Gov. Sonny Perdue appointed his chief legal advisor, Harold Melton, to the Georgia Supreme Court on Wednesday. The high court is expected to have the final say in a pending lawsuit challenging Amendment 1, a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
MOST VIEWED Local: A Beatle in Piedmont Park National News: Obama cheered at Pride celebration Local: Judge: Trans lawsuit against Ga. lawmakers can continue Feature: Tough as nails National News: Gay groups back suit against marriage ban

HOME > NEWS > LOCAL

Jun 10, 2005  |  By: DYANA BAGBY  | COMMENTS |   |  

Harold Melton, chief legal advisor to Gov. Sonny Perdue, was appointed to the state Supreme Court on Wednesday, joining a panel that is expected to decide if the state’s recently passed ban on gay marriage is constitutional.

Melton, 38, fills the vacancy left by Chief Justice Norman Fletcher, who retires June 30. Beginning July 1, the seven-member court will be headed by Justice Leah Sears, who Perdue campaigned against last year and called “an activist judge” while supporting an anti-gay candidate.

In making his announcement June 8, Perdue praised Melton for his “conservative values.”

“His experience in the courtroom has taught him to approach every decision he makes with integrity and fairness,” Perdue said in a prepared statement. “Harold Melton shares my philosophy that jurists should apply the constitution and laws passed by the legislative branch, upholding the strict separation of powers that is integral to our government’s system of checks and balances.”

A lawsuit challenging Amendment 1, a same-sex marriage ban approved by voters last November, is awaiting a ruling by Fulton Superior Court Judge Constance Russell. But whatever her decision, attorneys on both sides of the case expect it to eventually reach the Georgia Supreme Court.

Veteran gay lobbyist Larry Pellegrini said he hoped Melton would keep an open mind when it came to the case against Amendment 1.

“Our hope is that as a person of color he understands what it is like to be discriminated against as a minority,” said Pellegrini, executive director of the Georgia Rural Urban Summit.

Melton is a personable man, but his philosophical and political views are not publicly known, Pellegrini added.

“I don’t believe he has a real descriptive public record of his personal opinions,” Pellegrini said. “I’ve been at a couple events where he’s represented the governor’s office and reflected the administration’s policies.”

Perdue supported Amendment 1 and stated in March 2004 that marriage should be only between a man and woman.

“Liberal, activist judges and individual municipal officials have tossed aside state laws and thrown down a gauntlet — daring us to stop them as they attempt to fundamentally change our society,” Perdue said in a statement delivered to a rally favoring the marriage ban.

“[Melton] has undoubtedly had internal discussions about [Amendment 1],” Pellegrini said. “It will be evident pretty quickly if he exhibits any partisan tendencies.”

Perdue and Melton were unavailable for comment by press time, according to a spokesperson for the governor’s office.

Georgia’s Supreme Court is a relatively moderate court, according to political pundits. Of the five candidates Perdue chose from, none were likely to tilt the court to the political left or right, said Richard Reaves, director of the UGA Institute of Continuing Judicial Education.

“And I don’t think they will go out on a limb like they did in Massachusetts [and support gay marriage]. That requires interpreting law, and I don’t think any of our justices see that as their appropriate role,” Reaves said.

Charles Bullock, a political science professor at the University of Georgia, said he would be shocked if the state high court struck down Amendment 1, regardless of its makeup.

“I would be amazed to see this court take a stance on the issue of gay marriage,” Bullock said. “My guess is that the judges will not interfere.”

Todd Young, policy director for the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a conservative legal group, said the state Supreme Court should look at history when making rulings.

“Judges should not be in the business to make law or interpret law,” Young said. “Our hope is the appointee will look at what the court has done before.”

“If the nominee says, ‘I’m gonna call it like I see it,’ then they’re not the one for the job,” he added. “If the nominee says, ‘I’m going to take a look at what’s happened before and not reinvent the wheel’ — that’s the person we’re looking for.”