Kim Davis' legal team pushes to overturn Obergefell, citing Dobbs decision

and so it begins. Over/under on how the scotus will rule on this if it goes up that high?

 

They’ll kill it 6-3 with the possible exception of one of the R’s being the 4th to try to make it seem as if it wasn’t a done deal from the jump.

 

I really don't think they'd go there as the court stands now, but if Alito became the swing vote under an even more right-wing court, all bets are off. I think there are still at least 2 conservative votes that think its a bad idea for the courts to invalidate thousands of marriages overnight.

 

IIRC, she was fired after refusing to issue the marriage license. I do not recall the $360,000 in damages part. That is pretty steep and likely something a county clerk's salary will never be able to repay (and that assumes she was able to find equal employment after). Fire her? Sure. But $360,000? What were the actual damages to the couple? The couple had to come back a week later and get the license from somebody else?

 

If I were to bet I would put my money on the Court overturning Obergefell. The majority in Dobbs has demonstrated that they have absolutely no respect for precedent and it's also rather obvious that they were motivated by religious fundamentalism. I do not expect that to change. Of the five justices in the majority of the original decision in Obergefell two have been replaced by conservatives; three of the four dissenting justices are still on the court and the one who is no longer there (Antonin Scalia who passed away) was replaced by another theologically motivated conservative.

I would add that it always floors me how organizations promoting theocracy like that representing Davis use words like "liberty" and "freedom" in their names while they support neither unless it's the freedom to discriminate.

 

I went to school with Kim Davis.
Not this one, though.

 

They’ll come up with something like “gay marriage can stand, but government employees don’t have to recognize it or accept your forms if they have deeply held religious bigotry beliefs.” So, maybe you’ll have to come back another day, or drive to another county, if you run into a Jesus Karen at your local court house.

 

Too bad both parties love their big gov. The real con position: such a notion as a marriage license is obscene. How can you be for limited gov & make marriage the gov's bidness? Gov should not recognize or deny marriage. It's stupid.

 

Roberts is the only one I think might do that. Cavanaugh and ACB appear to be getting the “make it look better” assignment lately, joining the losing ticket for cover.

And even Roberts is often setting up the move that is so common it has been named after him so he can circle back at a later date for the real prize.

 

All I have to say is screw Liberty Counsel. Who dedicates a career in 2024 to overturning same sex marriage by supporting county clerks who don’t want to follow the laws of the land. Has a same sex marriage hurt one single US citizen, ever?

 

I agree with you, but to be completely fair, it reads as though they're appealing a $360,000 fine as the basis for going this route. That's a big chunk of change and I'm trying to figure out why she was ordered to pay that amount. It seems pretty excessive. Most violent crimes have far lower maximum fine amounts. I'm assuming it was a civil suit.

 

Yes, it was a civil lawsuit. I read that the jury awarded $50,000 per Plaintiff, and I believe the rest was an award of fees and costs.

 

Its the “freedom” to make others do what YOU want without consequences and its not limited to religion. It was the freedom to own land that dispossessed native Americans of their homes and it was the freedom to pursue prosperity in the fashion they wanted that provided the rationale for owning other human beings. The freedom for local taxpayers to run school systems as they wish - without the overbearing federal telling them what to do gave us separate but equal segregation. Lots of history has been written by those pursuing personal/religious/tribal freedoms.

 

Yeah, that seems excessive. Other than the inconvenience of having to come back to the clerk's office to obtain the marriage license (or simply drive to another jurisdiction), what was the basis for the suit?

 

Fair enough. Empowering the fairer sex has made women less dependent on dudes (which is great). The amount of “red pill” men or whatever it is called where 35 year old male virgins swear off women as all evil is a very real movement.

I just hope the Supreme Court focuses on more relevant issues. But as everyone has mentioned, it could definitely go all the way up the judicial flagpole.

 

Probably something along the line of a government official discriminating against them. Her only job is to stamp their papers and put them in a pile so they can be bound in a book… no one was forcing her to give up her bigotry….

 

Is that the test by which judges should use to rule on laws now? Is she trying to say that marriage is a state's right of law and not a federal right?

 

Do you know how much a wedding costs?