The Supreme Court of Texas has amended the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct to clarify that judges may decline to perform certain wedding ceremonies if doing so would conflict with their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” The change, adopted on October 24, adds a new comment to Canon 4 of the Code and specifically states: “It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief.”
The clarification arrives as legal challenges related to the issue continue in Texas courts. One of the most prominent cases involves McLennan County Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley, who has been in a six-year legal dispute over her decision not to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. In 2019, Hensley received a public warning from the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC). The commission argued that her refusal to perform ceremonies for same-sex couples could call into question her ability to treat all individuals impartially, as required under Canon 4A(1).
Hensley maintains that her decision is based on her Christian beliefs regarding marriage and that she continues to provide referrals so same-sex couples can be married by other officials. Her lawsuit against the SCJC is currently pending before the 459th District Court in Travis County.
Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute — the organization representing Hensley — said the new clarification from the state’s highest civil court supports her position.
“We are heartened by the Supreme Court’s amendment to the canons to protect religious liberty,” Sasser said. “Now going forward, every judge in Texas will enjoy the freedom Judge Hensley has fought so hard for. As for her case specifically, this amendment melts away the reasons the Commission relied on to punish Judge Hensley.”
A hearing on motions for summary judgment in Hensley’s case is scheduled for December 4. If granted, a summary judgment would allow the court to resolve the case without moving to a full trial.
The Texas Supreme Court did not provide an explanation for the amendment, and it is not clear whether the change was made in response to Hensley’s ongoing litigation. However, the issue extends beyond her case. The court is also considering a certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit involving another Texas judge, Keith Umphress, who likewise declined to perform same-sex weddings for religious reasons. That case specifically asks whether Canon 4A(1) prohibits judges from refusing such ceremonies while continuing to perform weddings for opposite-sex couples.
The Texas Supreme Court has not yet issued its response to the Fifth Circuit’s question.
Meanwhile, Texas voters are weighing a proposed constitutional amendment that would reshape the SCJC itself. The measure would expand the commission’s membership, increase public representation, and give the commission new authority, including the power to suspend judges who have been indicted for certain offenses.
Early voting on the amendment runs through October 31, with Election Day scheduled for November 4.
.jpg)
