Here is a link to Kim Davis's emergency application directed to Justice Kagan. It is 50 pages!
Kim Davis SCOTUS Stay Application
I'm not sure that I want to wade through it. Anyone else want to read it?
"She is one of 120 Kentucky County Clerks, and oversees one of approximately 137 marriage licensing locations spread throughout Kentucky. No marriage license can be issued from her office without her authorization and without her personally affixing thereto her name and endorsement."
~ Her argument:
"But such individual rights and freedoms so fundamental to liberty are neither absolutely surrendered at the entry door of public service nor waived upon taking an oath of office. To suggest otherwise creates a religious (or anti-religious) test for holding office – which the United States and Kentucky Constitutions expressly forbid."
~ I find her points a bit interesting, because yeah they kind of already do all of this...
"For if that were true, a person who religiously objects to wartime combat would be forced to shoulder a rifle regardless of their conscience or be refused citizenship; a person who religiously objects to work on the Sabbath day of their faith would be forced to accept such work regardless of their conscience or lose access to state unemployment benefits; a person who religiously objects to state-mandated schooling for their children would be forced to send their children to school regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to state-approved messages would be forced to carry that message on their vehicles regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to capital punishment would be forced to participate in an execution regardless of their conscience or lose their job; a person who religiously objects to providing abortion-related and contraceptive insurance coverage to their employees would be forced to pay for such coverage regardless of their conscience or face staggering fines."
~ In order: The draft, getting fired, child neglect/abuse, huh? That's a dumb one if your employer says you can't have x bumper sticker you can be fired (see the shooter guy who couldn't wear his Obama pin), getting fired, if I'm not mistaken ACA does that?
~ So she's basically trying to say that the State Constitution should "outweigh" the SOCTUS ruling, that's not happening:
"The district court has acknowledged that “this civil action” presents a constitutional “debate,” “tension,” and “conflict” between “two individual liberties held sacrosanct in American jurisprudence.” Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
In the district court’s view, Plaintiffs’ rights trump Davis’ religious rights. But Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a
state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
~ I can't imagine that's going to fly frankly, Alaska constitution has considered marijuana for private use legal since it's inception as a state. The Feds overruled that and /forced/ Alaska to make it illegal during the war on drugs; I can't recall if we went to the SCOTUS or not, but the Feds said basically "You will comply or you will have zero federal funding." Same shit, different layer cake.
~ She's kind of breaking the oath she took in taking office, regardless of her attempt to put religious spin on the oath:
"Before taking office as Rowan County clerk, Davis swore an oath to support the Constitutions and laws of the United States and Kentucky “so help me God.” KY. CONST. § 228."
And here's the rub, she's not only denying SSM's but /all/ marriages in her area:
"Expressly to avoid disparate treatment of any couple and ensure that all individuals and couples were treated the same, Davis suspended the issuance of all marriage licenses in Rowan County. VC, ¶ 29. She instructed all deputy clerks to stop issuing marriage licenses because licenses are issued on her authority, and because every license requires her name to appear on the license as the authorizing person."
~ Ouch
"The district court also rejected Davis’ claims under the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“Kentucky RFRA”), KY. REV. STAT. § 446.350, the Free Exercise Clause, the Free Speech Clause, and the Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution, and similar Kentucky Constitution provisions. See App. A-16 to A-28. In rejecting Davis’ religious liberty, conscience, and speech claims,
the district court incorrectly concluded that the Kentucky marriage license form “does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage” and instead merely “asks the county clerk to certify that the information provided is accurate and that
the couple is qualified to marry under Kentucky law.”9 According to the district court, the burden on Davis’ religious freedom is “more slight,” and she “remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs” since she “may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” and “believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.” Id. at 27.
But, according to the district court, “her religious convictions cannot excuse her” from authorizing SSM licenses.
[...]
"On August 26, 2015, the Sixth Circuit denied Davis’ emergency motion to stay the Injunction pending appeal. See App. D. In denying the stay request,
the Sixth Circuit stated that [t]he injunction operates not against Davis personally, but against the holder of her office of Rowan County Clerk,” and further stated that “In light of the binding holding of Obergefell, it cannot be defensibly argued that the holder of the Rowan County Clerk’s office, apart from who personally occupies that office, may decline to act in conformity with the United States Constitution as interpreted by a dispositive holding of the United States Supreme Court.”
~SCOTUS will follow the same lines of thought I'm sure.
~ I have to wonder if she ensures that every marriage license she signs is for a Christian couple, or a couple who is of "good moral standing"... Does this mean we can we then hold her morally and/or legally responsible for every marriage she allowed which ended in divorce over the past 30 years? How about where there was domestic abuse?
Thing is, it is not for a state worker to determine an applicants "moral status" when providing services of any kind. I suspect this office will be looked upon no differently than the folks who authorize welfare, or unemployment, or social security applications. If one were to argue that the applicant wasn't Christian therefore couldn't receive a marriage license it would fail, thus too will the argument that because they're the same sex will fail as well.
Later on she argues for "religious accommodations," presumably that she will only sign "traditional" marriage papers. Problem is she has to sign /all/ of them, thus the only "accommodation" would be hiring a second clerk to do her job... That's not reasonable. I'm not sure if they can like fax the paper's to the next county for a signature or not, because it's gotta be notarized and shit, can't do that over a fax heh. I just don't think there /is/ an accommodation that would work for her position. Clearly it needs to be specified from now on that part of that job is signing off on SSM's, in the mean time I guess give her early retirement and move forward.
