. The couple kissed, and it was made official.
At least for now.
The newlyweds’ licenses have not yet been revoked, but it is possible they will be when Koster’s case against the City of St. Louis reaches the courts. This though, is unlikely. Public opinion has changed drastically since the 2004 Missouri amendment was passed to keep marriage between a man and a woman. It is possible that when the case does come up, the justices, reacting to growing public support and recent court rulings, will strike down the marriage amendment in the Missouri constitution. Then finally, Slay and Koster will both get their way.