No need. I’m 100% correct.
I agree with you in principle, but whatever sanctions she faces are solely her fault. If she didn’t want to do the job, she should have resigned the moment the appellate process was completed. She didn’t, so now she will be held in contempt, and there is nobody to blame but her.
You’re correct in that you see marriage being “diluted”? Your own choice of word, bigot.
Whatever can be legally done. I am not a lawyer, and certainly not one with special knowledge of Kentucky state law. But it is my guess, the there might be some way for the Governor to declare a crisis and appoint someone else and fire her. Another idea is for the Governor, or someone not quite so high to create a new position which handles marriage licenses, taking it out of her hands. At least couples wouldn’t be inconvenienced while things play out with her.
I’m open to other solutions. Have any?
I recall her saying in an article that two people did, one did not, and the other was ambiguous on it (probably not wanting to upset the boss).
So there’s at least one who was willing to do it.
I found this in an NPR story today:
So it looks like, at least as of 2014, there is a legal body outside of the Kentucky legislature that is empowered to recommend sanctions (including removal from office) to the KY Supreme Court Chief Justice.
Removal isn’t necessary, only suspension. Can the SCK or other court impose that?
I agree. The court has said, "Okay, we’ve heard you. Sorry, but you really do have to perform the duties you of your office. Your choices now are to 1) perform them, 2) not perform them and be held in contempt of court, or 3) resign.
One thing I was pushing back against upthread was for people to sue her directly. As I said I think any suit should be brought against the office she holds and the entity that controls it, i.e., county, state, etc.
Easy for you to say given that any money needed to cover such a suit wouldn’t be coming out of your pocket as a Rowan County, KY, taxpayer.
But that’s just the point. If they feel the bite, they will advocate for their legislature to act and never elect someone like her again.
If she’s really born-again, and so her past immoral decisions are forgiven, shouldn’t she go back to her first husband?
Jesus forgives, but aren’t you supposed to correct the mistakes of your sins?
Wow, you’re really bad at the reading thing. I mean, you seem to be able to recognize the shapes and squiggles and reproduce them. But as far as what they mean, and how one thought follows form the next, it’s all some crazy crazy op art to you. I think Koko would have done better gleaning meaning and having a conversation that tracks.
Yes, you remember. Now show it.
From a first reading on the document linked (thank you xenophon41) I don’t see a provision for summary suspension. (Or maybe you’d need to show an irreparable harm from not acting immediately. ) As far as this case, the document does include willful or persistent failure to perform the duties of the office under the law as a cause for action. No grandfathering for what the law was when taking office vs later changes.
Is it Thursday, 3 September 2015 already? 
I am pretty sure NPR has it wrong. I found that too (as well as the relevany KY constitutional provision allowing the KYSC to govern clerks), but those procedures are for clerks of the circuit (not county) courts. In most states those functions are subsumed in one office, but Kentucky apparently has separate ones. So the circuit clerk rules do not apply to her.
Why should the county pay? The county has not done anything wrong and has no power to correct the situation. The wrongdoer here is an individual official who is committing misconduct.
and there was no religious test for her to hold office. Now that she is IN office she needs to do her job and follow the law. Nothing is preventing her from still holding her vile beliefs while she does that. No one is telling her that she is not allowed to hold her vile beliefs. What she has been told over and over again is that her vile beliefs have NO BEARING AT ALL on what her job entails and what she is required to do in her job.
Here is an interesting article about Ms. Davis.
He mother was the County Clerk for 40 years and Kim worked there as a deputy for 26 of them. She was narrowly elected and in her victory speech said,
Well, yeah, there pretty much was - that her holding and performance of that office (or any other) not be affected by religion.
Why should those bringing the suit have to pay for its defense?