top of page

Supreme Court asked to overturn Obergefell same-sex marriage ruling

  • Writer: WGON
    WGON
  • Aug 12
  • 2 min read
ree

The Supreme Court of the United States has been formally asked to take up a case that asks the court to overrule Obergefell v Hodges, the 2015 ruling that extended legal marriage rights to same-sex couples. 



Former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed for six days in 2015 after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples on religious grounds, is appealing the $100,000 jury decision on the basis of emotional damage as well as $260,000 in legal costs. 



Davis submitted a petition for writ of certiorari last month, which argues that her free exercise of religion protects her from legal liability for the denial of a marriage license and claimed in the filing that the Obergefell decision under the 14th Amendment was "egregiously wrong" and "must be corrected." 



The petition stated, "As predicted at the time Obergefell was decided, it 'would threaten the religious liberty of many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman.' 'As a result of this Court’s alteration of the Constitution, Davis found herself with a choice between her religious beliefs and her job. When she chose to follow her faith ... she was sued almost immediately for violating the constitutional rights of same-sex couples.'"



The petition marks the first time that the high court has been asked to take up a case that argues for the overturning of Obergefell. Davis is viewed as one of the only Americans who have the legal standing to bring the case, ABC News reported. 



"If there ever was a case of exceptional importance," Davis' attorney Mathew Staver wrote in the document, "the first individual in the Republic's history who was jailed for following her religious convictions regarding the historic definition of marriage, this should be it."



At the time, Davis was the Rowan County Clerk in 2015, and was the only person in the local government who could issue marriage licenses under state law. 

 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page