United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Kentucky clerk still won't issue same-sex marriage licenses
Source:
Associated Press
URL Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie ... AULT&CTIME=2015-09-01-08-52-48
Published: Sep 1, 2015
Author: Claire Valofaro
Post Date: 2015-09-01 10:04:38 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 28704
Comments: 339
A county clerk in Kentucky has again refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, invoking her religious beliefs and "God's authority" - this time in defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling against her. On Tuesday morning, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office denied the licenses to at least two couples. At first, Davis was in her office with the door closed and blinds drawn. But she emerged a few minutes later, telling the couples and the activists gathered there that her office is continuing to deny the licenses "under God's authority." The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, leaving Davis no legal grounds to refuse to grant the licenses. A district judge could now hold her in contempt of court, which can carry steep fines or jail time. As an elected official, Davis can't be fired. Davis asked David Moore and David Ermold to leave her office after they were denied a license Tuesday morning - the couple's fourth rejection. They refused, surrounded by reporters and cameras. "We're not leaving until we have a license," Ermold said. "Then you're going to have a long day," Davis told him. From the back of the room, Davis' supporters said: "Praise the Lord! ... Stand your ground." Other activists shouted that Davis is a bigot and told her: "Do your job." Davis has said her deeply held Christian beliefs don't let her endorse gay marriages. She stopped issuing all marriage licenses in the days after the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage across the nation. Two gay couples and two straight couples sued her, arguing that she must fulfill her duties as an elected official despite her personal religious faith. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, and an appeals court upheld that decision. Her lawyers with the Liberty Counsel filed a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court on Friday, asking that they grant her "asylum for her conscience." Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees the 6th district, referred Davis' request to the full court, which denied the stay without comment. After Tuesday's denials, the rejected couples' supporters called the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit on their behalf. They asked that the attorneys file that day to have Davis held in contempt. Shortly after Davis' remarks in her office, the sheriff's office cleared the room and building of those gathered to support both sides of the issue. The two groups lined up on the lawn, on either side of the courthouse entrance to chant at each other. Davis' supporters have told her to "stand firm," while gay-rights activists shouted "do your job." Randy Smith, leading the group supporting Davis, said he knows following their instruction to "stand firm" might mean Davis goes to jail. "But at the end of the day, we have to stand before God, which has higher authority than the Supreme Court," he said. Ermold hugged Moore, his partner of 17 years, and they cried and swayed as they left the clerk's office. Davis' supporters marched by, chanting. "I feel sad, I feel devastated," Ermold said. "I feel like I've been humiliated on such a national level, I can't even comprehend it." 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-52) not displayed.
.
.
.
#53. To: A K A Stone (#43)
(Edited)
One of us does. You ain't within email range of rational. BTW,I am sure it will please your Christian self to no end to know that my known homosexual relatives are now dead. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I'm really looking forward to the day when one of your homosexual relatives runs up and sticks about a foot of wet tongue in your ear. My best bet is you would instantly drop a load. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I think that might happen. LOL!
It's like eating at Friendlys. Always a happy ending. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
And Obama won't secure the borders, but no one's dragging him in front of a court threatening contempt.
Just wait until Commie Sanders gets his chance to flush the Mexican toilet on this country. "AS PRESIDENT, SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS WILL: Sign comprehensive immigration reform into law to bring over 11 million undocumented workers out of the shadows. We cannot continue to run an economy where millions are made so vulnerable because of their undocumented status." ^^^ off Commie Sanders web site. This is the fuck face that Hondo, Fred and Buckey are voting for. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
You may not have noticed,but there is a bit of difference between a county clerk and the President of the United States. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Well, the Caesar is this case are the people who elected her and gave her powers to act. Pilate did not have power on his own, but he could have refuse to execute Christ, even if he would be reported and possibly prosecuted.
