Supreme Court declines to revisit landmark same-sex marriage precedent

[Jawline4dayz 594]

 The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a call to overturn its landmark decision that legalized same-sex marriagenationwide.

The justices, without comment, turned away an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky court clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the high court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. 

Davis had been trying to get the court to overturn a lower-court order for her to pay $360,000 in damages and attorney’s fees to a couple denied a marriage license.

Her lawyers repeatedly invoked the words of Justice Clarence Thomas, who alone among the nine justices has called for erasing the same-sex marriage ruling.

Thomas was among four dissenting justices in 2015. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito are the other dissenters who are on the court today.

Roberts has been silent on the subject since he wrote a dissenting opinion in the case. Alito has continued to criticize the decision, but he said recently he was not advocating that it be overturned.

BY  MARK SHERMAN - AP NEWS

 

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-50eb4ad421911696e742d8c4fb4962fd

[Jawline4dayz 594]

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

Kim Davis wasted a decade of her life on this  

[Juanjo 2,284]

Thank God! 

[River 127,410]

we have nothing to complain about today

we have nobody to cancel today

 

[PartySick 172,527]

2 minutes ago, River said:

we have nothing to complain about today

we have nobody to cancel today

 

We have plenty to complain about, just less than we thought

[Controversiaga 16,024]

I’m honestly shocked…

With the direction things have been headed- I was not at all expecting this.

 

this is amazing news. Almost feels too good to be true

[FATCAT 60,888]

6 minutes ago, Controversiaga said:

I’m honestly shocked…

With the direction things have been headed- I was not at all expecting this.

 

this is amazing news. Almost feels too good to be true

yea I'm shocked as well, I thought for sure that they'd take this opportunity to give marriage "back to the states"

[timdrake 1,920]

Honestly not surprised, there really isn't an overwhelming political desire to overturn same-sex marriage. "Prominent" calls for it in 2025 are usually just from long-shot fringe groups, or low-level conservative politician wackos trying to make a name for themselves. I mean, there are even married gay republicans in the current administration who would be affected if a change were to take place. This issue isn't contested like it was a decade ago.

REGARDLESS, I am very glad to see they're not touching it. May Kim Davis choke on her own hair.

Edited November 10, 2025 by timdrake

[weed 78,931]

God bless America 

[Pablo 8,582]

Thank you, I would have my devastated for my friends in my state because no way would my red state vote to have gay marriage. 

[Meruk Holland 2,358]

I was surprised by this announcement like many of you, and looking into it and talking to more legal-minded people, I think I understand SCOTUS' thinking here. So, Davis' case is basically "a bad angle" to attack marriage equality, because Davis is relying on the 1st amendment. And it's really hard to prove that someone else's marriage is infringing on your right to practice your religion. Instead, the Supreme Court is more likely to hear a case wherein same-sex marriage's protection from the 14th amendment are put into question. 

Kim Davis? BTFO

Marriage Equality? Safe...for now.

[IllusionLover 7,566]

Oh, thank Godga 

[REALITY 80,162]

I mean, this is objectively good, but we are at a point in this country where deciding not to overturn a decision made by the Supreme Court themselves is seen as a “win”  Like, this should’ve have even been a question, but here we are…

[River 127,410]

1 hour ago, PartySick said:

We have plenty to complain about, just less than we thought

not fair