# Kim Davis asks Supreme Court to overturn gay marriage ruling of 2015
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [August 11, 2025, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943 "2025-08-11T21:51:35Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/21 "2025-08-11T23:18:32Z")
Let’s take religion out of the equation. Would it be constitutional for a state to tell me that I can enter into a contract to have a woman dig a well for me, but it would not be a legal contract if I made it with another man?
---
### Author:  [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/22 "2025-08-11T23:20:41Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> > [@Chronos](#):
> >
> > Your definition, please, for “activist judge”?
>
> judges who make rulings that are not clearly supported by the US constitution
So you mean the same judges who ruled on _District of Columbia v Heller_, agreeing with Scalia writing that the preamble to the Second Amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State …” was just superficial decoration and could be completely ignored when overturning gun laws they didn’t like. 🙄
This was exactly the same gang of activists (with the exception of Justice Stevens, who was a Republican moderate with libertarian leanings and supported _Heller_) who subsequently dissented on the _Obergefell_ ruling.
---
### Author:  [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/23 "2025-08-11T23:26:34Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> the word “privilege” in the context of the 14th amendment has been read by legal scholars to be interpreted in concert with “or immunities” to refer to fundamental rights and protections afforded to individuals, not the common understanding of the word.
That’s fair.
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> The right to marriage has not historically been considered a fundamental right to all citizens and therefore the ruling was a stretch to bring marriage within the due process clause, as the majority did.
Clearly, denying marriage to same-sex couples is restricting their liberty. in violation of the 14th Amendment. The pursuit of happiness itself has been considered a fundamental right going back to the nation’s founding, unfortunately we have not always done a great job in ensuring that.
---
### Author:  [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/24 "2025-08-11T23:31:18Z")
> [@Atamasama](#):
>
> Clearly, denying marriage to same-sex couples is restricting their liberty. in violation of the 14th Amendment.
It’s much more than that. It’s dehumanizing and relegating them to the status of second-class citizens. It’s one of the reasons that Kim Davis was hit with having to pay $100,000 in compensation for the emotional damage her hateful actions caused to the plaintiffs, in addition to legal costs.
---
### Author:  [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/25 "2025-08-11T23:31:35Z")
let me answer your question with one of my own. Do you think judges can make rulings in cases that they believe should be decided one way (based on ideological, political, or other reason) even when there is not a clear basis for such a ruling in the Constitution (hence an activist decision) while also issuing opinions in other cases that are clearly grounded in established Constitutional doctrine (hence not activist)? There is not such thing (really) as an activist judge, just activist decisions.
---
### Author:  [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/26 "2025-08-11T23:33:00Z")
That’s a terribly subjective opinion. How about “A judge that overrules the legislature or executive branch” - at least that’s objective. A judge that overrules a law banning some marriages is activist - and so is a judge that overrules a law legalizing some marriages.
---
### Author:  [@peedin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peedin)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/27 "2025-08-11T23:36:33Z")
This cunt has nothing better to do with her time than stew about gay marriage. What is the penalty for not paying the quarter of $1 million in fines she owes?
---
### Author:  [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/28 "2025-08-11T23:37:01Z")
> [@Atamasama](#):
>
> Clearly, denying marriage to same-sex couples is restricting their liberty.
of course it is, but the 14th amendment only prohibits “any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, _without due process of law_“. Furthermore, “liberty” here is interpreted to mean “civil liberties”, not just anything a person desires to do. It doesn’t prevent a State from outlawing and preventing someone from driving drunk for example.
---
### Author:  [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/29 "2025-08-11T23:37:56Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> There is not such thing (really) as an activist judge, just activist decisions.
Bullshit. Thomas and Alito are especially spectacular examples of totally unthinking judges who are driven entirely by their warped ideology. Their rulings are absolutely 100% predictable based on the ideological issue in question, and the Constitution be damned. You can’t get any more activist than that. These clowns are unfit to judge pigs at a county fair, let alone sit on the Supreme Court.
---
### Author:  [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/30 "2025-08-11T23:38:06Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> The right to marriage has not historically been considered a fundamental right to all citizens and therefore the ruling was a stretch to bring marriage within the due process clause, as the majority did.
Historically, who wasn’t allowed to marry?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/31 "2025-08-11T23:38:25Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> the word “privilege” in the context of the 14th amendment has been read by legal scholars to be interpreted in concert with “or immunities” to refer to fundamental rights and protections afforded to individuals, not the common understanding of the word.
And marriage is a fundamental right afforded to individuals.
---
### Author:  [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/32 "2025-08-11T23:40:47Z")
If she is successful, I predict her debts will disappear the next day, paid by various right-wing religious organizations and people.
---
### Author:  [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/33 "2025-08-11T23:41:38Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> And marriage is a fundamental right afforded to individuals.
the Supreme Court agreed with you. I agree with you. I just don’t think it is entirely clear that the Constitution and history agree with that, hence my statement that the decision rested on shaky doctrinal ground.
---
### Author:  [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/34 "2025-08-11T23:43:50Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#):
>
> Historically, who wasn’t allowed to marry?
Well, interracial couples weren’t in almost every state at some point. Not until _Loving v. Virginia_, which established that anti-miscegenation laws were a violation of the 14th Amendment using the exact same justification as _Obergefell_.
> **[Loving v. Virginia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia)**
>
> Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled that the laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Beginning in 2013, the decision was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions ruling that restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States were unconstitutional, including in the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. H The...
Clearly, those were also activist judges as well by the logic of @We_re_wolves_not_werewolves.
---
### Author:  [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/35 "2025-08-11T23:44:35Z")
I regret the intemperate resort to gendered insults. Let’s come together with “asshole,” please
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/36 "2025-08-11T23:46:45Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> the Supreme Court agreed with you. I agree with you. I just don’t think it is entirely clear that the Constitution and history agree with that, hence my statement that the decision rested on shaky doctrinal ground.
In other words, what made them “activist judges” was just that they made a decision based on their interpretation of the Constitution? Where I come from, the word for that is just “judges”. That’s their job.
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/37 "2025-08-11T23:49:13Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> the Supreme Court agreed with you. I agree with you. I just don’t think it is entirely clear that the Constitution and history agree with that, hence my statement that the decision rested on shaky doctrinal ground.
For that, I think we can look to the 9th Amendment.
---
### Author:  [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)
#### Post date: [August 11, 2025, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/38 "2025-08-11T23:50:03Z")
> [@Atamasama](#):
>
> Clearly, those were also activist judges as well by the logic of @We_re_wolves_not_werewolves
not at all. There was no Constitutional basis for anti-miscegenation laws, and thus they violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.
It differs from Obergefell. Obergefell invoked the 14th amendment for both the Equal Protection clause and the Due Process clause. Once they stated that marriage was a fundamental right and denying it violated due process (the shaky part of the decision), they then stated that denying same-sex couples the right to marry constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection clause (very solid part of the decision once the first aspect was met).
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [August 12, 2025, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/39 "2025-08-12T00:00:04Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#):
>
> Once they stated that marriage was a fundamental right
Under what reasoning, historical and legal, would it not be a fundamental right?
---
### Author:  [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)
#### Post date: [August 12, 2025, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943/40 "2025-08-12T00:11:00Z")
It is nice to know that any rando can petition the Supremes.
However, let’s say they grant her hateful request. What becomes of marriages that were performed lawfully, but are suddenly “not marriages”?
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943.md?page=1)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kim-davis-asks-supreme-court-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ruling-of-2015/1021943.md?page=3)