The court turned away an appeal filed by Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who was sued after refusing to issue a marriage license to a gay couple.
Davis then appealed, claiming that she should have been able to cite as a defense her right to the free exercise of religion under the Constitution’s First Amendment.
If practicing your faith requires you to illegally block someone else practicing their faith then no, you don’t get to use that as a defense. Your First Amendment rights do not supercede other peoples First Amendment rights.
This is probably why the court declined to hear it. Her claim is so absurd that it doesn’t mean the minimum requirement for them to overturn Obergefell. They are probably waiting on another case to come along with a more reasoned argument.
If practicing your faith requires you to illegally block someone else practicing their faith then no, you don’t get to use that as a defense. Your First Amendment rights do not supercede other peoples First Amendment rights.
This is probably why the court declined to hear it. Her claim is so absurd that it doesn’t mean the minimum requirement for them to overturn Obergefell. They are probably waiting on another case to come along with a more reasoned argument.
You nailed it with that last sentence. Based on their recent (emergency and normal) rulings, that’s the plan.