Judge: get married or go to jail

My thoughts about this case: The US Constitution prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment". This punishment is certainly "unusual" (some might argue it's also cruel, but leave that aside for now). Second, the judge didn't even bother to ask the woman he was ordering this man to marry what she thought about it. As far as I can tell from the news, she isn't pregnant, nor do either of them have children. Maybe the judge just thinks they are "living in sin" because they aren't married. We don't know because the judge won't answer questions about it from the media. Is there any legitimate state interest in ordering two single, childless people to marry?

Judge sentences East Texas man to get married or face jail time

Quote:

In July, a Smith County judge sentenced Josten Bundy to get married to his 19-year-old girlfriend as part of his probation, which also included writing Bible verses and getting counseling. The court case stemmed from a February altercation between Bundy and the ex-boyfriend of his girlfriend, Elizabeth Jaynes.

Quote:

Judge Rogers asked Bundy if he was married to Jaynes and then said, “You know, as a part of my probation, you’re going to have to marry her…within 30 days.” If Bundy declined to do the probation, he would be sentenced to 15 days in jail.

Quote:

Jaynes, who was in the courtroom said the proposal from the judge embarrassed her. “My face was so red, people behind me were laughing,” said Jaynes. “[The judge] made me stand up in court.” Afraid of Bundy losing his job if he spent two weeks behind bars, the couple applied for their marriage license and scheduled a date with the justice of the peace to get married.

Quote:

The father of the bride, Kenneth Jaynes, wanted answers. “[I felt] anger; I was mad. [The judge] can’t do this by court ordering somebody to be married,” said Kenneth Jaynes. “I contacted a couple of lawyers but they told me someone was trying to pull my leg…that judges don't court order somebody to get married.” Judge Rogers declined to interview about an open probation case. He also declined to comment generally about his sentencing practices. Attorney Blake Bailey, who practices constitutional law, said an order to marry is not legal. “To say you're not going to be criminally punished if you get married is way out of left field,” said Bailey. “It sounds like the old days of shotgun weddings, but not even the judge is capable of enforcing, what he thinks is best for some people in his court.”

Later, the judge recused himself from further involvement in the case, citing the defendant's involvement with the media and media attention.

There seems to be some kind of patriarchal sexism here. Maybe the judge somehow thinks that marrying this woman and writing Bible verses will make the defendant a better man, which is dubious, but doesn't seem to stop to ask whether this order is in the best interest of the woman, who was not charged with any crime.

Since he was offered a choice of another, more standard, punishment does that make an unusual one OK constitutionally? What about the fact that the punishment also affects a third party?

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1MEObJD