Posted on 09/04/2015 5:54:01 PM PDT by markomalley
A spokesman for the Oregon judge refusing to marry same-sex couples told The Daily Caller News Foundation the judge may lose his job, though he thinks that is unlikely.
“It could range all the way from dismissal of the complaint up to removal and anything in between,” Oregon judge Vance Day’s spokesman Patrick Korten told TheDCNF. “You could call [removal from office] the nuclear option, highly doubtful.”
Day stopped performing marriages in March and asked his staff to kindly refer couples to other judges. Now he’s under investigation by the Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness And Disability over whether he is still fit to be a judge. A complaint was filed in June.
Korten said the commission’s conclusions will then go to the court system, and that the commission does not have the final authority to remove Day, if it were to come to that.
Day, former chairman of the Oregon Republican party, received permission from the Oregon Government Ethics Commission Thursday to set up a legal defense fund to pay his legal expenses for the response to the complaint.
Korten pointed out that judges in Oregon are not required to perform marriages and that there are plenty of other judges who could do it instead. A wide range of officials, including state judges, federal judges and county clerks can perform them.
“This is the start of what we’re going to be wrestling with for the next several years,” Korten told TheDCNF. “How are we to resolve the conflict between where same-sex marriage now stands thanks to the Supreme Court and people who have deep and profound objections to it. Where does the line get drawn? Does conscience and religious belief have any value?”
The enemy never quits.
Why are there so many Freepers who think people like Kim Davis and this Judge should just “do their job or quit”?
This is WAR! We must keep pushing OUR agenda. We must stop backtracking and giving in.
Anyone can file a complaint. This doesn’t mean anything.
Unlike marriage clerks whose job duties include issuing marriage licenses, Judges aren’t required to perform marriage ceremonies. It’s not part of their job description.
So this complaint almost certainly won’t go anywhere, and if it does, the judge should be protected by the first amendment, and i’d predict at least six votes on SCOTUS would agree if it ever had to go that far.
I assume you are referring to Kim Davis who was not a marriage clerk, but a county clerk whose job function included many more things than recording marriages. But she did not refuse, in fact she requested the Kentucky marriage license forms be changed so her name would not appear on them. She would record any license without her name affixed. Marriage licenses remain in county records permanently. Her objection was that her signature inferred her consent, which would violate her concise and her faith.
Further she is not disobeying the law, the USSC nullified the KY law so there is no law. She is disobeying an order. So when someone says that we are a nations of laws not men they are actually defending her! The judge is commanding her to follow a man (himself)and not laws. Laws are only lawful when passed by both houses of the legislator they are not lawfully enacted when created by the judiciary.
You can be removed as a judge in California if you have children in the Boy Scouts.
These perverts will never rest until this judge is living on the streets.
Essentially, these new laws will have the effect of making it impossible for traditional Jews and Christians to serve in the civil service.
I don’t think any of our civil libertarians (ie, ACLU types) realize quite what that ultimately means.
Oh, yes, they do. My ancestors in Ireland experienced the same. They were forbidden to enter the professions, dispossessed of their lands, couldn’t be armed, and couldn’t even own a horse worth more the 5 pounds. Because of their religion. The people behind this know exactly what they are doing. They have their sights on the resources of their enemies, and will not rest until they are successful.
Re: “. . . she requested the Kentucky marriage license forms be changed so her name would not appear on them. She would record any license without her name affixed. Marriage licenses remain in county records permanently. Her objection was that her signature inferred her consent, which would violate her concise and her faith.”
This is something I had not heard yet. Is there a link to a story that has this information so I could show it to those who question Davis’s motives? I am not doubting you, I just wondered where I could document this.
http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14100&PRID=1587
and
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3333185/posts
USSC in Obergefell held:
“The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States. It follows that the Court also must hold - and it now does hold - that there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.”
For the moment I will stipulate to this part: “there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character”
Here is the error:
“The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States.”
This commandeers the legislative process of the States. The federal government has no say in marriage laws, laws which have always been within the purview of the States. No court, least of all the USSC, has the authority to legislate.
Since the Supreme Court has arrogated to themselves the power to legislate, the power to commandeer State legislatures, why haven’t they provided a uniform marriage code for the entire United States?
The USSC declaration that “The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States” is nothing but the personal opinion of Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, none of whom have authority to legislate.
Thanks
Can you show me an example of a CA judge who was removed of having children in the boy scouts?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/01/24/california-bars-judges-from-boy-scouts/
Judges will have until January 21, 2016 to comply with the new rule.
Americans in general and even Freepers have been so brainwashed by the MSM and the cultural zeitgeist that they fail to even think that the Supreme Courts opinions are nothing more than OPINIONS and that the Supreme Court has no authority to legislate.
They think that cases like this and Roe v. Wade are some kind of black letter addendum to the Constitution.
We have an uphill battle to unbrainwash these people.
Oh, this prevents a California judge from being part of the boy scouts, not his children.
Oh, I'm so relieved. I thought that California may have just gone too far. Thanks for reassuring me that everything here is ok.
[[A spokesman for the Oregon judge refusing to marry same-sex couples told The Daily Caller News Foundation the judge may lose his job, though he thinks that is unlikely]]
Psssst- a clerk just went to prison for not issuing licenses- bakers have lost their businesses, florists, photographers, printers. planners etc- all have lost their businesses and jobs-
Same sex marriage should never have gone to the SC in the first place. I think we all knew what the results would be. This should be up to the individual states, however, even that hasn’t worked - the voters would vote it down and then some judge would overturn the will of the people. What in the world is the answer to this? The left never stops - never!
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.