US Fed Judge: cannot use OWN rights to block rights of others - IN GOV'T JOB!
bi4smooth last edited by bi4smooth
So, maybe you remember back in '63 (oops, no in 2015) when a KY county clerk started refusing to issue marriage licenses because she objected to gay marriage (then newly upheld by the SCotUS)...
She basically claimed that she didn't HAVE to issue same-sex marriage licenses because it violated her own religious rights. Most people agreed: this was balderdash, because she was a Gov't representative in an official gov't capacity.
Well, now a US Federal Judge has agreed - she can be held liable (civilly) for denying the legal requests for marriage licenses. (It remains to be seen if she'll actually be found liable... this ruling just means there can be a trial).
Her Atty says they'll appeal (actually again - their earlier appeals were denied), but the idea that people representing the Gov't can do (or not do) whatever they think their religion says they should, and use their own Freedom of Religion rights as a shield - is now officially debunked.
For the record: IMHO, she's allowed to not approve of gay marriage... she's allowed to believe the moon is made of muenster cheese, for that matter! But, she's not allowed to use that personal stance as an excuse to not do her job... or worse, to deny people their own Constitutional rights! In a nutshell: your rights do not trump other's rights, just because you were elected to a functional Gov't job.
While I applaud the decision, I have no illusions that the Conservative super-majority on the SCOTUS will overturn it if they take up the case.