Posted on 09/20/2015 10:20:46 AM PDT by Ray76
A deputy for Kim Davis, [] is worried he's been issuing invalid marriage licenses, according to papers filed in federal court.
Davis replaced the old marriage license forms with forms that don't carry her name, the name of the county or any reference to a clerk or deputy clerk, said Mason's lawyer, Richard Hughes.
The new forms also require Mason to list his initials, instead of a signature, with a notarization beside the initials, Hughes said.
The same-sex couple that sued Davis for not issuing a marriage license said, in a separate court filing, that Davis is "requiring her clerk to issue licenses in his capacity as a 'notary public' rather than a deputy clerk. ..."
Hughes said: "Mr. Mason's concern is he does not want to be the party that is issuing invalid marriage licenses and he is trying to follow the court's mandate as well as his superior ordering him to issue only these changed forms. ..."
The lawyer for Davis, Mat Staver, issued a statement Saturday saying, "there is no new development with this report."
"Kim Davis said Monday that her name and title would not appear on the forms and later that same day the Governor said the forms were valid," Staver said. "And Judge (David) Bunning's order releasing Kim Davis said a form altered by Brian the day after the contempt hearing while Kim was in jail was valid. ...
Bunning noted that a license issued while she was behind bars had been "altered so that 'Rowan County' rather than 'Kim Davis' appears on the line reserved for the name of the county clerk."
Bunning said he had no objections to those changes. The judge didn't address the changes mentioned in Mason's filing, such as the notarization and the initials replacing the signature.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=36473
"Rowan County" is not the name of the Rowan County County Clerk. Listing "Rowan County" as the name of the County Clerk is a violation KRS 402.100(1)(c), 402.110
Persons issuing these licenses have committed multiple misdemeanors. KRS 402.990
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=36475
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=36477
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=36498
For an example of a Kentucky Marriage License please see "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit D" https://www.liberty.edu/media/9980/attachments/2015/080515_Complaint_-_Davis_Third_Party_Complaint_against_Gov_Beshear_FINAL.pdf
Issued by County Clerk or deputy
Yeah no kidding. The point is a notary public does not have the authority to issue a Marriage License.
“Issued by County Clerk or deputy.”
If it’s a deputy would that make it a shotgun marriage?
LOL!
“The point is a notary public does not have the authority to issue a Marriage License.”
It does if Leftists say so!
I think someone notarized his initials and the tale is being told erroneously. It doesn’t make sense the other way around. He’s a deputy....period!!
The way I see it is, The JUDGE Committed EVERY CRIME LISTED, His Actions of Legislating NEW LAW from the Inferior Court for a FREE STATE and then Ordering COUNTERFEIT LICENSES to be issued should be a FELONY punishable by Life in Prison. Why the STATE has not Arrested and Charged him is beyond me!!
A recent detailed study of the courts of all 50 states and the District of Columbia determined that 46 states and the District of Columbia adopt the position that the precedents of lower federal courts are not binding in their jurisdictions. Wayne A. Logan, A House Divided: When State and Lower Federal Courts Disagree on Federal Constitutional Rights, 90 Notre Dame L. Rev. 235, 280-81 (2014). The position of three other states is uncertain. Only one state (Delaware) defers to the constitutional decisions of lower federal courts. Id. At 281.
Federal courts have recognized that state-court review of constitutional questions is independent of the same authority lodged in the lower federal courts. “In passing on federal constitutional questions, the state courts and the lower federal courts have the same responsibility and occupy the same position; there is a parallelism but not paramountcy for both sets of courts are governed by the same reviewing authority of the Supreme Court.” United States ex rel.Lawrence v. Woods, 432 F.2d 1072, 1075 (7th Cir. 1970).
Although consistency between state and federal courts is desirable in that it promotes respect for the law and prevents litigants from forum-shopping, there is nothing inherently offensive about two sovereigns reaching different legal conclusions. Indeed, such results were contemplated by our federal system, and neither sovereign is required to, nor expected to, yield to the other.
Surrick v. Killion, 449 F. 3d 520, 535 (3rd Cir. 2006).
The United States Supreme Court has acknowledged that state courts “possess the authority, absent a provision for exclusive federal jurisdiction, to render binding judicial decisions that rest on their own interpretations of federal law.” Asarco Inc. v. Kadish, 490 U.S. 605, 617 (1989). Two justices of the United States Supreme Court in special writings have elaborated on this principle.
The Supremacy Clause demands that state law yield to federal law, but neither federal supremacy nor any other principle of federal law requires that a state court’s interpretation of federal law give way to a (lower) federal court’s interpretation. In our federal system, a state trial court’s interpretation of federal law is no less authoritative than that of the federal court of appeals in whose circuit the trial court is located.
Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 375-76 (1993) (Thomas, J., concurring). See also Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452, 482, n. 3 (1974) (Rehnquist, J., concurring) (noting that a lower- federal-court decision “would not be accorded the stare decisis effect in state court that it would have in a subsequent proceeding within the same federal jurisdiction. Although the state court would not be compelled to follow the federal holding, the opinion might, of course, be viewed as highly persuasive.”).
“Davis replaced the old marriage license forms with forms that don’t carry her name, the name of the county or any reference to a clerk or deputy clerk”
Good move. Thinking ahead. Davis is at war.
The validity of licenses is a matter of state law. State judges would have been able to sort through this to determine their validity. Bunning never had jurisdiction to rule on this case and adjudicate these matters as a Federal judge. He should have dismissed the action as being in the wrong venue. And apparently her attorneys have not bothered to make this point in their arguments, though Bunning should have known it by default.
