Supreme Court rejects county official’s request in gay-marriage case

[Ada Lovelace]

I'll post some excerpts below from one of the articles pertaining to the Supreme Court's rejection of a request by Kim Davis, the elected clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples due to her personal religious convictions. Incidentally, prior to the Supreme Court's ruling to nationally legalize same sex marriage in late June, Davis issued a marriage license to a transgender man, Camryn Colen, who served in Iraq, and his wife.

A line of couples, turned away by her office again and again in the two months since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage across the nation, plan to meet her at the courthouse door.

Davis stopped issuing all marriage licenses in the days after the landmark decision. Two gay couples and two straight couples sued her, arguing that she must fulfill her duties as an elected official despite her personal religious faith. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, and an appeals court upheld that decision. Her lawyers with the Liberty Counsel filed a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court on Friday, asking that they grant her "asylum for her conscience."

Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees the 6th district, referred Davis' request to the full court, which denied the stay without comment. Kagan joined the majority in June when the court legalized gay marriage across the nation.

Meanwhile, a couple that had been turned away went to Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins to ask that she be charged with official misconduct, a misdemeanor defined by state law as a public official who "refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office." The crime is punishable by up to a year in jail.

On Monday, the Christians stood on the grass and sang "I am a Child of God."

The marriage equality activists chimed in after each refrain: "So are we."

The full AP article which can be read here.

 

[craigerNY]

I'm curious to know that if prior to stopping issuing licenses she was issuing them to divorcees?

 

[trunks2k]

I'm curious to know that if prior to stopping issuing licenses she was issuing them to divorcees?

Considering that she, herself, has been divorced and remarried (several times, IIRC), I would think yes.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

It is dishonorable to sign up for a job and agree to do something, and then refuse to do it. It is also foolish to think nothing would ever change in your job. If you cannot morally do something, then request either a change of position that removes any moral context that offends, or resign. If you cannot deal with sinners as a Christian. i do not even know how you can function in today's society, because all sin should be offending your senses daily.

 

[Archivist]

If she is unable to do her job she should resign. If she does not do sop she should be removed from office.

 

[trunks2k]

And she is still refusing to issue marriage licenses.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...marriage-licenses-after-supreme-court-ruling/

Someone needs to step in now and remove her from office. She is refusing to do the job she was elected to do despite court rulings telling her that as a county clerk she cannot refuse.

 

[Marius27]

If you cannot deal with sinners as a Christian. i do not even know how you can function in today's society, because all sin should be offending your senses daily.

Sin seems to be embraced or at least ignored among lots of Christians today, except the gays. That seems to be the only sin actually worth obsessing about for a lot of people.

As evident by the fact she's been divorced and remarried multiple times, she's a hypocrite.

 

[trunks2k]

As evident by the fact she's been divorced and remarried multiple times, she's a hypocrite.

My guess is that she's enjoying the attention and sees a bright future in the conservative christian circle.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Sin seems to be embraced or at least ignored among lots of Christians today, except the gays. That seems to be the only sin actually worth obsessing about for a lot of people.

As evident by the fact she's been divorced and remarried multiple times, she's a hypocrite.

If she had to deny somebody for their perpetual sinning she would be denying a lot more than just gays. Somebody will bring up the fact that their problem with gays is that they continually commit the sin, but that is true of a lot of sins, and they are many we overlook and ignore. The sins that "work" for us and society are necessary evil, and it is this backwards viewpoint that began the downfall of American morals long long ago.

 

[Marius27]

And she is still refusing to issue marriage licenses.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...marriage-licenses-after-supreme-court-ruling/

Someone needs to step in now and remove her from office. She is refusing to do the job she was elected to do despite court rulings telling her that as a county clerk she cannot refuse.

She will probably be held in contempt, along with those in her office not issuing licenses either. Hope she sits in jail for a long time. She's a disgrace to Christianity.

 

[Archivist]

She will probably be held in contempt, along with those in her office not issuing licenses either. Hope she sits in jail for a long time. She's a disgrace to Christianity.

If I were a couple who had planned to get married in my home church, and I had been forced to move my wedding out of the county becasue this poor excuse for a public servant had refused to issue a license, I would not be a happy camper. This woman needs to do her job or get out of office.

 

[Oafman]

She will probably be held in contempt, along with those in her office not issuing licenses either. Hope she sits in jail for a long time. She's a disgrace to Christianity.

Jail seems excessive!

But if her job requires her to work within the law as regards marriage, and she feels unable to do so, then she needs to quit, or to be 'asked' to move on.

