KY clerk refuses to issue marriage licenses

[albeto.]

I think the clerk should resign from her post....

 

She thinks she shouldn't.

 

And thus raises the practical problem with arguing for a "morality clause" that would give license to professionals and service providers to deny service according to their own personal moral code. 

 

 

(and yes, I get the difference between not providing a service to "them" vs. not providing a service to "anyone," but the point is not in how the morality clause would be practiced - the point is in advocating it at all

 

and also, I know you're not advocating that and don't mean to imply you are, I'm just jumping off your comment for convenience)

[MomatHWTK]

I know it is a long read, but this is the judge's initial ruling ordering the injunction.  The ruling discusses the clerk's role in this particular state as well as discusses the governing laws and interests.

 

With regard to the timing of events, usually once a preliminary injunction is issued, it is obeyed.  If the clerk in this case had obeyed the ruling, the matter would have temporarily been resolved until a final trial could be held.  This final trial will still need to be held, but now instead of relief being granted to the plaintiffs in the meantime the clerk has refused.  She will face a civil contempt charge and the underlying trial will go forward.  If I were representing the plaintiff, I would ask that the contempt charge include incarceration because KY state law permits a judge to issue licenses in the event the clerk is "absent."  (This "absence" requirement is also discussed in the above referenced ruling and much of what is happening now depends on how it is being defined by the parties involved, IMO.) 

 

I would suspect that as one of the many issues to arise due to this entire matter, legislatures will look at their policies and proceedures for handling similar situations in the future. 

 

 

 

[Orthodox6]

She thinks she shouldn't.

 

And thus raises the practical problem with arguing for a "morality clause" that would give license to professionals and service providers to deny service according to their own personal moral code.

 

 

(and yes, I get the difference between not providing a service to "them" vs. not providing a service to "anyone," but the point is not in how the morality clause would be practiced - the point is in advocating it at all

 

and also, I know you're not advocating that and don't mean to imply you are, I'm just jumping off your comment for convenience)

Albeto, I am agreeing with you. This is why I believe there should be a minimum of one additional staff member of equivalent rank and duties for any work situation that includes a controversial action and/or a controversial response. We [the board] probably had discussions at an earlier date when there were news articles about pharmacy clerks who did not wish to fill a prescription for birth control medications. In exact parallel, I have no problem with a clerk who asks a different pharmacy clerk to handle the task.

[Kerileanne99]

I think the clerk should resign from her post. There are jobs that I could not hold because of my strongly-held values, so I would not even begin working at one of them. Decades ago, I held an office job (one of the many jobs during college) for a sales company. When I realized the lies and tactics being used by the telephone sales staff, I quit and moved on to other work. If this woman is the one-and-only clerk for that county office, I believe she should leave the job. If, on the other hand, there is at least one other clerk who does not object to the task, I feel at ease with allowing the clerk in question to exercise her rights of conscience. I don't have the impression that this particular county office has lines of customers for this kind of a license wrapped around ten city blocks. Tolerance is supposed to be bi-directional. So long as the particular task is fulfilled, and EVERYBODY refrains from nasty comments, I genuinely see no problem.

Unfortunately, she has stated that since her name (as official clerk) is on each marriage certificate issued, allowing someone else in her office to issue them would still be her officially sanctioning gay marriage.

Problem? I see the solution, even if she does not:(

[LucyStoner]

Albeto, I am agreeing with you. This is why I believe there should be a minimum of one additional staff member of equivalent rank and duties for any work situation that includes a controversial action and/or a controversial response. We [the board] probably had discussions at an earlier date when there were news articles about pharmacy clerks who did not wish to fill a prescription for birth control medications. In exact parallel, I have no problem with a clerk who asks a different pharmacy clerk to handle the task.

Here's the issue though. Lots of small towns might not be able to afford to have the office double staffed in case someone "controversial" came into get a license. It's also not the public's responsibility to time their visit to the clerk's office staffing schedule. If you go during business hours, you should be able to see to your business and not have to come back later when the person who will "do that" is back from vacation. She is not entitled to her job. It's a very comfortable position for the area and frankly, I don't think she has been showing the grace and dignity that someone in such a role should have.

