September 2, 2003

PAULA ZAHN, HOST: Justice Moore joins me now for this exclusive interview. Welcome, glad to have you with us tonight.

JUSTICE ROY MOORE: Nice to be here, Paula.

ZAHN: You have long been known as the "Ten Commandments Judge." Where were you when "Roy's Rock" was moved?

MOORE: Well, I was at home taking my son to the hospital. He had to have an examination, an MRI, on his head that morning, and I was at home.

ZAHN: And how outraged were you when you found out that that was the ruling you were going to have to live by?

MOORE: Well, I was extremely disappointed--disappointed in the officials in our state who have let this happen, disappointed that they would let a judge threaten the state of Alabama to remove the acknowledgment of God, which is fundamental to our state and our justice system under the Constitution of Alabama. Without the acknowledgment of God, we have no justice system, according to the Constitution--and that I'm sworn to uphold.

ZAHN: Your own attorney general suggested that perhaps you view yourself as above the law.

MOORE: Well, you've got to consider what the law is. And that's the problem: many people think that what a judge says is law. Indeed, judges can't make the law. Judges, just like anybody else, are under the law. That's why we have rule of law--that law is the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the United States is very clear in saying that "Congress shall make so law respecting an establishment of religion." When a judge, a federal district judge, says, "I don't know what the words mean, but this is what I think they mean," he's entering into a lawless order, when he enters the fact that you can't acknowledge God in your constitution.

And that's what happened. I'm not defying the law, I'm upholding the law.

ZAHN: Well, you also have some thirteen other states out there facing potential conflicts that you've just witnessed. Do you have any travel plans?

MOORE: Well, I'm traveling around speaking to this issue because there's so many who don't understand it. They don't understand what the Constitution says, what, you know, the First Amendment's about. What the Alabama Constitution says is very clear.

And I think there's too many things going on in this country about the removal of God from our life. And it's fundamental. Actually, the organic law of our country establishes God as the basis of our justice system.

ZAHN: But when your own attorney general, who actually personally has no problem with the display of the Ten Commandments, comes out and says that you defied a federal court order, that you are not above the law, and that you should have followed through with what the federal court told you to do.

MOORE: Again, the attorney general is under the law, just like I am. And when that law is being violated, when it's an unlawful order--and, you know, I just was brought in this information about Morris Dees, who is with the Southern Poverty Law Center, who is in the case against us. This is what he said in the Washington Post about the attorney general and his actions: "'The heat of this battle certainly matured this young man,' Dees said of Pryor. 'His actions behind the scenes to orchestrate the state officials handling these things saved Alabama from a constitutional crisis.'"

Now, it bothers me that there are things going on behind the scenes to orchestrate the denial of our right to acknowledge God under the Constitution. That bothers me.

ZAHN: His group also suggested, the way you framed the argument, people felt that what you were saying, if you weren't in favor of the public's display of the Ten Commandments, you weren't in favor of God. Is that really what you were saying?

MOORE: No, no, no, no. No. In fact, the judge in this case said this case is not about the Ten Commandments. He said he's not saying the Ten Commandments are wrong in a public building, he's saying this case is about the acknowledgment of God. He said, and I quote, "The issue is, can the state acknowledge God?" and he said, "No."

And if he tells Alabama that they can't acknowledge God, he destroys the very foundation of our justice system--a system I'm sworn to uphold. And as chief administrative officer, it's my job to administer the justice system in Alabama, and that includes acknowledging God as its basis. When he says you can't do that, you can't do your job.

ZAHN: I know you say this is about God, but clearly when you ran on a platform as the "Ten Commandments Justice," there are a lot of people out there who say this is just as much about self-promotion. Do you concede that this battle, in some circles, has made you more popular than ever, and--as some have suggested--a real martyr?

MOORE: Well, this battle has cause me to suffer a disqualification of office right now. I can't even--I'm disqualified from acting as a judge. That's not a good political move, in my opinion. This is about your oath of office. It is about God, because that's what the judge said it was about. That's not what I said, that's what he said. He said this is the issue in this case, and this is an issue that has plagued this country for forty years. The government, the federal courts, have said you can acknowledge God as long as you don't mean it.

ZAHN: And in the Ten Commandments--I guess, you know, you have three difference interpretations here. I looked up today in research how Christians verses Jews, and even certain sects of Catholicism view the Ten Commandments slightly differently when it comes into language. But let's just say, two of the Commandments clearly are against the law. And the question a lot of people are posing is, why do you need to put up in a public space something about "thou shalt not covet they neighbor's wife" when, in fact, that's not even against the law?

MOORE: Well, coveting is not one of those things. It's a form of mind, but it leads to other violations of laws like stealing and adultery, and so forth. And the commandment, "I am the Lord thy God," you say, "That's against the law?" It's actually the basis for the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The acknowledgment of God was the very basis we have for "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." You see, the word "religion" was the duties we owe to the Creator and the manner of discharging those duties. That was the definition used by the United States Supreme Court and all our Founding Fathers.

And when this judge said, in his own words, that he could not define religion, and thought it dangerous and unwise to define religion, he can't enter a lawful order. He can't interpret the law. The law is above the courts.

ZAHN: Finally, I can only give you ten seconds to answer this question. In spite of how passionately you believe what you're saying, what are the chances you'll ever end up back on the bench?

MOORE: Well, we're proceeding right now to the Supreme Court of the United States. We'll file a writ of certiorari probably within two weeks, going before the Supreme Court. And we hope that the Supreme Court will recognize the state's rights to acknowledge God. It's outside the federal jurisdiction to intrude their powers into the state, and tell us how we can establish our justice system.

ZAHN: So, you're saying you're optimistic you're going to get your job back?

MOORE: Yes.

ZAHN: Chief Justice Roy Moore, thank you for stopping by here on the set tonight.