By Darren Smith Weekend Contributor
After the Rowan County Kentucky Clerk, Democrat Kim Davis, defied a court order to issue gay couples marriage licenses, and was subsequently arrested by the U.S. Marshal’s Service and jailed, her husband stated that she chose to remain in jail rather than compromise her religious beliefs by performing her statutory duty. Her contempt of court ruling will stand until she resumes issuing such licenses and thus in jail she shall remain.
And so it should.
The issue is not the content of her religious beliefs that are on trial. It is that of failure to perform her duty and denial of a civil right as mandated by the Supreme Court. For this reason she has two choices: being in contempt indefinitely; or resigning her position. For the near term it is as simple as that. If she continues her defiance, a third party must step up, show some leadership, and make the decision for her by ejecting her from office.
When a politician takes an oath of office upon their swearing in they affirm to uphold the constitutions of their respective states and that of the United States, and that they will discharge also their statutory and common law duties mandated by the legislature and the state’s courts. This is not an optional recommendation, it is conditional of receiving the position and taking salary and benefits. In this case Ms. Davis knew, as a second generation politician to her mother’s thirty seven year tenure as the former county clerk, what these duties encompass. The excuses she made to justify her failure to perform on her duty are 100% irrelevant whatever they might be, religious, personal or otherwise. Her authority does not include usurping the legislature and the courts to suit her own goals.
Ms. Davis, through her attorney, claimed that a compromise can be made by the removal of her name from the certificates of marriage granted to those couples she objects to. This also is completely unacceptable. The duality of this settlement offer is that she previously stated the certificates issued by her deputy clerks, in her absence, were void.
The authorization official charged with issuing marriage licenses is that of the County Clerk, and from working convention is usually performed by a deputy delegated and commissioned through this authority. If Ms. Davis chooses to remove her name from the form, the marriage license could be contested as being invalid since it was not assented to by the county clerk. For this reason she implored the governor to call the legislature into a special session to amend the statutory language to facilitate the compromise that would be agreeable to this one individual politician–at a cost of course of hundreds of thousands of dollars. The hubris and arrogance she exudes on that demand alone certainly should be enough cause for the legislature to impeach her or the voters to generate a recall. If this becomes necessary to remove her from office a failure to act upon this by either entity and allow this usurper to remain in office would be a true embarrassment to themselves in the eyes of a great many.
Anecdotally, all of us who have worked in an official capacity know that sometimes you cannot do what you like. We cannot legally make arbitrary actions that are outside the law. To do so leads straight to corruption and an erosion of the system and the liquidity of society. The result is almost always a patchwork of patronage and differing rules and the abandonment of trust in the public that ultimately grants the government its legitimacy. The controversy is this, we stop malfeasances of office now before they lead to worse.
Not only that but in addition to moneys wasted in salary payable to an incarcerated elected official–who is unable to perform her job–it is all but certain expensive lawsuits alleging violations of civil rights will result. It is an outcome frankly the county government deserves.
Ms. Davis clearly wants to have her cake and eat it too. She reportedly takes an $80,000.00 salary along with benefits. In addition, she has family members within the employ of her office. This is why I personally find political dynasties to be in direct conflict with democracy, because it almost always leads to nepotism at least and despotism at worse. The Rowan County Clerk’s Office seems a great family business for the Davis family because that is how she seems to choose to operate it. But as the Rolling Stones famously sang…
It is time that Kim Davis “gets what she needs”…termination of her employment.
By Darren Smith
Source:
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Bob,
Do you support Sharia Laws, too?
Bob Stone – how would the Civil Rights Act accommodate a government official who could not in good conscience follow the law they were sworn to uphold? Are you saying that doing so would discriminate against her on the basis of her religion? And if, they should amend the law so that someone else can act as Deputy County Clerk so she could recuse herself in such instances?
That’s an interesting proposition. Would that solve the problem if the end result is the law would be upheld?
Karen – I would say that Snowden would get a reasonable accommodation, that was before he started stealing info and giving it away. Soldiers get a reasonable accommodation if they can prove it.
Bob
I’m sorry, whose religion get’s this ‘reasonable exemption’ ?
“An exemption to doing one’s job?”
