And he's a liar as well. The Supreme Court trotted out there and changed the definition of Kentucky's marriage law as well as some other states and then turned around and went off to dine on lobster tail leaving a lot of local and state governmental officials subject to jail and lawsuits instead of even making a minor attempt at staving off the collateral damages stemming from their decision. That clerk could have been sued by some other party for issuing the licenses in violation of Kentucky law. The state attorney general could have arrested her for issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. She was caught in the crosshairs. She was doomed to violate either one law or another. It should be the Court's responsibility to foresee things like this. The state of Kentucky should have gone to jail if anyone needed to - not that little county clerk.
You claim;
"That clerk could have been sued by some other party for issuing the licenses in violation of Kentucky law. The state attorney general could have arrested her for issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. She was caught in the crosshairs. She was doomed to violate either one law or another. It should be the Court's responsibility to foresee things like this." [Emphasis Added]
The Supremacy clause, Article V, Clause 2, of the Constitution made the Kentucky statute in question
MOOT the moment the Supremes released their decision in Obergefell v. Hodges last June 26th. There would have been no jeopardy what so ever attached to Kim Davis if she had just done her sworn duty and issued those licenses to any same sex couples requesting one.
You claim. I submit she fulfilled her sworn duty as pertaining to the law she swore to uphold when she took office. The law in effect in Kentucky at the time she took office was the law she took an oath to uphold. The law was changed dummox.
The law is often changed. This is why we have mechanisms in the US Constitution to allow for changes in the law. Those who cannot adapt to change have no business being in the position of a Kim Davis to begin with.
75% of the voters thought so. What happened was 75% of the voters had their votes vacated while 25% had their votes validated. Gays and lesbians only make up about 6 or 7 per cent of the total population. Get real. You'll never have 100% agreement on any issue but the majority should prevail.
The decision was the worst in history. Worse than Plessy v Ferguson. Worse than Roe v Wade. The Supreme Court threw out:
1) 2000 years of Western tradition, which holds marriage is one man, one woman
2) 200 years of American Jurisprudence, which holds judges interpret laws
3) the 10th Amendment, which holds powers not specifically granted to the federal government are retained by the states
4) 200 years of tradition that holds states primarily define marriage and similar laws within their borders
5) Over 200 years of tradition that holds the Will of the People is the ultimate arbiter of standards
6) The principle of one man, one vote
7) The principle of limited government
Now the Supreme Court can invent anything, call it a right, and declare that it is protected under the 14th A. There is no limiting principle to it.