 

The state could change it so the county clerk is no longer the official listed on the license and is just filing the form.

 

I personally think that this woman is probably looking for the gravy train that will be afforded to her as the public face of the last stand against gay marriage. Lecture circuit. Conferences. Donor money. I don't think this is about the courage of her convictions. If it were, she could interact in a less nasty tone with the public she is supposed to serve.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Here's the issue though. Lots of small towns might not be able to afford to have the office double staffed in case someone "controversial" came into get a license. It's also not the public's responsibility to time their visit to the clerk's office staffing schedule. If you go during business hours, you should be able to see to your business and not have to come back later when the person who will "do that" is back from vacation. She is not entitled to her job. It's a very comfortable position for the area and frankly, I don't think she has been showing the grace and dignity that someone in such a role should have.

 

The state could change it so the county clerk is no longer the official listed on the license and is just filing the form.

 

I personally think that this woman is probably looking for the gravy train that will be afforded to her as the public face of the last stand against gay marriage. Lecture circuit. Conferences. Donor money. I don't think this is about the courage of her convictions. If it were, she could interact in a less nasty tone with the public she is supposed to serve.

 

I suspect you are correct.  Ken Ham and the like are already using her as a talking point to raise money from their more dimwitted supporters.

[Word Nerd]

Odd.

"Kentucky law allows a commonwealth’s attorney to indict county judges-executives, justices of the peace, sheriffs, coroners, surveyors, jailers, county attorneys and constables for malfeasance in office or willful neglect in the discharge of official duties, for which they can be fined up to $1,000 and removed from office upon conviction. But for some reason lost to history, the statute doesn’t include county clerks."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/02/qa-ky-clerk-gay-marriage-license-case/71567812/

[LucyStoner]

Odd.

"Kentucky law allows a commonwealth’s attorney to indict county judges-executives, justices of the peace, sheriffs, coroners, surveyors, jailers, county attorneys and constables for malfeasance in office or willful neglect in the discharge of official duties, for which they can be fined up to $1,000 and removed from office upon conviction. But for some reason lost to history, the statute doesn’t include county clerks."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/02/qa-ky-clerk-gay-marriage-license-case/71567812/

Perhaps no one ever imagined a county clerk doing anything half as exciting as malfeasance. It's not exactly a job one expects to hear about in the headlines.

[Frances]

I personally think that this woman is probably looking for the gravy train that will be afforded to her as the public face of the last stand against gay marriage. Lecture circuit. Conferences. Donor money. I don't think this is about the courage of her convictions. If it were, she could interact in a less nasty tone with the public she is supposed to serve.

And yet again, opponents of gay marriage have annointed another outstanding Christian role model as their spokesperson. Will they never learn?

[poppy]

Here's the issue though. Lots of small towns might not be able to afford to have the office double staffed in case someone "controversial" came into get a license. It's also not the public's responsibility to time their visit to the clerk's office staffing schedule. If you go during business hours, you should be able to see to your business and not have to come back later when the person who will "do that" is back from vacation. She is not entitled to her job. It's a very comfortable position for the area and frankly, I don't think she has been showing the grace and dignity that someone in such a role should have.

 

The state could change it so the county clerk is no longer the official listed on the license and is just filing the form.

 

I personally think that this woman is probably looking for the gravy train that will be afforded to her as the public face of the last stand against gay marriage. Lecture circuit. Conferences. Donor money. I don't think this is about the courage of her convictions. If it were, she could interact in a less nasty tone with the public she is supposed to serve.

 

Imagine going in for your driving test and being told "Come back another day, the tester who thinks women should  be allowed to drive isn't in today".  Or going into the police station to report a crime you've been victim to and being told "Hold up, let me call for Officer Jones, he's the one who deals with black people".  No.

[poppy]

I know the county clerk in my area, he also makes about $80K-- which is less here than it is in Kentucky, but is still quite a bit. ( I know his salary because the town budget is something I vote on as a Town Meeting member).  He definitely considers himself a representative for the community.  He goes to public events and every police swearing in, always wearing a suit.  And I don't think that's unusual. My image of a town or county clerk is something like  a sheriff, very much a public role, even though their work is largely administrative paperwork.

[Guest]

Anybody know what time the clerks are due in court?

