Kim Davis

[TlalocW]

So I've been arguing/discussing this whole clusterf*** with friends and family, and none of us are 100% sure on the chain of events, and my Googling only brings up more questions. So if anyone could help us out, that'd be great.

The main things we can't agree on are:
1. Her religious beliefs aside because we know that she don't like teh gayz, was Kim's main objection to marriage equality ONLY because her name was on the certificates?
2. Did the ACLU offer a deal of her returning to work with certificates without her name on it (I find it hard to believe that the ACLU could "make" a deal in a court case like that, but if they did, and she refused then that would seem to say that number 1 is a non-starter).
3. If number 1 is valid or part of it, are they getting the office new certificates?

Thanks in advance.

TlalocW

[KentuckyWoman]

1. Yes it's entirely about her name being on the certificates.

The Kentucky Legislature had to change the laws and didn't get it done before the Supremes issued the ruling.

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36475

Kentucky law requires the clerk's name on the certificate as an authorization. Kim Davis and 2 other country clerks want the certificates authorized by the county or the state rather than the clerk personally. Kentucky would have to change that requirement and only require the signature of the deputy clerk issuing the license.

Since the Kentucky legislature is not now in session it would require a special session and no one seems to be particularly keen on doing so.

[csziggy]

2. I thought the judge offered her a deal to take her name off

And that is how the deputy clerks were issuing the licenses while Davis was in jail.

Clerk in Kentucky Chooses Jail Over Deal on Same-Sex Marriage

By ALAN BLINDER and TAMAR LEWINSEPT. 3, 2015


ASHLAND, Ky. — A Kentucky county clerk who has become a symbol of religious opposition to same-sex marriage was jailed Thursday after defying a federal court order to issue licenses to gay couples.

The clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, Ky., was ordered detained for contempt of court and later rejected a proposal to allow her deputies to process same-sex marriage licenses that could have prompted her release.

Instead, on a day when one of Ms. Davis’s lawyers said she would not retreat from or modify her stand despite a Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, Judge David L. Bunning of United States District Court secured commitments from five of Ms. Davis’s deputies to begin providing the licenses. At least two couples planned to seek marriage licenses Friday.

“The court cannot condone the willful disobedience of its lawfully issued order,” Judge Bunning said. “If you give people the opportunity to choose which orders they follow, that’s what potentially causes problems.”

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/us/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage.html

Kim Davis, Released From Kentucky Jail, Won’t Say if She Will Keep Defying Court

By ALAN BLINDER and RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑASEPT. 8, 2015

<SNIP>

But her release came with a stern warning from Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court, who on Thursday sent her to jail and directed five of her deputies to issue licenses without her approval. In a two-page order on Tuesday, he wrote that he was setting her free because her office was “fulfilling its obligation to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples,” but that he would respond to any further defiance.

“Defendant Davis shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples,” he wrote. “If Defendant Davis should interfere in any way with their issuance, that will be considered a violation of this order and appropriate sanctions will be considered.”

Last week, one of Ms. Davis’s lawyers signaled in court that Ms. Davis would not consent to her office’s processing marriage licenses under existing guidelines. On Tuesday, reporters asked repeatedly if she would abide by the latest court order. Ms. Davis remained silent, and Mr. Staver said, “She’s not going to violate her conscience.”

The central issue for Ms. Davis is that the licenses say they are issued by the Rowan County clerk, and she, as the clerk, will not authorize them. If that feature is eliminated, Mr. Staver said, she will not stand in the way of granting licenses. “The court order did not resolve the underlying issue,” he said.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage.html