Posted on 09/04/2015 9:47:22 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Five deputy county clerks in Rowan County, Kentucky — the scene of the first major courthouse battle over a conflict between the Supreme Court’s view on same-sex marriage and religious objections to it — told a federal judge that they will start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Friday morning. They did so after the judge sent the county clerk herself to jail for contempt of court, and threatened her deputies with the same fate.
But even the judge conceded that those licenses, if issued, may not be valid, although he refused to decide that issue and left it to the lawyers for the same-sex couples to confront. The question of legality of new licenses came up during a series of hearings throughout the day Thursday in U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning’s court in Ashland, but did not get resolved and will linger.
With County Clerk Kim Davis in jail, under the judge’s order that she had illegally broken his order to end her “no marriage licenses” policy as a way of obeying her religious views against same-sex marriage, the dispute will be moving forward on several points and could return to the Supreme Court on at least some aspects. Her lawyers said they will be appealing her contempt punishment, and they have two other appeals pending in lower courts.
Davis’s religious complaint all along has been that, because Kentucky law requires her name and signature to be on every marriage license issued in her county, issuing licenses to any couples would involve her directly in authorizing same-sex couples to marry, which would violate her belief that God has made marriage an institution only for a man and a woman. She thus adopted a no-licensing policy and ordered her deputies to follow the policy as well.
After Davis told the judge in person that she could not obey his order, the judge said she did not have that option as a public official. He turned down the suggestion, made by lawyers for same-sex couples who had sued, that Davis should only face tough and escalating fines. The judge said that, because Davis’s supporters would simply cover those fines for her, jailing was the only option to assure that she would obey his order. She was turned over to U.S. marshals for jailing.
Among other points that Davis’s lawyers made to the judge about the obedience by her deputy clerks was that state law does not allow them to do so without her name and signature on the forms, and they repeated her vow not to provide that authorization.. Even so, the judge then obtained the promise from five of her six deputy clerks to reopen marriage licensing in their office on Friday, and he said he would tolerate no “shenanigans.”
One of the deputies, Davis’s son, Nathan, would not yield to the judge’s demand, but the judge chose not to punish him because other clerks would be available to issue licenses. At least one same-sex couple told local news reporters that they would show up at the clerk’s office Friday, to apply for a license.
Local news organizations in the state have provided extensive coverage of the dispute, and increased their coverage on Thursday as several sessions in the judge’s court unfolded.
After the judge sent the clerk to jail, one of her lawyers, Roger K. Gannam, a senior staff lawyer with the advocacy group Liberty Counsel, told reporters outside the courthouse that they would immediately appeal her contempt citation. Gannam was quoted as saying: “Today, for the first time in American history, an American citizen has been incarcerated for having the belief and conscience that marriage is a union of one man and one woman.”
The judge is a (redacted)
Funny. A federal judge in the course of enforcing his decree is pretending to make state law.
If state law deems that only a certificate with the county clerk’s name and signature will serve as an official marriage certificate....then I would say something with less than that...is not a marriage certificate.
A judge can deem things illegal or such...but he can’t write law and I think there’s not much a federal judge can do on this case. He can’t even fire the clerk...can he?
Send him a gift. An SS officer’s cap.
Are they valid even if she signed them?
How can this usurper imprison the clerk??
I’m not a lawyer so may be ignorant of some things.
I understand that she appears to be going against the Supreme Court ruling on homosexual marriage.
What I don’t understand is why she is in jail. She has not been convicted of any crime, or officially charged as I understand it. Even if officially charged, the crime is not any sort of violent felony crime. So why exactly is this woman in jail????
The judge said contempt of court I think. The LE officers believed or at least obeyed him.
Freegards
RE: I understand that she appears to be going against the Supreme Court ruling on homosexual marriage.
The Supreme Court does not make laws. They interpret them.
Where in the constitution is gay marriage mentioned?
RE: What I don’t understand is why she is in jail. She has not been convicted of any crime, or officially charged as I understand it
A Kentucky judge cited her with contempt because she refused to issue ANY marriage license ( not just licenses for gay marriage ).
But think about it... if one really wants to get a marriage license and nothing else, there are many other ways.
Another judge in the county volunteered to issue marriage licenses ( which he is authorized to do so ). Neighboring counties can issue marriage licenses as well. Nobody is inconvenienced, much less gays.
So, We have to understand that this is not about anything but a HUNT AGAINST DEVOUT CHRISTIANS.
Why do you think gays in Colorado and other states INSIST on going to Christian bakers to have their wedding cake baked when there are hundreds of others out there who could do the same job?
It is about FORCING CONFORMITY and using government to PUNISH those who refuse to conform pure and simple.
Our first amendment rights are being discarded right before our very eyes yet many people ( even Presidential candidates ) refuse to see it, much less defend it.
RE: A federal judge in the course of enforcing his decree is pretending to make state law.
YEP, and 5 black robed justices pretend to make NATIONAL LAW.
There is certainly some uncertainty as to the validity of any licenses issued today (and going forward). But, I think the practical likelihood of them getting struck down is low.
First, in order for them to be declared invalid, I would think that someone would have to challenge the validity of the licenses once they are filed. It will be difficult to find someone with standing to challenge the licenses, who is willing to do so.
Second, even if a valid challenge was made to the licenses being issued today and going forward, a judge may well say that the validity/authorization of Davis’ signature on the licenses is a technical issue, between Davis and her staff
All in all, I think the likelihood of actually invalidating whatever licenses are issued today is exceedingly low.
And when that doesn't work, we can start pulling fingernails, right, judge?
Where will you stop? You can only leave her locked up... Forever?
I pointed this out on NUMEROUS threads yesterday and it was completely ignored.
So we have a U.S. District Judge throwing Kim Davis in Jail, and then admits that its unclear whether or not those marriage licenses issued by deputy clerks -- WITHOUT KIM DAVIS' sign-off are in fact, valid.
WTG Judge! /sarcasm
Fraudulent "marriage licenses" for fraudulent homosexual marriages. It just doesn't get any better than this! ROFL!!!
I think there is a problem with selective enforcement
if the judge refused to jail the son for contempt also.
This whole mess smells of Obamalaw.
All in all, I think the likelihood of actually invalidating whatever licenses are issued today is exceedingly low.
You have a gift for understatement...the likelihood is non-existent...
Our government is invested in seeing homo marriage become setled law...
That is a dangerous trend. Unfortunately it has been happening for years and nobody has put a stop to it. Many years ago an out of control judge in Arizona even ordered the amount of money school districts were to spend.
Because good men have done nothing to stop him.
For what it’s worth, I saw it, and thought it was a brilliant and incisive take. But not having any legal background, I wasn’t sure how valid the argument was. Delighted to see it confirmed though, and kudos for being the first!
I don’t understand why you Americans even have legislatures any more. The judiciary unilaterally legislates all the time, and this is allowed to proceed without incident and only pathetic protest which is never followed up by action. So the judges are the law of the land, and do as they will without check (except for higher judges).
The concept of reviewing legislation to make sure it is constitutional IS an important one, but it is one the Founders delegated to the voters. Voters who saw their legislatures enacting unconstitutional legislation could throw out the lawmakers and elect new ones to resolve the issue, rather than abandoning representative government and giving all power to the judiciary such as America has done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.