Supreme Court considers Kim Davis petition to overturn same-sex marriage ruling

(WASHINGTON) The Supreme Court on Friday will consider whether to take up the appeal of former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who has directly asked the justices to overturn the landmark 2015 decision that extended marriage rights to same-sex couples nationwide.

Davis gained international attention after she refused to issue a marriage license to a gay couple on religious grounds in open defiance of the high court’s ruling and was subsequently jailed for six days. A jury later awarded the couple $100,000 for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys fees.

In a petition for writ of certiorari filed in August, Davis argues First Amendment protection for free exercise of religion immunizes her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses.

She also claims the court’s decision in Obergefell v Hodges — which rooted marriage rights for LGBTQ couples in the 14th Amendment’s due process protections — was “legal fiction.”

“The mistake must be corrected,” wrote Davis’ attorney Mathew Staver in the petition.

“If there ever was a case of exceptional importance,” Staver wrote, “the first individual in the Republic’s history who was jailed for following her religious convictions regarding the historic definition of marriage, this should be it.”

Davis’ petition will be discussed during the court’s weekly private conference when justices cast secret votes on which cases to accept for argument.

Four must agree in order for a case to be heard. The court typically releases outcomes from the conference on the following Monday.

The Davis petition appears to mark the first time since 2015 that the court has been formally asked to overturn the landmark marriage decision. Davis is seen as one of the only Americans currently with legal standing to bring a challenge to the precedent.

An attorney for David Ermold and David Moore, the gay couple to which Davis’ owes damages, told the justices in a court filing that the former clerk does not make a convincing case that warrants being heard.

“Because Davis’s policy went beyond anything she arguably had a right to do, her First Amendment affirmative defense would fail even if such defenses are available to government officials engaged in state action,’ wrote attorney William Powell.

Davis, as the Rowan County Clerk in 2015, was the sole authority tasked with issuing marriage licenses on behalf of the government under state law.

“This is a relatively easy case that does not merit this Court’s review,” he wrote.

Lower courts have dismissed Davis’ claims and most legal experts consider her bid a long shot.

“Not a single judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals showed any interest in Davis’s rehearing petition, and we are confident the Supreme Court will likewise agree that Davis’s arguments do not merit further attention,” said Powell said in a statement to ABC News.

Davis’ appeal to the Supreme Court comes as conservative opponents of marriage rights for same-sex couples pursue a renewed campaign to reverse legal precedent and allow each state to set its own policy.

At the time Obergefell was decided in 2015, 35 states had statutory or constitutional bans on same-sex marriages, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Only eight states had enacted laws explicitly allowing the unions.

So far in 2025, at least nine states have either introduced legislation aimed at blocking new marriage licenses for LGBTQ people or passed resolutions urging the Supreme Court to reverse Obergefell at the earliest opportunity, according to the advocacy group Lambda Legal.

Last month, Texas courts adopted new rules allowing judges statewide to refuse to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples if it would violate a sincerely held religious belief.

“Without this Court’s review, the First Amendment’s protections for public officials with sincerely held religious beliefs will continue to vary by jurisdiction,” Staver wrote to the justices Wednesday in a last-minute letter . “This case provides a suitable vehicle to establish the clear guidance that lower courts and government officials currently lack.”

Davis first appealed the Supreme Court in 2019 seeking to have the damages suit against her tossed out, but her petition was rejected. Conservative Justices Thomas and Samuel Alito concurred with the decision at the time.

If the court were to accept the Davis case, it is far from certain that a majority of justices would undermine or overturn the Obergefell decision.

Several conservatives, including Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, have publicly signaled that same-sex marriage rights should not be rolled back.

If the ruling were to be overturned at some point in the future, it would not invalidate marriages already performed, legal experts have pointed out. The 2022 Respect for Marriage Act requires the federal government and all states to recognize legal marriages of same-sex and interracial couples performed in any state — even if there is a future change in the law.

There are an estimated 823,000 married same-sex couples in the U.S., including 591,000 that wed after the Supreme Court decision in June 2015, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School. Nearly one in five of those married couples is parenting a child under 18.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.