Supreme Court weighs longshot appeal to overturn decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide

Supreme Court to Consider Appeal Challenging Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

The Supreme Court justices are scheduled to discuss a controversial appeal from former Kentucky court clerk Kim Davis during their closed-door conference Friday. Davis, who gained national attention in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, is now asking the high court to overturn a lower court order requiring her to pay $360,000 in damages and attorney’s fees to a couple she denied a marriage license.

The appeal represents a broader challenge to the landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. An announcement regarding whether the justices will take up the case could come as early as Monday.

Davis’s legal team has strategically cited Justice Clarence Thomas in their petition, the only current justice who has explicitly called for overturning the same-sex marriage ruling. Thomas was one of four dissenting justices in the original 5-4 decision. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, who also dissented in 2015, remain on the court today.

While Roberts has not publicly addressed the decision since writing his dissent, Alito has continued to criticize the ruling. However, Alito recently clarified he was not advocating for its reversal. The court’s ideological balance has shifted significantly since 2015, with a 6-3 conservative majority now in place.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court in 2020, has previously stated that the Supreme Court should sometimes correct mistakes by overturning precedent, as it did in the 2022 Dobbs decision that eliminated federal abortion protections. However, she has recently suggested same-sex marriage might deserve different treatment than abortion because many Americans have made life decisions based on the right to marry.

The Davis case stems from events in Rowan County, eastern Kentucky, where she gained national prominence for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples immediately following the Obergefell decision. Davis cited her religious beliefs as justification for defying the ruling, even after multiple court orders directed her to comply with the law.

Her refusal eventually led to a five-day jail sentence for contempt of court in September 2015. She was released after her staff began issuing licenses without her name on the documents. The Kentucky Legislature subsequently passed legislation removing all county clerks’ names from state marriage licenses, addressing Davis’s religious objection concerns.

Davis’s stance made her a polarizing figure in the national debate over religious liberty versus civil rights. Despite her prominence among some conservative and religious groups, Davis lost her bid for reelection in 2018.

The case highlights ongoing tensions surrounding the Obergefell decision, even as public acceptance of same-sex marriage has grown substantially. According to Gallup polling, support for same-sex marriage has increased from 60% when the ruling was issued to 71% in 2023.

Legal experts note that overturning Obergefell would create unprecedented complications, as hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples have married since 2015. Such a reversal would raise complex questions about the legal status of these marriages and associated rights regarding children, property, and benefits.

The Court’s potential consideration of Davis’s appeal comes amid heightened scrutiny of the justices’ views on precedent following the Dobbs decision. While some conservative legal advocates hope to see other landmark decisions reconsidered, others, including several Republican lawmakers, have distanced themselves from efforts to challenge same-sex marriage, recognizing its broad public support.

The justices’ decision on whether to hear the case will provide insight into how the Court’s new conservative majority views the stability of relatively recent landmark civil rights decisions.