If we followed the letter of the Bible divorced people couldn't remarry and neither could people of different faiths.

not relevant to her non-existent case.

Eventually, there will be a case that directly addresses same-sex marriage.

The claims that SCOTUS was "considering" it were basically click bait.

As predicted - It was jut one of a long line of "cert denied"s without comment.

Crumbs.

We’re cheering that we’re getting crumbs.

So damn discouraging being in this place

but I'm not sure Pete Buttigieg would agree that his marriage to Chasten is a crumb.

The GOP will find a better case in the future but Obergefell was never in danger on this go around.

I’m sure even Pete and Chasten recognized that

SCOTUS actually did something right.

regarding this case, for now.

But a less odious plaintiff and a more narrowly crafted and better case, and all bets are off.

Last edited Mon Nov 10, 2025, 01:33 PM - Edit history (1)

It’s that they didn’t do something bad.

That’s what we’ve come to expect.

If it was "They're forcing a church to host their wedding" situation, there might be some right to service issue the SCOTUS might hear, but a Government Office providing a general Government service doesn't (yet) have the right to deny that service based on an individual's belief.

Though in questioning I thought he got to the heart of the matter and I'm paraphrasing by asking if Joe can marry Jane why can't he marry Mike.

Sort of like an LLC...so long as the people involved are not in a competing arrangement (already married), competent, not acting fraudulently, not under duress and are consenting adults, there's absolutely no reason why two households

A Religious marriage is just the marriage ceremony. Not necessarily the partnership. People can be married in a Church, but unless the state has a common-law marriage statute in which co-habitation for a long period of time can be considered legal, the official civil document is still the determining factor as to if the marriage is a legal contract in terms of tax or other spousal legal situations and benefits.

A hateful multiple divorced woman who lectures about the sanctity of marriage. No thanks.

She's been irrelevant for some time. This cements that fact.

If anyone knows anything about being judgemental, the Supreme Court should know. LOL

I’m still not really happy, and won’t be at my own party, but after reading this, I’m in a better mood to learn this won’t be heard.

SMDH

He also said if you marry an unbeliever you're unevenly yolked. Her opposition to not marrying gay couples was hypocritical.

Thanks for the post.

I'm not conspiracy theory kind of gal but I believe this lady, Kim Davis, is being paid and/or compesated.

Her handlers certainly aren’t going to pay that for her. They are done with her. She has served her purpose.

...even if simply to avoid discouraging other potential plaintiffs from stepping up to cry fake tears in other cases the theocrats want to pursue.

. . . what's a poor ol' bigot to do? Does everyone understand that she has been married FOUR times --
1. first husband, divorce
2. second husband, divorce
3. first husband again, divorce
4. third husband, still married

Somewhere along the line she had twins and then one or two single births. One of her kids works for her in the County Clerk's office -- remember, this is Appalachia where the rule is "hire your kin."

Obergefell may not be safe because when the Not-So Supreme Court tossed Roe, Justice Thomas said they should take another look at Obergefell (same gender marriage); Loving v. Virginia (interracial marriage); and Griswold v. Conn (legalized contraception).
The biblethumpers will come after Obergefell again. Attacks on Loving and Griswold are not out of the question.

Some of my friends are really happy

I honestly figured it was a done deal.

Okay, apparently the case was really poorly crafted, but so what, really? Does anyone think this Court is going to rule on the merits of a case? Considering some of the rulings that they have handed down, I'm surprised they didn't take advantage of this opportunity to blow Obergefell out of the water and are apparently willing to wait for a better case. I wonder what was in Davis's suit that they couldn't, or wouldn't, swallow.

-- Mal

Please kindly go crawl back under the troll bridge you came from and never come back! And don't let the door hit ya on the way out!

And then they don't pay anything back. These morons would be nothing if they didn't file frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit.

Me and my wife frequently quote "I'm washed clean!" in her accent after taking a shower.

For both my bros and sisters.

And also knowing if Obergefell falls they come for Loving v. Next.

The fascists wont stop.

So I don't anticipate this will be overturned. Republicans would lose a lot of donations.

Except in someone's little pea brain.

Too bad the media adopted her unrealistic framing as to what the case was about.

were smart-enough to realize that overturning Obergefell would find them tarred, feathered, and glittered.

except in the imagination of Davis, and anyone reporting it who didn't bother to check with a lawyer.

But when has that stopped the Republicans on the court from repurposing a case before?

Crazy misreading of the law as applied to facts and legal issues actually cases in front of them - yes. Reaching issues within a case that were not necessary to resolve the case - yes.

But this case was about whether she is free to exercise her religious beliefs when doing so violates a generally applicable law and harms individuals in the process. It had nothing, legally, to do with the constitutionality of same gender marriage - no matter how many times, or in how many courts, she stomped her feet and insisted it did.

This one was weak sauce.

The county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples had filed a long-shot petition to the justices.

Hallelujah!!!

Supreme Court denies review of Kim Davis’ petition that sought to overturn Obergefell www.msnbc.com/deadline-whi...

— Stephen Trumbull (@smtrumbull.bsky.social) 2025-11-10T14:45:07.808Z