[KarenC]

Anybody know what time the clerks are due in court?

11:00 this morning.

[Word Nerd]

Her legal team offered several possible solutions, including removing her name from the licenses and having others sign them. That idea seems simple enough to implement, but it doesn't change the fact she has openly defied orders to resume issuing licenses and should face the consequences. It's one of the primary functions of her job, and if she won't do it she should resign, not try to pass that task off to someone else.

[mommaduck]

Can't help it, it is funny. Can you imagine being the employee held hostage in the middle of this situation...someone could and it's humourous. *language warning*

https://twitter.com/nexttokimdavis

[FaithManor]

I suspect you are correct.  Ken Ham and the like are already using her as a talking point to raise money from their more dimwitted supporters.

:svengo:  :svengo:  :svengo:

[LucyStoner]

I know the county clerk in my area, he also makes about $80K-- which is less here than it is in Kentucky, but is still quite a bit. ( I know his salary because the town budget is something I vote on as a Town Meeting member). He definitely considers himself a representative for the community. He goes to public events and every police swearing in, always wearing a suit. And I don't think that's unusual. My image of a town or county clerk is something like a sheriff, very much a public role, even though their work is largely administrative paperwork.

Apart from her nasty attitude her dress isn't appropriate for a highly paid government employee. I would expect her to dress in more professional, business attire. Suits, cardigans, something up and neat with her hair. She makes 80k a year in a town where most make less than 1/2 that. She can afford to look like a professional who works in an office.

 

ETA- In every picture I see, she is wearing a long sleeved cotton t-shirt. I like my t-shirts as much as the next gal but I'm a homeschooling mom, not an elected official. Would it kill her to swap the jumper and tee thing for a nice blouse, a blazer and a skirt? It occurs to me that she looks more like the stereotype of a homeschool mom than most actual homeschool moms.

[Guest]

Can we talk about bangs?? I don't understand people who still wear those big bangs. How do you not look around and see that no one else has rocked that look in 20 years???

[Orthodox6]

Here's the issue though. Lots of small towns might not be able to afford to have the office double staffed in case someone "controversial" came into get a license. It's also not the public's responsibility to time their visit to the clerk's office staffing schedule. If you go during business hours, you should be able to see to your business and not have to come back later when the person who will "do that" is back from vacation. She is not entitled to her job. It's a very comfortable position for the area and frankly, I don't think she has been showing the grace and dignity that someone in such a role should have.

 

The state could change it so the county clerk is no longer the official listed on the license and is just filing the form.

 

I personally think that this woman is probably looking for the gravy train that will be afforded to her as the public face of the last stand against gay marriage. Lecture circuit. Conferences. Donor money. I don't think this is about the courage of her convictions. If it were, she could interact in a less nasty tone with the public she is supposed to serve.

Agreeing with you. Can a clerk undergo equivalent to what would be impeachment of a sitting U.S. President? As a very traditionalist Christian, even I feel this woman should not hold office.

[LucyStoner]

Can we talk about bangs?? I don't understand people who still wear those big bangs. How do you not look around and see that no one else has rocked that look in 20 years???

You mean the ones the lady sitting next to Kim Davis is wearing? I call those Kentucky bangs. They were out of style already on the west coast when I lived in Kentucky in 1991 but all the rage in Kentucky. Some of my family in Kentucky still wears those bangs. I even saw them in the back to school pics on Facebook posted by my aunt just today (I have some *much* younger cousins as my aunt is much younger than my mom and had kids until she was in her 40s).

[Word Nerd]

Agreeing with you. Can a clerk undergo equivalent to what would be impeachment of a sitting U.S. President? As a very traditionalist Christian, even I feel this woman should not hold office.

 

Yes, she could be impeached, but they would have to hold a costly special session, as the state's legislators are not currently in session.

[Mimm]

Her legal team offered several possible solutions, including removing her name from the licenses and having others sign them. That idea seems simple enough to implement, but it doesn't change the fact she has openly defied orders to resume issuing licenses and should face the consequences. It's one of the primary functions of her job, and if she won't do it she should resign, not try to pass that task off to someone else.

