Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis has been released from jail. Great! We are thankful. But let’s understand one fact—Kim Davis is not the problem. The illegitimate Supreme Court decision lacking constitutional jurisprudence—changing the definition of marriage—is the problem.
It seems more and more that judicial activism has resulted in judicial overreach by legislating from the bench. In his dissenting opinion on Obergefell, Justice Roberts clearly speaks to the lack of constitutional basis for the decision stating, “But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.” This is an extremely alarming commentary from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
As the County Clerk in charge of issuing marriage licenses, Kim Davis was put in a position to choose between compromising her First Amendment rights of religious exercise and conscience or, challenging the Court decision not yet evidenced by Kentucky law. Davis chose to stand by her beliefs and to fight for her religious freedom/liberty.
Providing a means for this same-sex couple to secure a marriage license was not the problem. There were dozens of sites within driving distance that would have issued the marriage license. In fact there were 117 locations in Kentucky. No, this is about power. This is about forcing Kim Davis to compromise her sincerely held religious belief, her First Amendment right of religious exercise and conscience. This is about using the power of the government to make an example of Kim Davis. Either you give in or you go to jail.
The Kentucky governor and/or the US District Court Judge could have made accommodations to enable marriage licenses to be issued and to honor Davis’s First Amendment rights. But they didn’t and chose to put Kim Davis in jail. They did change the marriage license form to include ‘Person one’ and ‘Person two’. But they couldn’t accommodate Davis’s request to remove her name from the licensing document.
Now sensing the public outrage, the judge has released Davis. The terms of her release, however, is that she cannot interfere with the issuing of marriage licenses. The problem is that her name remains on the marriage document. Absent the removal of her name and the use of her authority, Davis has said she cannot participate in issuing licenses contrary her religious belief.
Thank you to Kim Davis for standing on principle, principles guaranteed by her First Amendment rights.
Davis is standing in defense of her religious liberty. If the power of the government can be used to usurp Davis’s guaranteed First Amendment rights, it most certainly can come after our Second Amendment rights or our Fourth Amendment rights, or any other provision of the constitution.
This is not just about defending religious liberty, this is about defending liberty. Liberty is in the crosshairs.