Time to Stand with Kim Davis (Liberty Counsel Update)

 

Arthur,

In a December 2015 interview, David Ermold and David Moore told GQ Magazine they had never even discussed getting married until they saw a social media post announcing a protest at Kim Davis' Rowan County, KY, clerk’s office. The two Davids grabbed their cell phones and raced to the protest hoping to shame Kim on camera.    The men got what they wanted, which had less to do with a marriage license and more to do with a brief shot at internet “fame.” Had the two Davids actually wanted to get “married,” they could have done so that very day at one of the seven County Clerk offices within a short drive of Kim’s office. But rather than get a license, the two men chose to repeatedly harass and ridicule Kim Davis with their “viral” social media posts.     But what they meant for evil, God can turn around for good (Gen. 50:20). Kim’s case could be the one to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges and end this nonsense.    Defend Religious Freedom. Defend Kim Davis. As Kim waited for the KY governor to issue a determination on her pending request for religious accommodation, the two Davids would travel to Kim’s office a total of five separate times, recording video as they tried to publicly shame and humiliate Kim over her faith.  In court, David Ermold demanded 100,000 dollars in damages. Ermold claimed that Kim had cost him his job at the University of Pikeville. The Human Resources director for the university testified that David’s position was downsized for budget reasons along with others and that it was completely unrelated to Kim. Ermold’s lie was revealed, and he was forced to drop that claim. No longer able to claim that Kim cost Ermold his job, the two Davids then tried to claim that Kim should pay for their “hurt feelings” — an ironic claim, considering that these men admitted in interviews that their intention was to publicly shame Kim and hurt her feelings. Binding legal cases state that a plaintiff’s mere statements of hurt feelings without any other evidence of damages cannot suffice to merit an award of damages. WITHOUT MEDICAL OR OTHER EVIDENCE, “HURT FEELINGS” IS NOT A JURY QUESTION. THE CASE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISMISSED.  When asked on the stand how they arrived at 50,000 dollars for each plaintiff, David Moore said, “I don’t know how to come to that amount.”    Fund the fight for religious freedom! All of these things resulted in the jury improperly awarding the two Davids 100,000 dollars in damages, and 260,000 in fees and costs, for a breathtaking total of 360,000. And this is against Kim Davis personally. Kim Davis is a soft-spoken retired public servant of humble means. If the two Davids prevail, she and her rural Kentucky family will be bankrupted — all because Kim refused to give up her religious freedom RIGHTS. This set us up for a much larger potential case. Two weeks ago, I presented oral arguments on this case to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. If we win, we expect Ermold to appeal. And if Ermold wins, we will certainly appeal. Meaning, whichever way the Sixth Circuit decides, this case WILL go to the U.S. Supreme Court. The finding of liability and the Ermold damages jury verdict are unsound and set up this case on an eventual route to the U.S. Supreme Court, where religious freedom will be central to the argument along with the issue that the 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges was wrongly decided and should be overturned. Liberty Counsel argued that Davis is not liable for any damages because she was entitled to a religious accommodation from issuing marriage licenses under her name and authority. When the then-governor, Republican Matt Bevin, took office in December 2015, he granted religious accommodation to all clerks by executive order. Then in April 2016, the KY legislature unanimously granted religious and conscience accommodation to ALL clerks from issuing marriage licenses that conflict with their religious beliefs.

Even assuming Obergefell was not a flawed decision, which it was, the High Court’s opinion did not mean that same-sex couples have a right to receive a “marriage license” from a specific individual, and it did not direct that every government official in America had a duty to put their stamp of approval on that “marriage license.” Like Davis, ALL public officials are entitled to religious accommodation to protect their religious freedom rights. Justice Alito warned in Missouri Department of Corrections v. Finney, where jurors were dismissed because of their religious beliefs: [This] holding exemplifies the danger that I anticipated in Obergefell v. Hodges, namely, that Americans who do not hide their adherence to traditional religious beliefs about homosexual conduct will be “labeled as bigots and treated as such” by the government. No matter what happens at the Sixth Circuit, we look forward to taking Kim’s case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where we intend to accomplish two monumental tasks: Establishing that people cannot be sued for using their religious freedom rights.  Overturning the wrongfully decided Obergefell decision. We need YOUR help to continue fighting for religious freedom — not just for Kim, but also for the hundreds of other plaintiffs we represent. Our non-donor income covers all administrative and fundraising expenses. Most of the non-donor income derives from attorney’s fees and costs that are recoverable from a government defendant. This means 100% of every dollar goes directly to Liberty Counsel programs. And Liberty Counsel operates on a debt-free basis. Your recurring monthly gift would be greatly appreciated. Every donation made today will be DOUBLED IN IMPACT by a generous Challenge Grant.

Mat Staver Founder and Chairman Liberty Counsel

P.S. We need your help to defend religious liberty. Support our legal fund today and have YOUR IMPACT DOUBLED by a generous Challenge Grant.