A former Kentucky court clerk who infamously refused marriage licenses to gay couples in 2015 is now arguing in federal court that same-sex marriage should be overturned.
Nearly a decade ago, following the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, Rowan County clerk Kim Davis made headlines when she wouldn’t grant a marriage license to David Ermold and David Moore.
Politics, but make it gay!
Stay woke with our briefing while staying informed on all things LGBTQ+ entertainment, life, and more!
At the time, Davis claimed granting same-sex couples a marriage license violated her religious beliefs. Somehow her moralistic views on marriage weighed so heavily despite having walked down the aisle four different times herself. But we digress.
In the immediate aftermath, Davis spent five days in jail for contempt for failing to comply with the court order, while Ermold and Moore were married by a deputy clerk in October 2015.
The couple wound up suing Davis for violating their constitutional rights. After more than eight years of fighting in court, Ermold and Moore recently received resolution.
Earlier this year, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered Davis to pay more than $260,000 in expenses and attorney fees to Ermold and Moore, in addition to the $100,000 a 2023 jury decided the couple was in owed in damages.
But Davis’ anti-gay ways cannot be contained.
She is now appealing the 2023 decision by filing a brief that could lead to the Supreme Court and potentially overturn marriage equality.
In a brief filed with the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Davis’ lawyers, the right-wing hate group known as the Liberty Counsel, state: “Obergefell … was wrong when it was decided and it is wrong today because it was based entirely on the ‘legal fiction’ of substantive due process, which lacks any basis in the Constitution.”
In their argument, they refer to the SCOTUS 6-3 decision in 2022 that overturned the constitutional right to abortion: “Obergefell should be overturned for the same reasons articulated by the court in Dobbs.”
Liberty Counsel is doubling down on Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion in the Dobbs case when he argued the court “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying same-sex marriage (Obergefell), same-sex intimacy (Lawrence v. Texas) and contraception access (Griswold v. Connecticut).
While the Sixth Circuit Court has not said if it will hear arguments in the case, it could eventually wind up at the Supreme Court.
This is especially troubling considering Obergefell barely passed with a 5-4 ruling, with Thomas, Samuel Alito, and John Roberts all dissenting.
It only take four justices to hear a case and now that SCOTUS leans ultra conservative with a 6-3 split, getting the five votes needed to do away with the constitutional right to marriage isn’t out of the realm of possibility.
All of this just adds to the urgency surrounding the 2024 presidential election and why we’re voting for more than just one person.
The next White House occupant may have to appoint one or two lifetime justices, which will affect everyone’s lives for decades to come.
On a positive note, Davis lost her reelection bid in 2018 to a true Democrat.
Related*
Isn’t it ironic? 6 antigay foes whose marriages ended in divorce
There seems to be a pattern here.
abfab
A stale old pice of toast. These people do more for our agenda than we do!
Derek Northcutt
What a looker! and there were four men who wanted married her?
winemaker
Why is this still an issue?. If tyou don’t believe in same sex marriage, fine, that’s your right. This’ one of the great things about America, everyone has the right to their beliefs and free non threatening speech.. The Supreme Court made their decision some 10 years ago after years of arguing this issue and now it’s the law of the land. That said if kim davis’ position was not an elected position, she could have just resigned and saved herself the headaches and as much as I disagree with her, this is her right to object. On the other hand since this was an elected position her religious views have no bearing when asked to comply with a legal request, in this instance a marriage license for a same sex couple.
inbama
Likewise, the reverse.
RIGay
All it takes is one person like her. I am sure she will have plenty of financial support (I’m looking at you, Chik-fil-A).
Jim
Jesus never said anything about homosexuality but he did comment about divorce. He didn’t recognize it.
Kim is not a follower of the Nazarian
khan72
Jesus talked about no divorce four times, homosexuality zero
Christianity – divorce good, homosexuality bad
They might need to reread the Bible. Spoiler, he dies in the end
whereshouldistart
I’ve spent almost half of a century screaming the argument…
IF YOU’RE GOING TO APPEAR BEFORE THE SCOTUS, CHALLENGING ANY LAW BECAUSE IT CLASHES WITH YOUR “RELIGIOUS BELIEFS”, THEN YOU HAD BETTER BE ABLE TO FIRST PROVE THAT YOU FOLLOW ALL OF THE RULES OF YOUR RELIGION!
99% of these cases would be tossed on the simple practices of CHERRY-PICKING HYPOCRITES AND RELIGIOUS SCAM ARTISTRY!
Eternal.Cowboy
Woody, Free Speech and Inbama must be over the moon with excitement.
Sister Bertha Bedderthanyu
Sadly the Supreme Court looks the way it does because Ruth Bader Ginsburg refused to resign when Obama asked her to. It was well known she was near the terminal stages and she was notorious for sleeping during hearings. Thank god Biden accepted reality and by doing to is going to help stop what would have been a biblical mistake, the reelection of Trump. There needs to be term limits on that court. Fifteen years is long enough.
abfab
The troll trio.
still_onthemark
Inbama is far to the left of the other two, h@tes 45, has never been banned here (unlike the other two). Are you thinking of someone else?
dougie
I agree with almost all the comments made so far, but this is actually a scary case. The appeal is based on the same reasoning used when the Supreme Court overturned the right to an abortion – that Obergefell was “wrongly decided” in the first case. Clarence Thomas already set the stage for overturning gay marriage rights in his opinion on Dobbs, the abortion ruling. Thomas and 5 other justices on the court have been salivating to get a case like this that enables them to legislate from the bench.
At the very least, the court could rule that Davis’s religious rights were violated when she was required to issue a marriage license. The court has a track record of making such decisions on the basis of religion.
Huron132
I thought she was dead? Didn’t Dorothy dump a bucket of water on her????
Cam
Right wingers know Harris is going to win and Dems will likely pick up seats so they are desperately trying to get as many bigoted laws in place before that happens.
Vince
doug, She actually forbid anyone else from doing marriage licenses even though some were ok with doing it. None of her rights were violated.
inbama
If Obergefell is reversed, there is still the R e s p e c t for M a r r i a g e Act of 22.
M a r r y in a blue state, reds must accept it.
Mack
Sister Bertha Bedderthanyu, I disagree. The same thing would have happened that happened when Scalia died, McConnell would have blocked the nomination. You guys keep bring this up but conveniently forget what Mitch did to block a replacement for Scalia.
This is Liberty Council’s way of getting the Same Sex marriage ruling back before the Supremes so they can knock it down. And yes the right wingers will knock it down. Kim Davis was probably happily sitting at home being a nobody but the Liberty Council needed a pasty, and here she is.