 

I don't think they should offer this woman any compromise whatsoever. Issuing licenses is what the job entails and if she doesn't want the job, she should have the integrity to quit. Since she lacks that, she should be removed from office, asap, with as little expense as possible to the people who have already paid her, and much less publicity than she's already gotten.

[albeto.]

Albeto, I am agreeing with you. This is why I believe there should be a minimum of one additional staff member of equivalent rank and duties for any work situation that includes a controversial action and/or a controversial response. We [the board] probably had discussions at an earlier date when there were news articles about pharmacy clerks who did not wish to fill a prescription for birth control medications. In exact parallel, I have no problem with a clerk who asks a different pharmacy clerk to handle the task.

 

That doesn't solve the problem, though, it only pushes it back. What do you do when both employees appeal to their morality clause? What do you do when you don't have a second employee to take over? What's wrong with doing the damn job you're paid to do?

[mommaduck]

Hey, if anyone wants to know what REAL persecution looks like, take a glance at all the pictures of fleeing Syrians. THAT is persecution. This woman just needs to do her dang job or step down.

[Pawz4me]

I certainly don't agree with what she's doing, but I don't think it's fair to criticize her looks or the way she dresses or her choice of hairstyle.  Perhaps her clothing choices might be an appropriate topic for discussion, but . . . it's a rural area, isn't it?  She might be right in line for what's considered professional dress there.  Anyway . . . I just don't like any woman being ripped into for stuff like that.

[Word Nerd]

I certainly don't agree with what she's doing, but I don't think it's fair to criticize her looks or the way she dresses or her choice of hairstyle.  Perhaps her clothing choices might be an appropriate topic for discussion, but . . . it's a rural area, isn't it?  She might be right in line for what's considered professional dress there.  Anyway . . . I just don't like any woman being ripped into for stuff like that.

 

It is rather catty.

[justasque]

I wondered where Mrs. Davis is getting her legal advice.  Now I know.  According to Dan Savage (NSFW, language alert, etc. etc. etc. - if you don't know who he is, he's likely not your kind of guy), she is being represented by Liberty Counsel.  

 

Their other projects include the "Friend or Foe" Christmas Campaign, "designed to educate, and, if necessary, litigate to keep Christmas from being censored", and the Day of Purityâ„¢, which "offers those who strive for sexual purity an opportunity to stand together in opposition to a culture of moral decline".  Their tag line is "Restoring the Culture by Advancing Religious Freedom, the Sanctity of Human Life, and the Family".  (Not, of course, families with gay parents who adopt special needs kids from the foster system or anyone like that, of course.)  

I don't think Mrs. Davis is going to make very much money from her martyr status - I don't see her on the lecture circuit somehow - but Liberty Council now has fundraising fodder that should keep them comfortable for some time to come.

(In their favor, Liberty Council "successfully defended homeowners Enock and Ines Berluche in Kissimmee, FL, when their homeowner’s association allowed numerous lawn ornaments, including human skulls and four-foot topless Greek statues, but tried to force them to remove two small statues of Mary and Jesus."  For the record, I am very pro-lawn ornaments of all kinds.)

[FaithManor]

That doesn't solve the problem, though, it only pushes it back. What do you do when both employees appeal to their morality clause? What do you do when you don't have a second employee to take over? What's wrong with doing the damn job you're paid to do?

I agree. At some point you'll have people claiming morality issues all the live long day. We'll have society dictated to by an entire collection of legalistic, fundamentalist, judgmental narcissists. Don't apply for the job if you aren't willing to do the job.

 

I really do not believe ANYONE should be working in a pharmacy who has any reason in their pretty little heads for refusing to fill a prescription. Period. This is not your life! This is between the patient and the doctor, end of discussion. Get the heck out if you can't manage the job. It is literally not your d*mn business. Collective American "you", not the forum "you".

[LucyStoner]

Moxie's remark about bangs clearly has nothing to do with Kim Davis, as she doesn't have bangs of any sort.

 

My remarks about her clothing are part of a reaction to how unprofessional she seems as a whole.

