Fox pundits offered a surprisingly strong condemnation of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis and her lawyer, Mat Staver, on Monday’s edition of “Happening Now.”
Host Gregg Jarrett asked two legal experts whether the Rowan County clerk’s religious beliefs allowed her to defy court orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. All three talking heads insisted Davis’ claim undermined the authority of federal law.
“When she took the job she swore to uphold the law,” Jarrett said. “We rely on government officials to do that. They can’t just pick and choose what laws they like and which ones they don’t. If they were allowed to do that, wouldn’t that lead to chaos, anarchy and so forth?”
Trial attorney Chip Merlin concurred, saying Davis may believe gay marriage is “immoral” but has “an obligation to uphold other people’s constitutional rights.”
Criminal defense attorney Sharon Liko was similarly dismissive, calling Davis “a hypocrite” who is “applying for the job of martyr.”
Liko rejected Davis’ attorney’s suggestion that the Supreme Court lacked the constitutional authority to enforce gay marriage—a claim that GOP presidential candidates such as Mike Huckabee and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) have endorsed.
“It’s just a ridiculously stupid statement,” Liko said. “The Supreme Court does just that. They determine the constitutionality of issues; they resolve these kinds of disputes.”
Watch the full clip below.
h/t Raw Story
They’re absolutely correct.
If even Fox News gets it, then everyone should get it. I can understand why Huckabee and Cruz don’t, but what’s taking Kentucky so long?
Dear Kim Davis Supporters,
A vegan clerk issuing gun licenses issues permits to people who have handguns for self defense, since self-defense is important to him, but not to hunters for their rifles, because he’s morally opposed to killing animals. Thoughts?
I am not a lawyer. I have never even audited a class on US Constitutional law. But if I was on trial before a judge, and I heard my lawyer say that a Supreme Court decision does not have to be followed because it is not the law of the land, then even I know that it is time to ask the court to get me a new lawyer. This is absolute recklessness. These lawyers know goddamned well about the supremacy of a high court decision.
I also heard these morons and their willfully ignorant client Ms. Davis casting suspicions about the validity of the licenses issued by the clerk’s office without Ms. Davis, when Kentucky law clearly states that they are legal and valid, and there are records of legal licenses being issued in Ms. Davis’s absence in the past. Isn’t it illegal for a lawyer to do that?
When you’ve lost FOX news…