 

[trunks2k]

If I were a couple who had planned to get married in my home church, and I had been forced to move my wedding out of the county becasue this poor excuse for a public servant had refused to issue a license, I would not be a happy camper. This woman needs to do her job or get out of office.

Well, normally you don't need a license from the county in which you are getting married to get married. You need a license from the state. So the couple could go to a different county to get the license and have their ceremony wherever they want it to be. But people shouldn't have to do that.

...Unless KY is different than any other state I have experience with. I got married in NY. We got the license from the town my wife grew up in, but got married in a completely different town and county.

 

[trunks2k]

Jail seems excessive!

I don't think it's excessive when it comes to being in contempt of court. I don't think fines are going to have an effect on her. There's going to be enough people willing to help her cover those costs. Jail for contempt or getting removed from office is the only real options I see.

 

[Oafman]

She just needs to be sacked for gross misconduct. I appreciate that contempt of court is a serious offence, but the easiest way to get her to abide by the court's ruling is to remove from her the opportunity to not do so

 

[Arcangl86]

Well, normally you don't need a license from the county in which you are getting married to get married. You need a license from the state. So the couple could go to a different county to get the license and have their ceremony wherever they want it to be. But people shouldn't have to do that.

...Unless KY is different than any other state I have experience with. I got married in NY. We got the license from the town my wife grew up in, but got married in a completely different town and county.

It depends on the state. I've heard stories from colleagues about needing to get the license in the particular county and the issues caused by doing so.

 

[trunks2k]

She just needs to be sacked for gross misconduct. I appreciate that contempt of court is a serious offence, but the easiest way to get her to abide by the court's ruling is to remove from her the opportunity to not do so

I agree that she needs to be removed from office. But that isn't a simple procedure in this case. She's an elected official who can't just be fired. The state AG has expressed a desire the other day to start procedures to remove her from office. So in the meantime, she is still the county clerk and she is in contempt of court. She needs to understand that if she doesn't start doing her job NOW there will be consequences NOW, not some point in the indeterminate future.

ETA: IMO, at this point even if she does decide to start issuing licenses she has stepped well over the line and should be removed from office. Her issue went made it all the way up the Supreme Court. Their refusal to hear the case makes the issue clear: DO THE JOB. If she is currently refusing to issue the licenses, then she has knowingly and deliberately broken the law. No going back from that. Get rid of her.

 

[bhsmte]

Jail seems excessive!

But if her job requires her to work within the law as regards marriage, and she feels unable to do so, then she needs to quit, or to be 'asked' to move on.

I disagree.

When a court issues an order, it becomes the law. If a person blatantly ignores the court order, jail is a real option, at the judges disposal and it needs to be, for the law to have any teeth.

Now, when someone is in contempt of court the judge will usually give the person more than one opportunity to follow the order, while warning them they could see the inside of a jail cell if they don't. If the person continues to ignore the order, the person is really the one making the decision to go to jail.

Also, why has this person not been fired yet?

 

[bhsmte]

I agree that she needs to be removed from office. But that isn't a simple procedure in this case. She's an elected official who can't just be fired. The state AG has expressed a desire the other day to start procedures to remove her from office. So in the meantime, she is still the county clerk and she is in contempt of court. She needs to understand that if she doesn't start doing her job NOW there will be consequences NOW, not some point in the indeterminate future.

ETA: IMO, at this point even if she does decide to start issuing licenses she has stepped well over the line and should be removed from office. Her issue went made it all the way up the Supreme Court. Their refusal to hear the case makes the issue clear: DO THE JOB. If she is currently refusing to issue the licenses, then she has knowingly and deliberately broken the law. No going back from that. Get rid of her.

I don't see how any elected official who has publicly defied the supreme court, is fit to stay in office. I know she was elected, but they could move to remove her rather quickly if they wanted to.

 

[trunks2k]

I don't see how any elected official who has publicly defied the supreme court, is fit to stay in office. I know she was elected, but they could move to remove her rather quickly if they wanted to.

"Rather quickly" could still take some time, even if it's just a few days. Especially since "wanted to" is a key phrase there. Relative to the position, refusal to issue marriage licenses is a big deal. In the meantime, she's still the clerk and people are not getting the services they are supposed to be getting. It's faster for a judge to find her in contempt and put her in jail. Either way, she needs to be removed from office. If putting her in jail for contempt of court convinces her to issue licenses for, say one day before being removed from office, or making other clerks think twice about making a similar move, it's worth it.