SCOTUS Won’t Take Up Same-Sex Marriage Case

The Supreme Court declined on Monday to revisit its 2015 decision establishing the right to same-sex marriage, but the group representing the challenger vowed to keep fighting to overturn the landmark ruling.

The challenge to Obergefell v. Hodges came from Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who was ordered to pay more than $300,000 for refusing to sign a marriage license to a gay couple in 2015, citing her religious beliefs.

Davis said her First Amendment rights had been violated and asked to court to reverse both the payment order and the 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

Her legal team said they won’t give up.

“Obergefell was egregiously wrong from the start,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said in a statement. “This opinion has no basis in the Constitution. We will continue to work to overturn Obergefell. It is not a matter of if, but when the Supreme Court will overturn Obergefell.”

The Supreme Court’s decision 10 years ago in Obergefell determined that the fundamental right to marry for same-sex couples is guaranteed by the due process clause of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court released a short and unsigned order rejecting the petition, and did not provide any further explanation why they declined to hear the case. No justices publicly disagreed with the order. At least four of the judges would need to agree to revisit the case, with legal experts doubtful this would happen.

The Sixth Circuit previously rejected Davis’ arguments in March, pointing to a recent Supreme Court decision saying public officials can’t claim First Amendment immunity for actions taken in their official roles.

Still, LGBTQ+ advocates were concerned the court would be willing to revisit the case, particularly as the court has become more conservative since 2015, and showed a willingness to break precedent when it overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. In that ruling, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the justices should reconsider the court’s previous rulings regarding access to contraception and same-sex marriage.