KRS 423.010(2) A county clerk shall have the powers of a notary public in the exercise of the official functions of the office of clerk within his or her county, and the official actions of the county clerk shall not require the witness or signature of a notary appointed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section.
(Sep 18, 2015) However, any unauthorized license that they issue will not have my name, my title or my authority on it. Instead, the license will state that they are issued pursuant to a federal court order.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-interfered-with-judges-order-attorney-says/
“Issued pursuant to a federal court order” is not the name of the county clerk.
Per Kentucky law, marriage licenses can also be issued by the county judge or his executive... with that existing option on the books, I wondered why Only Kim Davis was held to the standard...
I read this same exact cnn story yesterday on yahoo, but it did not have Kim Davis’ lawers take on it... I commented something like “Really this passes for news? I read a news report while she was still behind bars that said this had already happened”
Yes. Why hasn’t the county judge issued licenses? He’s stayed well clear of doing so. I support his decision, and Davis decision.
This problem is entirely the making of judicial fiat, most particularly the USSC. Kentucky needs to protect it’s officials and it’s people from the bullying of the USSC and Bunning. Instead the Governor has joined in the bullying.
That's why this is a non-issue. Anyone who believes a clerk can solemnize a marriage, rather than merely stamp a paid license form, doesn't understand real marriage or the powers of a clerk.
Overview of the process
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.080 Marriage license required — Who may issue. No marriage shall be solemnized without a license therefor. The license shall be issued by the clerk of the county in which the female resides at the time, unless the female is eighteen (18) years of age or over or a widow, and the license is issued on her application in person or by writing signed by her, in which case it may be issued by any county clerk.
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.105 Marriage license valid for thirty days. A marriage license shall be valid for thirty (30) days, including the date it is issued, and after that time it shall be invalid.
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.020(1)(c)Marriage is prohibited and void when not solemnized or contracted in the presence of an authorized person or society;
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.050(1)(b) Marriage shall be solemnized only by ... Justices and judges of the Court of Justice, retired justices and judges of the Court of Justice except those removed for cause or convicted of a felony, county judges/executive, and such justices of the peace and fiscal court commissioners as the Governor or the county judge/executive authorizes
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.220 Return of license and certificate to clerk after ceremony. The person solemnizing the marriage or the clerk of the religious society before which it was solemnized shall within one (1) month return the license to the county clerk of the county in which it was issued, with a certificate of the marriage over his signature, giving the date and place of celebration and the names of at least two (2) of the persons present.
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.230 Filing of marriage certificate — Record of marriages. The certificate shall be filed in the county clerk’s office. The county clerk shall keep in a record book a fair register of the parties’ names, the person by whom, or the religious society by which, the marriage was solemnized, the date when the marriage was solemnized, and shall keep an index to the book in which the register is made.
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.240 County judge/executive to issue license in absence of clerk. - In the absence of the county clerk, or during a vacancy in the office, the county judge/executive may issue the license and, in so doing, he shall perform the duties and incur all the responsibilities of the clerk. The county judge/executive shall return a memorandum thereof to the clerk, and the memorandum shall be recorded as if the license had been issued by the clerk.
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.100(1)(c) A marriage license which provides for the entering of... The date and place the license is issued, and the signature of the county clerk or deputy clerk issuing the license.
Full details: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Statutes/chapter.aspx?id=39205
402.050 Who may solemnize marriage — Persons present.
(1) Marriage shall be solemnized only by:
(a) Ministers of the gospel or priests of any denomination in regular communion with any religious society;
(b) Justices and judges of the Court of Justice, retired justices and judges of the Court of Justice except those removed for cause or convicted of a felony, county judges/executive, and such justices of the peace and fiscal court commissioners as the Governor or the county judge/executive authorizes; or
(c) A religious society that has no officiating minister or priest and whose usage is to solemnize marriage at the usual place of worship and by consent given in the presence of the society, if either party belongs to the society.
(2) At least two (2) persons, in addition to the parties and the person solemnizing the marriage, shall be present at every marriage.
Checks and Balances exist not only between the three branches of the federal government, but between the federal government and the state governments. (Amend IX, X)
So far only Tennessee has moved to assert its authority, its right, and its duty to protect its people
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3338908/posts
http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/109/Bill/HB1412.pdf
The USSC has acted entirely beyond their authority
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3334733/posts?page=84#84
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3335187/posts?page=30#30
402.100(1)(a) says that the marriage license must provide for the entering of authorization by the clerk (and only the clerk is named in this part of the statute) for any person or religious society authorized to perform marriage ceremnies to unite in marriage the persons named.
That specific clause has been cited as "the problem" in legal briefs going way back. It is the clerk who is authorizing the marriage. There are places for multiple signatures, and both issuance and recording can be witnessed by deputy's signature. But authorization is by the clerk, period.
SCOTUS is the top dog, but the entire federal court apparatus is operating out of its boundaries on this issue, and it was more than SCOTUS that drove this issue, to this point. The federal courts have made a mess.
The pressure is put on Davis more or less as a coincidence, that's why judge Bunning made a monkey of the legal process with Davis as the victim - she was named in a lawsuit, and county judges were not. Those who sued could have gone to the next county over and gotten a license. This entire dance is about "forcing" a person to give "the law" priority over conscience.
Yes Kentucky needs to do what Tennessee just did..
Tennessee Lawmakers Introduce Bill Nullifying Gay Marriage Decision
http://truthinmedia.com/tennessee-bill-nullifying-gay-marriage/
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.