Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Kim Davis Cleared of Additional Legal Reprocussions

2/10/16

Judge clears Kentucky clerk, OKs marriage licenses with her name removed

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-kentucky-gaymarriage-idUSKCN0VJ1Q1

Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis speaks during an interview on Fox News Channel's 'The Kelly File' in New York September 23, 2015. REUTERS/Brendan McDermidIn what appears to be the final development in the Kim Davis marriage licence case, a federal judge cleared Kim Davis, an ideologue of conservatism, of any remaining contempt charges, and has enforced the court's decision to uphold marriage equality. The compromise that was reached through the order of Governor Matt Blevin was that the names of county clerks be removed from all new marriage licences to honor the religious beliefs of the clerks, but the newly enforced right of homosexual couples to marry be honored. Since returning to work Kim Davis has not hindered the process of new marriage licences going though, but has distanced herself from the process. When the Governor's order went through, the ACLU sued Davis on behalf of various same-sex couples, saying she was not in compliance with written law stating she had to fill out her name on all marriage licences. The federal judge stated that it was perfectly fine to not fill in her name or information and upheld the governors order.

This story relates to a perfect example of selective incorporation, a power given to the supreme court through an interpretation of the 14th Amendment that became popular in the 1920's. The Supreme Court's decision to protect the right of same-sex couple to marry became the law of the land when their final decision was made. They selectively incorporated this right through their interpretation of the constitution. The supremacy of the national government ensures that any any conflict with state or local law about marriage equality is ruled in the favor of the national government. While it is Kim Davis's right to hold her own personal and religious beliefs about the matter, it was ultimately illegal to deny other people a right guaranteed to them by the federal government.

No comments:

Post a Comment