The issue of same-sex marriage is once again in the spotlight as the U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to revisit its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. This landmark ruling recognized a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, but it has been contested anew by Kim Davis, the former county clerk from Kentucky who made headlines in 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples on religious grounds.
Davis has petitioned the Supreme Court to review a decision by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals that rejected her claims. The appellate court ruled that Davis was acting on behalf of the government when she denied the licenses and thus was not protected by the First Amendment in that capacity. Her appeal is essentially an attempt to have the Supreme Court overrule its own decision in Obergefell, contending that the initial ruling lacks constitutional basis and conflicts with her religious beliefs.
In an unusual move after Davis filed her petition, the Supreme Court directed the original plaintiffs, David Moore and David Ermold, to file a response, thus keeping the case under consideration rather than outright denying it. This signals that at least one justice, possibly Justices Alito or Gorsuch who do not participate in the court’s “cert pool,” deemed the petition worthy of further examination.
The crucial factor remains whether there are four justices willing to grant review and a confidence that a fifth would agree to overturn Obergefell. Currently, Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Clarence Thomas, Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, form a conservative majority that could potentially reshape existing precedents.
A decision to hear the case could have far-reaching implications, reigniting debates around the intersection of religious liberties and civil rights. The developments will be closely watched, especially given the previous dissenting opinions by justices like Alito and Thomas, who have expressed that states should possess the authority to decide their marriage laws independently.
You can read more about this developing legal query on SCOTUSblog.