 

She makes $80k a year. She works as an elected government official. She can up her game to reflect being paid a handsome salary on the tax dollars collected primarily from relatively low income folks. She doesn't need to dress in designer clothes or be especially fancy or wear pants or anything but in any professional role one would generally see a man wearing a suit or business casual at minimum, women shouldn't be wearing plain casual t-shirts every single day. I live in an area way more casual in business attire than Kentucky and I've never seen anyone drawing a salary at the courthouse wearing a t-shirt during business hours.

 

My take on her professionalism comes from listening to her vicious words and juvenile expressions towards the public she is supposed to serve. Pairing that with her very casual dress and, to me, it's a jarring image for someone drawing that level of salary as a public servant.

 

If this makes me a catty elitist, so be it.

[justasque]

She's headed to jail.

 

Quotes from the link:

 

#BREAKING Kim Davis found in contempt; taken into custody by U.S. Marshals

 

Judge Bunning told Kim Davis he has his own religious beliefs as Catholic, but public officials must respect the law. ^JC

 

Judge said fine for Kim Davis would not work b/c others apparently raising money to pay fines for her. ^JC

 

Judge says no deadline. In jail until she complies or instructs staff to start issuing licenses. #WSAZ

 

 

 

[LucyStoner]

Ironically enough, my only words on FB about her at all have been to tell a friend of a friend that it's not ok to call her fat, ugly, stupid or wonder how "she got 4 men to marry her". Because that is truly unkind.

 

Certainly her physical looks aren't relevant (nor do I think she is physically ugly in the least).

 

Her deportment as a professional and public servant, however, is relevant. And like it or not, clothes are very much a part of that. The area can't be so very small if it has a staff of six clerks working there and multiple same sex couples immediately seeking licenses. It's an hour from Lexington, not in the dead middle of nowhere.

[mommaduck]

 

She's headed to jail.

 

Quotes from the link:

 

 

 

 

I agree with the Judge. In such a role, you either have to be able to separate yourself and uphold the law or remove yourself.

 

Oh heavens, there's a man preaching crap. Oh, yes, this was all just an agenda. Uhm, no, those men were FROM that county and paid her salary. (watching live feed)

[Rivka]

If you say that she can opt out for religious reasons, as long as someone else in the office is willing to issue a license, that creates a different - and bigger - problem.

 

I would guess that right now there are thousands of government workers all over America who personally disapprove of same-sex marriage but are complying with the law because it's the law. Once you make the "Kim Davis option" legal, there will be pressure on those people to also refuse.

 

Right now, nobody except perhaps Kim Davis thinks that a clerk who signs a marriage certificate for a gay couple is necessarily pro-gay-marriage. We understand that they have to obey the law. But if there's a religious opt-out, then people who opt in will be labeled "pro." It makes the act of issuing the certificate a political/moral stance instead of a neutral job duty. What kind of pressure would be put on someone who is the only signer in a small, conservative community? Or the only non-signer in a large, liberal community? Would we want to see county clerk elections become referendums on gay marriage every time one candidate pledges to opt out? Would we want to have big sections of Red States where the only way to win a clerk election, or be appointed clerk, is if you promise to opt out?

 

Let government employees' private opinions be their private opinions. Let compliance with the law just mean compliance with the law - not a declaration of the employee's personal religious beliefs.

[Laura Corin]

You might be interested to know that the report that she is going to gaol made it onto the three-minute 7pm UK BBC radio news this evening.

[melmichigan]

Do I understand correctly that the hearing is or will continue this afternoon to determine if her clerks will issue licenses?

[mommaduck]

Yes

[Guest]

Do I understand correctly that the hearing is or will continue this afternoon to determine if her clerks will issue licenses?

That was my understanding.

 

Mike Huckabee has issued a statement that he "stands behind her".  Wonder if he'll offer to sit in jail for her??

[mommaduck]

That was my understanding.

 

Mike Huckabee has issued a statement that he "stands behind her".  Wonder if he'll offer to sit in jail for her??

 

If he did, it would just be a show. He wouldn't have to deal with entire fallout and consequences of being IN jail.

[SKL]

Personally I would just issue the licenses.

 

I can understand that she has a big dilemma if she really thinks it is a sin to issue them AND she needs her job.  When she took the job, maybe she didn't expect it to involve gay marriages.  But on the other hand, she should have seen this coming for a while.  She should have had her resume out.  I'm sorry.

