Latest news with #LibertyCounsel
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kim Davis will appeal to SCOTUS in marriage equality case
Kim Davis, then the Rowan county clerk, waved to supporters at a rally outside the Carter County Detention Center on Sept. 8, 2015 in Grayson. Davis was ordered to jail for contempt of court after refusing a federal court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (Photo by) Former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis plans to ask the United States Supreme Court to weigh in on whether she was protected by the First Amendment when refusing same-sex marriage licenses a decade ago, her lawyer announced Monday. This comes after the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused a request to re-hear her case, saying the panel of judges who ruled against Davis in March already considered the case fully. Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of conservative legal group Liberty Counsel, said in a statement that the nation's highest court is 'the next step to give Kim Davis justice in this case since the emotional distress damage award against her in her individual capacity is barred by the First Amendment.' Davis is fighting a federal jury's decision that she should pay $100,000 to a couple she denied a marriage license in 2015. But her lawyers also want the case to result in same-sex marriage rights being revoked. 'This case underscores why the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, because that decision threatens the religious liberty of many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman,' Staver said. 'The First Amendment precludes making the choice between your faith and your livelihood.' The move is expected. Staver, who argued on Davis' behalf in Cincinnati in January before a 3-judge panel in the 6th Circuit, said at that time he intended to use her case to try and overturn marriage equality. Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 decision that guaranteed same-sex couples marriage rights, is 'on the same shifting sand' that doomed Roe v. Wade, Staver said. 'I think … it's not a matter of 'if,' it's a matter of 'when' Obergefell will be overturned,' Staver told the Lantern in January. 'I have no doubt that Obergefell will be overturned, and the issue will be returned back to the states as it was before 2015.' Davis, then the Rowan County clerk, made national headlines in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to several same-sex couples based on her religious beliefs. In 2015, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered Davis to jail for five days for contempt for refusing to comply with a court order. In 2024, Bunning ordered Davis to pay $260,104 in fees and expenses to attorneys who represented one of the couples she refused a marriage license. Bunning earlier ordered Davis to pay the couple, David Ermold and David Moore, $100,000 in damages for violating their constitutional rights. Liberty Counsel has unsuccessfully fought Bunning's decisions. Davis lost her bid for reelection as Rowan County clerk in 2018. Her lawyers have argued she acted within her First Amendment rights when she refused to issue the licenses, though judges don't agree. In March, the 6th Circuit refused to strike down the jury judgement against her on those grounds, saying she 'cannot raise a Free Exercise Clause defense because she is being held liable for state action, which the First Amendment does not protect.' Liberty Counsel said the case raises the question 'of whether a government official sued in an individual capacity and stripped of governmental immunity may assert a personal First Amendment defense to monetary damages.' The group wants the Supreme Court to take up the case to 'answer the question of 'first impression,' resolve any conflicts with Supreme Court precedent, and ensure that former government defendants standing before the Court in their personal capacity do not lose First Amendment protections.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court rules in Kim Davis case aimed at overturning same-sex marriage
A legal appeal filed by controversial former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis that aimed to eventually overturn the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision was denied this week. Davis gained fame and notoriety in 2015 by refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing her Christian faith and First Amendment rights. A ruling this week by three Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals judges noted Davis previously had claims of qualified immunity denied in two separate court decisions, and her actions as a public official in denying those licenses were not protected by the First Amendment. Davis' Liberty Counsel attorneys filed the appeal in July, calling to overturn a 2023 verdict that said she owed $100,000 to a couple to whom she had refused to grant a marriage license in 2015, after the Obergefell decision called on all 50 states to recognize same-sex marriage. That appeal also argued the U.S. Supreme Court overstepped in that decision and should have left honoring same-sex marriages to states, using similar logic the high court used in 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade. In a statement, Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver said the case "underscores why the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn Obergefell v. Hodges." "That decision threatens the religious liberty of many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman," the statement said. "The First Amendment precludes making the choice between your faith and your livelihood.' The ruling this week was issued by Judges Helene N. White, Andre B. Mathis and Chad A. Readler. Staver, in his statement, said Liberty Counsel "intends to seek further review" through an appeal in front of the full court, noting Readler said in his concurrence that case law in the Obergefell decision is "not entirely settled." Davis was briefly jailed over her actions in 2015 and was voted out of office in 2018. But her case attracted international attention, with then-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, joining her at a rally in Kentucky after she was released from jail, and drew support from many in the evangelical community. Reach Lucas Aulbach at laulbach@ This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: Kim Davis appeal aimed at ending same-sex marriage denied by court
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kim Davis' lawyer eager for next step as he argues same-sex marriage case before appeals panel
Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver in the Potter Stewart Courthouse in Cincinnati, Jan. 30, 2025. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Sarah Ladd) CINCINNATI — A lawyer for former Rowan County clerk Kim Davis argued before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Thursday in a case he hopes will help overturn federal same-sex marriage protections. The oral arguments focused on the question of whether Davis should pay $100,000 to David Ermold and David Moore for denying their marriage license a decade ago. After the hearing, Davis' lawyer, Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver, told the Lantern that his team's goal is for the appeal to reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The case would provide the justices an opportunity to re-evaluate the decision that gave gay couples equal marriage rights on the same grounds that the court in 2022 overturned the federal right to abortion, Staver said. Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 decision that guaranteed same-sex couples marriage rights, is 'on the same shifting sand' that doomed Roe v. Wade, said Staver. 'I think … it's not a matter of 'if,' it's a matter of 'when' Obergefell will be overturned,' Staver told the Lantern. 'I have no doubt that Obergefell will be overturned, and the issue will be returned back to the states as it was before 2015.' Each side argued for about 15 minutes before a three-judge panel at the Potter Stewart Courthouse in downtown Cincinnati. Davis' lawyers are asking that she not be required to pay $100,000 to Ermold and Moore for denying their marriage license in 2015 as ordered by a federal jury. Davis made national headlines in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to several same-sex couples based on her religious beliefs. Kim Davis' legal counsel moves to make her appeal a springboard for overturning marriage rights During Thursday's oral arguments, Staver focused his arguments on the First Amendment, which promises the freedom of speech, religion and the press, as a defense of Davis' actions. He also argued that emotional distress isn't quantifiable, therefore the $100,000 payment was 'pulled out of thin air' and Davis should pay out nothing. 'There's no lost wages, there's no treatment, there's no injury, there's no out of pocket expenses,' Staver told the judges. 'It's only based upon their hurt feelings that occurred when they went to the clerk's office to get the license, and they said that Kim Davis' words caused them the distress.' Because of that, he said, the amount in question is arbitrary. 'Just being upset when they came to the counter to get the marriage license and raising their voice is not sufficient for a jury to award emotional damages based solely upon that information,' Staver said. 'How in the world would the jury, for example, calculate $50,000 for each plaintiff when they had nothing before them on which to calculate it?' The judges pushed back on Staver's argument that Davis is now a private citizen and has full First Amendment rights. Senior Judge Helene N. White, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said the relevant question is what Davis did as a 'government actor.' Judge Chad A. Readler, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, said 'the problem there seems to be that she didn't try to avail herself of any of those rights she may have had under federal or state law, vis-à-vis her employer, to get an accommodation. She just refused, herself, to do this.' Judge Andre B. Mathis, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, posed this question twice: 'Are you saying she was not engaged in state action?' Staver replied, 'She was a state actor, and that's where she had sovereign immunity originally, but then they stripped her of the qualified immunity and came after her in her individual capacity.' Bill Powell, Ermold and Moore's attorney, argued that Davis violated his clients 14th Amendment rights while acting under the color of law. 'As long as my clients had enough testimony to support $1 in damages, then the argument that there should be zero should fail,' Powell said. Davis had the right to oppose the concept of gay marriage in her personal and private capacities, he said, but 'the state cannot continue to discriminate against same sex couples.' Powell also addressed the argument that Davis' actions are covered under the First Amendment. 'When a government official acts under color of state law, they do not have that kind of First Amendment protection. Even if you disagreed with that, and even if you thought that Miss Davis had some kind of First Amendment protections in her job, it would have to be for speech that she took in her private capacity outside of her official duties,' Powell argued. 'And that is not what happened here.' 'In this case,' he added, 'the accommodation that (Davis) gave herself was to make it the official policy of her entire office not to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, even her subordinates. And that kind of an accommodation … took the law into her own hands, and there was no possible justification for that.' Powell didn't speak to the press after Thursday's arguments, saying his comments in court would speak for themselves. Staver with Liberty Counsel said it was difficult to get a sense of where the judges stood based on their questions, but he's 'optimistic.' He expects a ruling in around 90 days, he said. Should the court rule against him, he intends to appeal to the Court. Should it rule in his favor, he expects an appeal from the other side as well. 'There's two arguments that we would present to the Supreme Court,' Staver explained. 'One, that the First Amendment is a defense in cases like Kim Davis' for other people who have sincere religious beliefs. But beyond that, that Obergefell should be overturned.' In a brief filed in June 2024, Liberty Counsel said the Supreme Court should reconsider Obergefell v. Hodges for the same reasons the high court rolled back federal abortion protections. Liberty Counsel's argument picks up on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' concurring opinion in the 2022 abortion ruling. Thomas wrote that the court could use the same rationale to overturn earlier decisions on same-sex marriage and access to contraception. 'Obergefell was wrong when it was decided and it is wrong today because it was based entirely on the legal fiction of substantive due process, which lacks any basis in the Constitution,' Liberty Counsel said in court documents filed last year. Listen to an audio recording of the oral arguments here. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