Sign comprehensive immigration reform into law to bring over 11 million undocumented workers out of the shadows. There fixed it for you. Amnesty is not going to be stopped - the Republicans are just as much on board with it as the democrats. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much You didn't fix nothing... that quote was posted by commie sanders on his own Facebook page. lol It's as true and accurate as it gets. You need not worry about the long list of RINO's you listed, IF YOU GET BEHIND TRUMP... or you can boycott voting another year and bitch bitch bitch next year about who's signing executive orders. And Deckard, you bitch the most of anyone here... and you do the least. Cast a vote, you slob. If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
self ping
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I guess it depends on how you understand criminal contempt under 18 U.S.C., Crimes and Criminal Procedure. http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2012/title-18/part-i/chapter-21/section-401/ §401. Power of court A court of the United States shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority, and none other, as— (1) Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice; (2) Misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions; (3) Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 701; Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title III, §3002(a)(1), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1805.) http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2012/title-18/part-ii/chapter-233/section-3691/ §3691. Jury trial of criminal contempts Whenever a contempt charged shall consist in willful disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command of any district court of the United States by doing or omitting any act or thing in violation thereof, and the act or thing done or omitted also constitutes a criminal offense under any Act of Congress, or under the laws of any state in which it was done or omitted, the accused, upon demand therefor, shall be entitled to trial by a jury, which shall conform as near as may be to the practice in other criminal cases. This section shall not apply to contempts committed in the presence of the court, or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice, nor to contempts committed in disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command entered in any suit or action brought or prosecuted in the name of, or on behalf of, the United States. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 844.) http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2012/title-18/part-ii/chapter-233/section-3693/ §3693. Summary disposition or jury trial; notice—(Rule) See Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Summary punishment; certificate of judge; order; notice; jury trial; bail; disqualification of judge, Rule 42. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 844.) https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_42 SUPPLEMENTARY AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS Rule 42. Criminal Contempt (a) Disposition After Notice. Any person who commits criminal contempt may be punished for that contempt after prosecution on notice. (1) Notice. The court must give the person notice in open court, in an order to show cause, or in an arrest order. The notice must: (A) state the time and place of the trial; (B) allow the defendant a reasonable time to prepare a defense; and (C) state the essential facts constituting the charged criminal contempt and describe it as such. (2) Appointing a Prosecutor. The court must request that the contempt be prosecuted by an attorney for the government, unless the interest of justice requires the appointment of another attorney. If the government declines the request, the court must appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt. (3) Trial and Disposition. A person being prosecuted for criminal contempt is entitled to a jury trial in any case in which federal law so provides and must be released or detained as Rule 46 provides. If the criminal contempt involves disrespect toward or criticism of a judge, that judge is disqualified from presiding at the contempt trial or hearing unless the defendant consents. Upon a finding or verdict of guilty, the court must impose the punishment. (b) Summary Disposition. Notwithstanding any other provision of these rules, the court (other than a magistrate judge) may summarily punish a person who commits criminal contempt in its presence if the judge saw or heard the contemptuous conduct and so certifies; a magistrate judge may summarily punish a person as provided in 28 U.S.C. §636(e). The contempt order must recite the facts, be signed by the judge, and be filed with the clerk. Notes (As amended Mar. 9, 1987, eff. Aug. 1, 1987; Apr. 29, 2002, eff. Dec. 1, 2002.)
Pilate had the power delegated to him by the Emperor and he could use it at will and at his discretion. And Pilate knew quite well what was powers were delegated to him and what was not. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
My belief system is very simple: God gave a Law, which Jesus upheld until the end of the world. The Law is not complicated. It amounts to: Don't be violent, don't oppress, be faithfully married and have children, tell the truth, don't steal, lend your excess money and do not charge interest, love God, and that God will forgive your sins if you forgive other people. All of human misery derives from breaking those simple rules.
Pilate had the power delegated to him by the Emperor and he could use it at will and at his discretion. And Pilate knew quite well what was powers were delegated to him and what was not. And from there on Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If you let this man go, you are not Caesar's friend: whosoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar. [...] And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he said unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate said unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then he delivered him therefore unto them to be crucified. [...] And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was near to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered, What I have written I have written
www.nytimes.com/2015/09/0...me-sex-marriage.html?_r=0 Breaking news...
www.nytimes.com/2015/09/0...me-sex-marriage.html?_r=0 Uh thats called politics! Ask the klintons!
There was never any doubt that she would issue licenses, resign, or go to jail.
How long will she spend in the Rowan County Hilton?
That's up to her.
How much do they charge a night? From what I hear it is something like 20 or 30 bucks. Will she still be on the payroll? Just some down home financial interests in my mind. I'm sure she could do some sort of gofundme endeavor and become a millionaire with all the funding from the fundies. Hey, I made a dilly.
Actually she should be fired. She should never see jail because they should fire her instead. Its evil of government to jail someone in a case like this. What they are saying is you either bend to our ways or be punished. It bothers me that we[government] give gay people special rights just because they are gay.
I am in total agreement with that. It bothers me that we[government] give gay people special rights just because they are gay. Same here. We need some elected officials with the stones to point out that "Special Rights" and "EQUAL Rights" are NOT the same thing,and than in America the LAW says we ALL have to be treated EQUALLY. Which means no racial quotes,no affirmative action,no government set-asides,etc,etc,etc. Anybody that doesn't like it is free to get the hell out of the country. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
WOW. I thought we would have at least squabbled about something! LOL
Why? Is it because you believe all that nonsense spouted by A K A Stone that I am pro-homosexual because I insist on ALL Americans being treated equally by the government? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Is it because you believe all that nonsense spouted by A K A Stone that I am pro-homosexual because I insist on ALL Americans being treated equally by the government? No Because we have had a difference of opinion on marriage. I think marriage is between a man and a woman. You think we should not discriminate and let gay people be miserable too! LOL You made me think about it more in depth from our previous discussions. I have concluded that marriage is a special right. I actually have no problem with that in that it suppose to protect people who bring forth and raise children to make America stronger. But like everything federal government gets a hold of they turn it on its head and make it useless.