 

Maybe her church will help her out while she looks for a more suitable job.

[Word Nerd]

What would stop others from going against her instructions and issuing the licenses anyway? What can she do about it—fire them from prison?

[LucyStoner]

Going to jail just feeds her, and her supporters' generalized sense of persecution.

 

I know it's the only real option available to the judge though, since the fines would be meaningless with the type of donor money that would flood in.

 

Anyone who doubts she will hop on the gravy train- I'm sure her book is already being written. A few ghost written speeches and she's a perfect face for groups still reeling from the SCOTUS decision. Heck, going to jail just ups her take on such endeavors.

[SKL]

I don't think she should go to jail.  I think they should ban her from the office because she is unable/unwilling to do the job as required.  What's jail going to do for anyone?  That would just make her a bigger martyr.

[mommaduck]

Agreed. This just feeds the "persecuted" complex. Remove her and stop her pay. Simple. 

[melmichigan]

Agreed. This just feeds the "persecuted" complex. Remove her and stop her pay. Simple. 

I wish it was that easy.  

[LucyStoner]

I don't think she should go to jail. I think they should ban her from the office because she is unable/unwilling to do the job as required. What's jail going to do for anyone? That would just make her a bigger martyr.

Unfortunately the only things at the judge's disposal are jail and fines.

 

She's an elected official, not someone who can be fired at will and apparently the only mechanism to relieve her of her duties is for the state legislature to impeach her. The state legislature doesn't convene until January of 2016.

 

I agree that going to jail just feeds her martyr thing though but I can see why, between time she'd have to serve and money others would pay for her, he chose the option that would affect her personally.

 

Also, with her unavailable to do her job perhaps some of the other clerks will be compelled to do the paperwork.

[Word Nerd]

Just saw this:

"The judge also told all five of the clerk's deputies, including her son, Nathan Davis, that they are free to issue licenses to all applicants while Davis is held in contempt, but would also face fines or jail if they refuse to comply. He told them to meet with lawyers briefly and consider their fates before returning to his courtroom later Thursday to reveal their decisions."

[melmichigan]

Unfortunately the only things at the judge's disposal are jail and fines.

 

She's an elected official, not someone who can be fired at will and apparently the only mechanism to relieve her of her duties is for the state legislature to impeach her. The state legislature doesn't convene until January of 2016.

 

I agree that going to jail just feeds her martyr thing though but I can see why, between time she'd have to serve and money others would pay for her, he chose the option that would affect her personally.

 

Also, with her unavailable to do her job perhaps some of the other clerks will be compelled to do the paperwork.

I believe in the earlier ruling it was mentioned that a judge could only order the issuance of licenses in her absence, not in light of her failure to do her job.  Now someone else should be able to step in and do her job and issue licenses while she is in jail.

[SKL]

Unfortunately the only things at the judge's disposal are jail and fines.

 

She's an elected official, not someone who can be fired at will and apparently the only mechanism to relieve her of her duties is for the state legislature to impeach her. The state legislature doesn't convene until January of 2016.

 

I agree that going to jail just feeds her martyr thing though but I can see why, between time she'd have to serve and money others would pay for her, he chose the option that would affect her personally.

 

Also, with her unavailable to do her job perhaps some of the other clerks will be compelled to do the paperwork.

 

What would they do if she became mentally incapacitated, or if she stopped coming to work?  Surely they would have a mechanism to put someone else in her chair.  I find it hard to believe jail / fines are the only options.

 

 

[LucyStoner]

What would they do if she became mentally incapacitated, or if she stopped coming to work? Surely they would have a mechanism to put someone else in her chair. I find it hard to believe jail / fines are the only options.

 

 

If she is not there, others can issue the licenses. Jailing her incapacitates her I guess. Apparently her deputy clerks will have to issue the licenses or they will also face being held in contempt. The available legal remedies in that jurisdiction are detailed in many helpful links on this thread. While she was not jailed, she was showing up for work everyday and ordered her five deputies to not issue the licenses either.

 

Here, she'd just be fired flat out but we don't elect her position.

[Guest]

So, say one of her clerks steps forward to issue the licenses. Will she then get out of jail? Will she be able to fire her clerk?