Posted on 09/04/2015 7:33:37 AM PDT by ctdonath2
As usual, there is a great deal of chatter about the law without anyone actually knowing what it actually _says_. Follow the link and read the Kentucky statutes on marriage. Note that these have not yet been repealed/vacated, certain prohibitions remain in place, and insofar as SCOTUS issued a ruling declaring such law unconstitutional it is by default null and void - therefore there is nothing for the federal judge to coerce Kim Davis into acting on.
And that is why she should sue the feds for $$$$$$.
IIRC, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but I seem to have read or heard that she was not issuing marriage licenses to ANYBODY, hetero or otherwise...................
From all that information, why is she even in jail?
And why should a Federal Judge be involved in this at all???
I would sue the hell out of the Judge and the State over this, sounds like they didn’t like her and this was the only way to get rid of her...
Wonder how much Mc Connell had to do with this????
Exactly. There is no applicable KY law for her to act on. Insofar as there is written law, without further judicial clarification in detail, the entire law either still applies (with stated limitations) or completely doesn’t - and as such she isn’t issuing such licenses to anybody in accordance with the latter (and correct) perspective.
She CAN’T issue such licenses to ANYBODY. There is no law authorizing her to.
Why? Despotic oppression.
From everything I've read, it looks like Kim Davis never made any of these legal arguments in Federal court. Her whole case was based on a "religious freedom" argument, when a simple reference to the statutory requirements under Kentucky law would have sufficed.
If anything, the legal argument here would be that Kentucky doesn't really have any marriage statutes at all ... which begs the question of how she could be compelled to sign any marriage certificates.
The court may issue a stay on their own ruling, giving the state time to rewrite the law. Obviously that didn’t happen in this case, which means that the entire law is automatically vacated. To deal with this possibility, legislation usually includes a clause to the effect “should any part of this law be found invalid, only the invalid clause shall be invalidated and the remaining part of this law will continue in effect”; problem with that is the clauses affected are definitive, and without them (i.e.: clause defining marriage) the remaining law makes no sense (i.e.: lacking a legal definition of marriage, there is no way for a county clerk to issue a permit to do so). SCOTUS ruling when applied leaves only meaningless fragments.
Point taken.
However, the judge is obligated to note what law she is obligated to carry out in her official capacity - a law which his superiors (SCOTUS) vacated. He can’t hold her in contempt of a law which he cannot quote because it doesn’t exist. That she is claiming a religious exemption to a nonexistent law is irrelevant.
Her attorney, if smart, will demand the judge quote what law he demands she act on, then observe that absent an adjudicated or legislative rewrite of that law, the law does not stand and there is nothing for her to act on and nothing for him to hold her in contempt of.
Why are the Oath Keepers not involved? They should be escort her out of jail (peacefully, but fully armed in case there is resistance) and protect her until a constitutionally viable resolution is found.
These legal arguments should have been made already. I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think you can introduce new legal arguments on your behalf after a decision has already been made.
Even if the Kentucky legislature rammed through a bill to make all of the “corrections” consistent with the SCOTUS opinion, nothing would change here.
Kim Davis never argued that the law was invalid, or deficient, or otherwise lacking in wording or authority. She argued that SCOTUS was wrong and that she would not violate her moral position by doing something amoral. She effectively ignored any other course of action that might have bought her some time, skipped right on to the main event, and fell on the sword.
I was likewise arguing yesterday that there’s a lot of KY laws that were being ‘de facto’ re-written on the fly, and that’s also wrong (of course), but Davis seems to have one-upped all of us by just saying “no”. She drew the line and a judge is now trying to sweating her out of that position.
In all honesty, I think her only course of action now (other than staying in jail) is to resign her office, since there’s no longer a battle for her to fight here - her office has capitulated without her. This would also allow her to correctly claim that she never caved on the issue.
Can you marry your first cousin in Kentucky? If they are the same sex as you are? That will prolly happen too.
It is totally incorrect to say every time a court strikes down a state or federal law then the entire law ceases to exist.
Sometimes, a court will, in fact, throw the whole thing out. Sometimes it may strike down only part.
In this case, SCOTUS voided all laws and state constitutional amendments as they apply to prohibiting gay marriage. It did not throw overboard all states' entire laws that apply to all marriages.
Don't you think Davis's attorneys would be making that case if it had any basis in reality?
Good. Somebody else gets it. Other states are in similar positions. Now, are any “marriages” in such states legally binding if they took place after the SCOTUS invalidated the marriage laws of said states?
That’s what I’m thinking.
Jailing elected officials for administrative disagreements involving conscientious objections is despotism.
Not sure how “peacefully” would apply, as it is a jail and the staff will say “no” to opening it up accordingly.
She is in jail because district Judge Bunning said our entire system will fail unless he forces everybody to “respect” supreme Court decisions— even when they are “unconstitutional ( Note it was Chief Justice Roberts who said “whatever the opine of the five was—it had nothing to do with the Constitution.” In short Kim Davis was made a Christian Martyr by the Unjust Judge.Because he had power to order her to jail.
This Democrat sure did find a great way to get some smoke screen over the Clinton email issues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.