Legal News

Judge Settles Case Over Refusal to Marry Mixed Couple

By Matthew Heller, Editor

A former Louisiana justice of the peace has settled a lawsuit over his refusal to officiate at the wedding of an interracial couple ? but not before equating mixed-race children to those born with birth defects.

Keith Bardwell

Keith Bardwell, who was representing himself, had asserted judicial immunity as a defense to the suit, which alleged he acted with ?deliberate indifference? to the civil rights of the couple and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on them. He resigned his office in November after Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay filed their case against him and his wife.

?[H]is actions complained of in the complaint were taken in his capacity as a justice of the peace,? he argued in a motion for summary judgment.

Bardwell also wrote that he had ?no discriminatory intent? but probably didn't do his case any good by continuing as follows:

Mr. Bardwell is handicapped as a result of severe birth defects. As set forth in plaintiff[s'] own complaint, Mr. Bardwell has stated that his concern about interracial marriages is for the couple's offspring and the torment that they may receive at the hands of other children. His concern is legitimate. He was scorned and ridiculed as a child because of his birth defects.

Plaintiffs' attorney Laura L. Catlett of Metairie, La., had a blistering response. ?In support of their warped and racist reasoning for not marrying interracial couples,? she said in a brief,

defendants ... attempt[] to equate interracial children to those born with congenital birth defects, such as those Bardwell himself suffers from. Aside from being absurd, this reasoning only reinforces the racist nature of defendants' discrimination toward interracial couples.

With the summary judgment motion pending, the parties agreed to a settlement last month, averting a trial set for Oct. 4. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Humphrey and McKay sued the Bardwells a year ago for violating their ?most basic civil rights.? The U.S. Supreme Court declared laws banning interracial marriage unconstitutional 43 years ago in Loving v. Virginia and the Bardwells' Jim Crow-like behavior gained them international notoriety.

According to the complaint, Beth Bardwell allegedly asked Humphrey if she and McKay were a ?mixed couple.? When Humphrey said they were, she told her, ?We don't do interracial weddings,? and that they would have to go outside Tangipahoa Parish to get married.

?There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage,? Keith Bardwell has said. ?I think those children suffer, and I won?t help put them through it.?

Louisiana law requires a couple to wait for at least 72 hours to get married after they obtain a marriage license. In addition to arguing he was immune from suit, Bardwell noted that another justice of the peace performed the wedding for Humphrey and McKay just after the waiting period expired.

?Plaintiffs were not deprived of their right to marry,? he said. ?The exercise of their right was not even delayed.?

But Catlett argued that her clients ?were denied a marriage ceremony? and Bardwell was not acting in a ?judicial capacity? when he refused to perform their wedding.

?While defendant Keith Bardwell's performance of marriage ceremonies may be considered a normal judicial function,? she said, ?his discrimination against marriage candidates solely upon the basis of race during an unconstitutional screening process is neither normal nor judicial.?

By Matthew Heller
On Point

Full post as published by On Point News on October 09, 2010 (boomark / email).