I think so. They can't fire here, she's elected. My impression is she has the support of the state and local government. If they had a sense of urgency, they could act to remove her from office. She refused an agreement to be released if she would authorize subordinates to issue the licenses. It's the same moral question. I admire her standing up for her beliefs, but have no illusion that the Federal government will just give up.
She can't be fired. She was never hired, she was elected. It does not appear to me that the in-state authorities are in any hurry to remove her from office. It seems issuing gay marriage licenses is not high on their to-do list. It is contempt of court. I believe it is also her good faith religious beliefs preventing her compliance.
Yes. She should be fired, by the people or be removed from office by local government but not jailed. That way people can go after those who do not do the peoples will in that locality. It always seems that the progressives always get their way laws be damned. If we don't start pushing back we will get pushed right into the ocean. In my opinion she should be low man on the list of priorities. When they get done with Hillary Klinton then I say let them worry about her. ;) It is contempt of court. I believe it is also her good faith religious beliefs preventing her compliance. Yes its the heavy hand of government.
The death of a wedge issue is never good for the ruling class.
Well put, and absolutely true. I saw this reply on another site. What is her crime? :----
Very good point
Most likely. And many I am sure will rejoice. After all, she violated The Law, and she ignored a FEDERAL JUDGE. She is lucky she did not get the firing squad. Okaaaay. If we are going to have this situation, I say we go after the President & Congress for the laws they violate or ignore; all the bureaucrats that ignore or violate laws; all of the city officials that operate "sanctuary cities", all the people at Planned Parenthood that sell baby parts, and a lot of other "law breakers". Yes, lets apply the law evenly, and with the same amount of enthusiasm. If any here want to ignore the ones I mentioned, while crucifying this lady, I look forward to hearing who, and the rationale. ;) Si vis pacem, para bellum
Very good point A point that her attorneys should be raising with higher courts. It's counterintuitive to our basic principles that when a constitutional issue is being raised, that a judge can jail the opposition for contempt..
Ping to # 87 Sorry, I inadvertently failed to ping you Regards, Stoner Si vis pacem, para bellum
If any here want to ignore the ones I mentioned, while crucifying this lady, I look forward to hearing who, and the rationale. ;) No problem on the ping, -- that's why I use (Y'ALL) all the time.. And dont hold your breath waiting for 'rationale' from the crusifiers on this forum.
Oh, I'm not. In fact, I am going to have a couple shots of Ky Bourbon and go to bed. Been cutting firewood about all day. I will check in next AM and see what the circus is up to. Have a good evening! Si vis pacem, para bellum
Thanks to you, DCW, and a fine merlot, I will.. It's good to see that there are still a few of us around here that give a damn about basic constitutional principles.
It's counterintuitive to our basic principles that when a constitutional issue is being raised, that a judge can jail the opposition for contempt.. The did. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
Comments (94 - 339) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestNo she isn't. Someone should beat your fag relatives until they change their mi mind. You belong in a mental institution.
#54. To: A K A Stone (#43)
You're acting like a pedophile trying to tell kids it is ok to be a faggot. Just because some relative of yours is a fag.
#55. To: sneakypete (#54)
#56. To: buckeroo (#44)
(Edited)
#57. To: sneakypete (#53)
BTW,I am sure it will please your Christian self to no end to know that my known homosexual relatives are now dead.
#58. To: sneakypete (#50)
Not that it really changes the basic claim that she is refusing to do her duty as a public official.
#59. To: Pinguinite (#58)
(Edited)
And Obama won't secure the borders, but no one's dragging him in front of a court threatening contempt.
#60. To: Pinguinite (#58)
And Obama won't secure the borders, but no one's dragging him in front of a court threatening contempt.
#61. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
She is an agent of the state. She serves Caesar and takes Caesar's coin. Therefore, she must obey C. If he conscience does not allow her to serve Caesar because of what Caesar demands of her, then she must stop taking Caesar's coin. She must resign her post and leave it.
#62. To: GrandIsland (#59)
"AS PRESIDENT, SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Walker, Cruz, ad nauseum WILL:
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#63. To: Deckard (#62)
There fixed it for you.
#64. To: stoner (#0)
#65. To: Pinguinite, sneakypete (#35)
The only thing she'd be jailed for is contempt. She is not in any danger of prosecution. No crimes are involved with contempt, as I understand the terms.
