The Supreme Court decision did not change Kentucky law, it voided it. The LAW in Kentucky regarding marriage is that in order to get a marriage license the applicant must be two adults of the opposite sex who are not immediately blood related. The Kentucky statute that authorizes the county clerk to issue marriage licenses to anyone does not authorize her to issue a license to same sex couples. If the Supreme Court determined that the Kentucky statute was unconstitutional, then the county clerk cannot issue any marriage license at all. She isn’t. She is currently obeying the law by not issuing licenses because she currently has no authority to do so.
Your position is one that gives the Supreme Court LEGISLATIVE POWER which it does not have. Forcing this clerk to issue marriage licenses is an unconstitutional act. The court has no power to require a county clerk to violate an existing Kentucky Statute and if the statute is void, then it has no power to make up some statute that requires the state to issue marriage licenses in accordance with a void statute.
I get pretty sick and tired of people on this forum saying that this clerk needs to follow the law or quit her job. SHE’S DOING HER JOB!!!! Her job is to follow the statutory law and right now there isn’t one.
Unless and until KENTUCKY passes a law re-authorizing the issuance of marriage licenses, no clerk in Kentucky should be issuing marriage licenses to anyone.
If you disagree, then show me the currently existing statute that authorizes county clerks in Kentucky to issue marriage licenses to anyone.
The problem is not that the clerk is not following the law, THE COURTS ARE MAKING UP THE LAW. THEY HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO DO SO!!! If anyone should be quitting their jobs, it is the judges!!!!
“Unless and until KENTUCKY passes a law re-authorizing the issuance of marriage licenses, no clerk in Kentucky should be issuing marriage licenses to anyone.”
So what the hell is the cause then?
They will STILL have to re-write it to allow for gays to get a license. It isn’t like they can write it so they still cant, nor can they stall for years either.
In the end she will still have to give them a license, whether she likes it or not.
There is no “win” for her here.
The SCOTUS decision does not void the entire law, only the law as it applies to gay marriages.
Your (and others') interpretation that it voids the entire existing law is incorrect.
First let me say that I believe and feel that homosexality and gay marriage are more than ‘wrong’. They are an abomination and those who unrepentantly practice such things will find their place in hell. Clear enough?
I am not an expert on the Kentucky Law, however, if you are right, and I can only find a ‘very few’ on an internet search who agree with you, I still think that this is a battle that cannot be won in court of public opinion and will cost Cruz, Huckaby, or Trump a chance of even getting nominated, much less elected. After the election if there was real conservative leadership in the house and senate this battle could be fought out legislatively or legally. Or perhaps others will contest the points of constitutionality you bring up. For now, I say leave Trump alone on this. He’s trying to get elected and is the only one, in my opinion, who has the gonads to fight the media and the establishment and still get elected. Cruz will fight, but has neither the charisma or the money to to what Trump is doing and win a majority. I’m with you, not against you. And, by the way, when did you come to know the Lord Jesus?