The United States Supreme Court is poised to make a critical decision on whether to hear a case that could potentially challenge the legal foundation of same-sex marriage across the nation.
The Case at a Glance
On Friday, the justices held their first conference to deliberate on the Davis v Ermold case. This legal battle involves Kim Davis, a former county clerk from Rowan County, Kentucky, who became a national figure for religious opposition to same-sex marriage in 2015. Her rise to prominence came shortly after the Supreme Court's landmark Obergefell v Hodges ruling that legalised same-sex marriage nationwide.
Davis repeatedly refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, a stance that led to her being briefly jailed for contempt of court. The case before the Supreme Court stems from a lawsuit filed by David Ermold and David Moore, a couple whom Davis denied a license. A jury subsequently awarded the couple $100,000 in damages.
The Legal Arguments and Appeal
Davis appealed the decision, arguing that her First Amendment right to freely exercise her religion protected her actions. However, in March of this year, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected this argument. The court ruled that because Davis was acting in her official capacity as a government employee, she was not entitled to such protections.
The judges wrote a powerful statement: "When an official’s discharge of her duties according to her conscience violates the constitutional rights of citizens, the constitution must win out." They further added that the Bill of Rights would be meaningless if officials could ignore it based on personal conscience.
Now, Davis and her legal team from the Liberty Counsel are asking the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, to overturn this ruling. Her petition not only seeks protection from liability but also urges the court to overturn the Obergefell decision entirely. Her lawyers drew parallels to the court's 2022 reversal of Roe v Wade, claiming that Obergefell is "not grounded in the nation’s history or traditions."
Potential Consequences and Next Steps
While the case has sparked protests, some legal experts caution that it remains a legal long shot. The justices could address the narrower question of Davis's liability without needing to revisit the broader Obergefell precedent.
There is no guarantee the Supreme Court will even agree to hear the case. The court receives thousands of petitions each term but only hears oral arguments in a select few. It requires the agreement of four justices to grant a hearing.
If the court were to use this case to undermine Obergefell, the consequences would be profound. A brief from Ermold and Moore argued that it would encourage other officials to break laws they disagree with, hoping for a bailout from the high court. They highlighted that nearly 800,000 married same-sex couples in the US could see their constitutional status thrown into question, disrupting countless lives.
The court may announce its decision on whether to take the case as early as Monday, setting the stage for a potentially monumental legal showdown.