CONTEMPTS - 18 U.S.C. § 401 (2012)
CONTEMPTS - 18 U.S.C. § 3691 (2012)
CONTEMPTS - 18 U.S.C. § 3693 (2012)
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure › TITLE VIII.
#66. To: A Pole, Vicomte13 (#61)
Pilate did not have power on his own, but he could have refuse to execute Christ, even if he would be reported and possibly prosecuted.
#67. To: Don (#42)
Thanks for your post. I read enough of it to have a better understanding of your Christianity and your thoughts. I have been wondering about these things.
#68. To: SOSO (#66)
(Edited)
"Pilate did not have power on his own, but he could have refuse to execute Christ, even if he would be reported and possibly prosecuted."
#69. To: sneakypete, All LFers (#47)
“The court cannot condone the willful disobedience of its lawfully issued order,” Judge Bunning said. “If you give people the opportunity to choose which orders they follow, that’s what potentially causes problems.”
#70. To: Fred Mertz, sneakypete, All (#69)
“The court cannot condone the willful disobedience of its lawfully issued order,” Judge Bunning said. “If you give people the opportunity to choose which orders they follow, that’s what potentially causes problems.”
#71. To: Fred Mertz (#69)
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/us/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0
#72. To: nolu chan (#71)
#73. To: Fred Mertz (#72)
How long will she spend in the Rowan County Hilton?
#74. To: nolu chan (#73)
#75. To: nolu chan (#71)
#76. To: sneakypete, nolu chan (#75)
There was never any doubt that she would issue licenses, resign, or go to jail.
#77. To: Justified (#76)
Actually she should be fired. She should never see jail because they should fire her instead. Its evil of government to jail someone in a case like this. What they are saying is you either bend to our ways or be punished.
#78. To: sneakypete (#77)
#79. To: Justified (#78)
I thought we would have at least squabbled about something!
#80. To: sneakypete (#79)
Why?
#81. To: Fred Mertz (#74)
Will she still be on the payroll?
#82. To: Justified, sneakypete (#76)
Actually she should be fired.
Its evil of government to jail someone in a case like this. What they are saying is you either bend to our ways or be punished.
#83. To: nolu chan, sneakypete (#82)
She can't be fired. She was never hired, she was elected. It does not appear to me that the in-state authorities are in any hurry to remove her from office. It seems issuing gay marriage licenses is not high on their to-do list.
#84. To: nolu chan (#82)
She can't be fired. She was never hired, she was elected. It does not appear to me that the in-state authorities are in any hurry to remove her from office. It seems issuing gay marriage licenses is not high on their to-do list.
#85. To: Pinguinite, Vicomte, nolu chan, Y'ALL (#7)
Pinguinite --- She is not an employee of the state. She is an elected official which to me is key. She is responsible for duties on the authority derived directly from the people of her voting district (county) and it seems to me that any judge that would jail her would violate the separation of powers, undermining the will of the majority of county voters. The county voters are her "Ceasar", not any judge. --- She is committing no crime.
Vicomte -- she will be haled into court and fined or jailed from contempt, suspended from her job and ultimately released for it.
Perhaps you can explain what federal law is being defied? I am unaware of any federal law in regards to marriage licenses since DOMA was struck down by SCOTUS.
Perhaps you can also explain what law SCOTUS has enacted in regards to marriage licenses that is being defied. I was unaware that SCOTUS could enact Federal or State legislation as I understand that it is not part of their Constitutional authority.
#86. To: tpaine (#85)
Perhaps you can explain what federal law is being defied? I am unaware of any federal law in regards to marriage licenses since DOMA was struck down by SCOTUS. Perhaps you can also explain what law SCOTUS has enacted in regards to marriage licenses that is being defied. I was unaware that SCOTUS could enact Federal or State legislation as I understand that it is not part of their Constitutional authority.
#87. To: Fred Mertz, A K A Stone, Vicomte13, Redleghunter, BobCeleste, Sneakypete, All (#45)
" This woman will be crucified in two weeks. Count on it. "
#88. To: Dead Culture Watch, Y'ALL (#86)
#89. To: tpaine (#87)
#90. To: Stoner (#89)
Okaaaay. If we are going to have this situation, I say we go after the President & Congress for the laws they violate or ignore; all the bureaucrats that ignore or violate laws; all of the city officials that operate "sanctuary cities", all the people at Planned Parenthood that sell baby parts, and a lot of other "law breakers". Yes, lets apply the law evenly, and with the same amount of enthusiasm.
#91. To: tpaine (#90)
" dont hold your breath waiting for 'rationale' from the crusifiers "
#92. To: Stoner, Dead Culture Watch, Y'ALL (#91)
Have a good evening!
#93. To: tpaine (#88)
A point that her attorneys should be raising with higher courts.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]