Supreme Court Declines Challenge to Same-Sex Marriage Ruling/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Kim Davis’s appeal to overturn the 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage. Davis, a former Kentucky clerk, had refused to issue licenses to same-sex couples citing religious beliefs. LGBTQ advocates praised the court’s decision as a reaffirmation of civil rights.
Supreme Court on Same-Sex Marriage: Quick Looks
- Justices decline to revisit Obergefell v. Hodges ruling
- Appeal came from Kim Davis, ex-Kentucky clerk jailed in 2015
- Davis challenged $360,000 judgment tied to denied licenses
- Court issued no comment in denying the appeal
- Justice Clarence Thomas previously suggested overturning Obergefell
- Justices Roberts, Alito, and Barrett declined to revisit the issue
- LGBTQ rights groups applaud court’s refusal to intervene
- Davis gained national attention for defying same-sex marriage ruling
- Kentucky law now removes clerks’ names from marriage licenses
Deep Look
Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Kim Davis Case, Leaves Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Intact
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a high-profile challenge to its 2015 decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, signaling no interest in revisiting the landmark ruling. The case was brought by Kim Davis, a former county clerk from Kentucky, who rose to national prominence after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples following the court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.
The court issued its denial without comment, declining to hear Davis’s appeal of a lower-court order requiring her to pay $360,000 in damages and legal fees to one of the couples she refused to serve. That couple, David Ermold and David Moore, sued after being denied a marriage license multiple times in 2015.
No Justices Signal Support for Revisiting Ruling
Although Justice Clarence Thomas has openly criticized the Obergefell decision in past writings and previously suggested it should be reconsidered, he offered no dissent to Monday’s order. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito—who also dissented in the 2015 ruling—did not comment either.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court in 2020 after the ruling, has previously suggested that not all precedent is untouchable. Yet she also indicated that same-sex marriage may fall into a different category than cases like abortion because Americans have built their lives around the decision, including getting married and starting families.
LGBTQ Advocates Welcome the Decision
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, welcomed the court’s refusal to take the case.
“The Supreme Court made clear today that refusing to respect the constitutional rights of others does not come without consequences,” Robinson said. She emphasized that the ruling sends a message that discrimination under the guise of religious belief cannot override federal civil rights protections.
Davis’s Legal and Political Fallout
Davis’s defiance of federal court orders in 2015 turned her into a national figure, particularly among religious conservatives. As the elected clerk of Rowan County, she argued that issuing same-sex marriage licenses violated her religious beliefs. She refused to comply with the ruling even after multiple court orders and was eventually jailed for contempt of court.
While Davis was released after her staff issued the licenses in her absence—with her name removed from the forms—her actions triggered legal and legislative changes. In response to the controversy, Kentucky lawmakers passed legislation that removed county clerks’ names entirely from marriage licenses, a move seen as a compromise between personal beliefs and legal compliance.
Davis later lost her re-election bid in 2018, marking the end of her official role in government but not her involvement in litigation. Her current legal appeal focused on overturning the damages awarded against her in civil court, as well as pushing the Supreme Court to reconsider Obergefell.
Why the Court’s Silence Matters
Though the court did not issue a written opinion explaining its decision, its refusal to hear the case speaks volumes. In a political climate where abortion rights have been rolled back, many LGBTQ advocates feared the court might be open to reconsidering same-sex marriage.
The court’s silence may be seen as a quiet but firm statement that, for now, the legal foundation of same-sex marriage remains untouched. Legal experts note that overturning Obergefell would likely cause significant legal chaos, disrupting thousands of existing marriages and family arrangements nationwide.
Justice Barrett, in particular, has alluded to the idea that public reliance on precedent plays a significant role in whether certain rulings should be overturned. That sentiment may help insulate Obergefell from the fate of other landmark decisions, such as Roe v. Wade, which was overturned in 2022.
A Broader Context of Legal Uncertainty
The denial also comes as some states have passed or proposed legislation that appears to challenge LGBTQ protections. However, Monday’s decision reinforces that federal civil rights rulings like Obergefell still carry legal weight and remain binding nationwide.
While Kim Davis and her legal team had hoped to challenge both the damages and the ruling itself, the Supreme Court’s refusal signals that a majority of justices do not currently support re-litigating marriage equality.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.