Kentucky Clerk Refuses To Give Gay Couple Marriage License, Defying Fed Order

Protesters waive a rainbow flag on the front lawn of the Rowan County Judicial Center, Tuesday, June 30, 2015, in Morehead, Ky. The protest was being held against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who, due to the ruling ... Protesters waive a rainbow flag on the front lawn of the Rowan County Judicial Center, Tuesday, June 30, 2015, in Morehead, Ky. The protest was being held against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who, due to the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States and her own religious beliefs, has refused to issue any marriage licenses in the county. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

UPDATE: Aug. 13, 2015, 9:41 AM EDT

MOREHEAD, Ky. (AP) — A Kentucky clerk’s office turned away a gay couple seeking a marriage license on Thursday, defying a federal judge’s order that dismissed her argument involving religious freedom.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis’ office turned away David Moore and David Ermold just hours after a U.S. district judge ordered her to do the opposite.

Deputy clerk Nathan Davis says the office was advised by its attorneys with the Christian law firm Liberty Counsel to continue refusing same-sex couples as it appeals the ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Kim Davis has argued that her deeply held Christian beliefs prevent her from issuing licenses to same-sex couples. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled gay marriage bans unconstitutional, Davis stopped issuing licenses to any couple, gay or straight.

Five couples sued her, and U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning on Wednesday ordered her to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

He wrote that her refusal “likely violated the constitutional rights of her constituents.”

Ermold, in a tearful plea, called her actions “cruel” and said they were representative of the continued discrimination faced by gay couples.

In Kentucky, county clerks issue marriage licenses, but someone else must “solemnize” the marriage before the license can be filed with the county clerk. Davis argued that issuing a same-sex marriage license that contains her signature is the same as her approving the marriage, which she said violates her Christian beliefs. But Bunning rejected that argument, saying Davis has likely violated the U.S. Constitution’s ban on the government establishing a religion by “openly adopting a policy that promotes her own religious convictions at the expenses of others.”

“Davis remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs. She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County Jail. She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do,” Bunning wrote. “However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County Clerk.”

Laura Landenwich, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the 28-page ruling reveals that the judge painstakingly combed through each of Davis’ legal arguments and rejected each one. Bunning said that although couples could get marriage licenses elsewhere, “why should they be required to?” He noted the surrounding counties require 30 minutes or one hour of travel and there are many “in this rural region of the state who simply do not have the physical, financial or practical means to travel.”

Bunning said state law does not allow the county judge-executive to issue marriage licenses unless Davis is absent from her job, and Bunning refused to deem Davis absent because she has a religious objection. And Bunning said issuing a marriage license does not constitute speech, saying the marriage license form “does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage on religious or moral grounds.”

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News
61
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Remove or jail her…or both. Yup! Both would be fine:
    http://blogs.trb.com/news/opinion/chanlowe/blog/island.gif

    In any case…get her out! Another bigot and homophobe in government is gone and a job is created for someone who wants to do it. Win/Win!

    BTW: Remember when one of these lunatic TEAliban Christian clerks refused to issue divorce papers? ____ Correct! Me neither.

  2. Why in hell is this bigot still employed by the county? Hey, David Moore and David Ermold, sue the fuck out of the county for keeping this idiot employed.

  3. If a law firm advised a client to break the law…that’s a big deal. Perhaps David Kurtz could get in on this one as it’s a bit confusing. SCOTUS ruled it’s OK. But many Gov’s said you don’t have to if you have a religious objection. This person stops performing her duties on a religious conflict claim. A Judge says stop that. The Judge’s order is appealed and a law firm tells this woman to ignore the Judge. She keeps up the behavior she was ordered to cease.

    I hope I have that right. Is there an legal angle she can exploit or is this just ‘in your face’ stupid?

  4. Time to start arresting these people as well as terminating their employment.They are breaking the law.I demand that they be brought before a Judge and face charges now.

  5. I hope the county pokie is located close by – That way she won’t have to travel far —

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

55 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for alliebean Avatar for pluckyinky Avatar for richardinjax Avatar for chammy Avatar for rollinnolan Avatar for jimtoday Avatar for mantan Avatar for calone1 Avatar for skippyflipjack Avatar for sherlock1 Avatar for joelopines Avatar for stiggy Avatar for dickweed Avatar for hugopreuss Avatar for jcblues Avatar for exasperated Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for azjude Avatar for beattycat Avatar for ikea_monkey Avatar for witcheekate Avatar for albesure Avatar for whatithink

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: