In Kentucky, Clerk Pits Supreme Court Against Supreme Being

What happens if a public official simply refuses for follow a Supreme Court ruling? In Kentucky, we’re about to find out as a clerk, an elected position in the Bluegrass State, says she’s answering to a higher authority – God. Others are noting contempt: “She’s certainly in contempt of court by any definition of the term, so the District Court has an array of sanctions it can resort to, to deal with that,” said Daniel J. Canon, a lawyer for some of the same-sex couples seeking licenses. “It can levy civil or criminal sanctions against her, and we had hoped that it would not come down to that.”
 
It’s all taking place in a college town, Morehead, which is home to Morehead State University.

Housing Rules Yet Another Huge SCOTUS 5-4 Decision

 

Photo from CNN report: Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

Photo from CNN report: Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

Obamacare and same-sex marriage naturally dominated attention over recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, but a huge housing issue also got a 5-4 ruling that leans toward the court’s liberal side. The court, in effect, re-affirmed a federal law passed in 1968 to combat housing discrimination by, as CNN explained, “… holding that the law allows not only claims for intentional discrimination but also, claims that cover practices that have a discriminatory effect, even if they were not motivated by an intent to discriminate.”
 
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the 5-4 opinion for a closely divided Court concerning the scope of the Fair Housing Act. He noted that “… much progress remains to be made in our nation’s continuing struggle against racial isolation.” His opinion was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer.
 
Opponents including the state of Texas argued that the law punished outcomes without any intent of harming anyone, and actually injects more, not less, race into housing development decisions.
 
Read the CNN coverage here.

6th Circuit Allows Gay Marriage Bans

In a divided decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has backed same-sex marriage bans in four states, leading to speculation that the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually tackle the issue. Reports the Vox.com news site: “Beyond stopping same-sex couples from marrying in several states, the decision makes it very likely that the Supreme Court will now step in to decide the issue of same-sex marriage.” 
 
Vox offers some background: “[The] nation’s highest court previously side-stepped the debate, largely because all circuit courts had been in agreement that states’ same-sex marriage bans violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. The decision not to act sparked a wave of court rulings ending same-sex marriage bans in several states, from Idaho to North Carolina.”
 

‘King George’ Could Have Gone Federal? Historic Implications Abound

Most of our discussion over former Chief Justice Ronald George’s recent memoir “Chief” has focused on his relentless quest for power. But S.F. Gate in the Bay Area has an interesting alternative take, pointing out that many of California’s same-sex marriage rulings might have gone another way if “King George” had accepted a federal judgeship that was offered shortly after he’d accepted an appeal court position.
 
That move, of course, set up an appointment to the state high court by Gov. Wilson. But S.F. Gate has this bit of insight: “If Wilson had appointed someone else instead of George in 1991, there’s a fair chance that some of the court’s later 4-3 decisions would have turned out differently — such as the May 2008 ruling, written by the chief justice, that legalized same-sex marriage in California. That ruling stayed in effect for less than six months before the voters outlawed same-sex marriage by passing Proposition 8, which ultimately was overturned by the federal courts. But George’s ruling allowed 18,000 gay and lesbian couples to marry…”
 
There are other milestones, but clearly it’s a take on the Justice George story we’ve not seen. You can see it here.