Washington D.C. – The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who sought to overturn the landmark 2015 decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The justices' decision, announced without comment, leaves intact the constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry across the United States. This move ends a long-running legal challenge that began nearly a decade ago. ^[1][2][3][4]The high court's action provides relief for LGBTQ+ rights advocates. Many worried the conservative-majority court might revisit the precedent set in Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that established the right to same-sex marriage. ^[2][5][6]### Davis's Decade-Long Legal Battle Kim Davis first gained national attention in 2015. As the Rowan County Clerk in Kentucky, she stopped issuing marriage licenses to all couples, both gay and straight, after the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. Davis stated that issuing licenses to same-sex couples would violate her deeply held religious beliefs. ^[7][5][8]Her refusal led to lawsuits from same-sex couples, including David Moore and David Ermold, who she denied a marriage license. A federal judge eventually jailed Davis for five days for contempt of court. Kentucky later changed its law to remove clerks' names from marriage licenses. ^[7][3][8]Davis continued her legal fight, appealing lower court orders that found she violated the constitutional rights of couples. A jury awarded David Moore and David Ermold $100,000 in damages in 2023. Judge David Bunning, a U.S. District Judge, had previously stated that "Davis cannot use her own constitutional rights as a shield to violate the constitutional rights of others while performing her duties as an elected official." D^[5][8][9]avis was also ordered to pay more than $260,000 in attorneys' fees and expenses, bringing her total liability to approximately $360,000. H^[5][10][11]er appeal to the Supreme Court specifically asked the justices to overturn the Obergefell ruling to help her avoid paying these court-ordered fees. ^[10][11][12]### Broader Concerns and Legal Expectations The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, which had guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion, fueled concerns among LGBTQ+ advocates. They feared that other landmark privacy-related precedents, including Obergefell v. Hodges, could be next. J^[1][2][5][9]ustice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion in the Roe v. Wade reversal, suggested the court should reconsider its past decisions based on "substantive due process," specifically mentioning same-sex marriage. ^{[6][11][13][12]}Despite these anxieties, legal experts widely expected the Supreme Court to reject Davis's appeal. The court typically turns away the vast majority of cases it is asked to hear each year, granting review to only a small percentage. M^[2][14]any saw Davis's case as an unlikely vehicle for the court to reconsider such a significant and established right. ^[1][2]Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, praised the court's decision. She said, "The Supreme Court made clear today that refusing to respect the constitutional rights of others does not come without consequences." J^[3]im Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the original 2015 case, voiced his strong opposition to Davis's efforts. He told The Advocate that he was "disgusted" by individuals using religious freedom to work against the well-being of others, calling it a "twisting and perverting of what our founders intended." ^[9]Colorado Governor Jared Polis, the first openly gay man elected as governor in the U.S., also welcomed the news. "Today's Supreme Court decision not to hear a case banning gay marriage reaffirms that love is love," Governor Polis said. ^[6]### Impact and What Comes Next The Supreme Court's rejection of Kim Davis's appeal means that the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling remains the law of the land. Same-sex couples continue to have a constitutional right to marry in all 50 states. The court's silence on the matter indicates a lack of appetite among the justices to revisit the issue for now. ^[1][6][13]This decision reinforces protections for hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples who have legally married in the United States since 2015. I^[1]n 2022, Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which further safeguards same-sex and interracial marriages by requiring states to recognize legal marriages performed in other states. This federal law would offer some protection even if the Obergefell ruling were ever overturned in the future, though states could still attempt to pass laws against same-sex marriage. ^[2][13]William Powell, senior counsel for the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, emphasized the importance of the ruling. "The Supreme Court's denial of review confirms what we already knew: Same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, and Kim Davis's denial of marriage licenses plainly violated that right," Powell told Courthouse News. "This is a win for same-sex couples everywhere who have built their families and lives around the right to marry." ^[12]The Supreme Court's decision ensures that the right to same-sex marriage, established nearly a decade ago, remains protected under the U.S. Constitution.

AI Insights Hub