*”a city council in Denver that advocates shutting down a business such as Chick-fil-A because the CEO once took a public position against gay marriage.
*entire cities across this country ignoring immigration laws; simply because they don’t like them and wish to create sanctuaries from law.
*And when Californians approved Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, there were no calls to jail those officials who refused to enforce the law.
In fact, not one elected official was hauled off to jail for any of those stands. And yet, those officials were subject to the same exact obligation as Kim Davis.
Liberals should be ashamed of themselves; if such were possible.
Bob Stone,
An exemption to doing one’s job?
Reasonableness, indeed!
bettykath:
That’s very interesting about marriage records being held in New England’s vital records.
I know that historically, churches kept records on marriages. I do not know at what point churches turned their records over to the state to archive them. Under English law, and probably subsequently United States Law, an officer of the army or navy could perform a marriage. It was not a secular ceremony, as the officer would read from the Anglican Bible, and was considered acting on behalf of the Church in that regard. I believe this custom was to prevent unplanned pregnancies if a soldier or sailor wanted to wed and there was not payor in sight for the next 6 months. In Scottish custom, the couple could have a temporary marriage for a year called a “hand fast” which would then be formalized in church if the pair were still of accord. Is a military officer performing a marriage the same as State Marriage? I am actually unsure of the definition of the latter.
If I understand correctly, the right to sue a philandering spouse would have stemmed from civil laws as well as criminal for adultery. Laws were indeed enacted for hundreds of years to protect marital rights, as wars have been fought over inheritance and legal issue.
Anarchy… “My religion said I don’t have to follow your laws”
When is Mike Huckabee gonna throw ME a party?
Ann,
I’ve already addressed the mandamus issue.
The point is there’s nothing unreasonable in allowing the official to recuse him/herself and having his/her name removed from the process.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/11/n-c-legislature-overrides-veto-allows-government-employees-to-not-do-gay-marriages/
Annie
Nothing screams reasonable, like a fill in the blank on marriage certificates. See above example from Kim Davis’ office. RECORDER’S NAME (fill in blank). CLERK (fill in blank).
When did Kim Davis first ask for an accommodation?
“Reasonable”. How reasonable is it to deny marriage licenses based on ones personal belief system when a public servant? Accommodations are refused legally all the time because they are unreasonable.
Karen: “Again, the same rules should apply. If a government official discovers that they cannot in good conscience uphold the law, then they need to resign.”
Unless they’re entitled to a reasonable accommodation under applicable federal law; e.g. Title VII.
Bob Stone,
Where is her name on the 9/4/15 marriage certificate I posted above FROM her office?
Why replace anything when nothing is there to replace? (recorder’s name) (title) fill in the blank.
There have been very good points made about the range of consequences for officials who refuse to enforce the laws they swore to uphold. (Obama, Lois Lerner, Hillary Clinton, Holder, etc.) I clearly recall wondering why AZ was dragged through court because they wanted to follow federal law by turning over illegal immigrants to ICE, which Obama proclaimed they could not. San Francisco also refuses to follow federal law in a form of civil disobedience.
Again, the same rules should apply. If a government official discovers that they cannot in good conscience uphold the law, then they need to resign.
Karen – not only was AZ fined for turning over immigrants to the feds, they have be found ‘racist’ and now have federal monitors.
Max,
Tell us why replacing the name “Kim Davis” with “Office of The County Clerk” is such an unreasonable accommodation under Title VII.
Bob,
Yep a reading issue… delegated became deregulated… Who served the decaf?
And, yes, I agree that it is true that she is engaging in civil disobedience. Which does have a consequence. If you do a lie in at the Pentagon, you get arrested. If you refuse to do your job as the county clerk, there will be consequences.
Bob Stone,
Her name isn’t on the copy I posted above…
Max,
What’s this “deregulated” tripe? Why are you attributing words to me that I have not uttered?
Karen S.
She’s elected. Ergo, until she’s impeached by the Senate, she’s remanded to the county jail, OR until she decides to actually do her job…
Max-1 – the County Clerk usually is responsible for all records and the recording of all records in their office. If you want to file a suit against someone, you file it with the County Clerk’s office. So the Kim Davis is probably doing 99% of her job, more than most of us do. Certainly more than the judge who held her in contempt.