ACLU Sues Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis to Recover $233K in Costs From ‘Gay Marriage’ License Legal Battle

Davis-compressedFRANKFORT, K.Y. — The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit against Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis in an effort to recover costs from its recent legal battle over Davis’ refusal to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals as long as her name was on the document.

The ACLU is asking U.S. District Judge David Bunning to order Davis to pay up $233,058 in legal fees and other expenses, but Davis’ attorneys state that the organization isn’t entitled to the payment since Davis prevailed in the matter in the long run.

“Courts recognize that when successful civil rights plaintiffs obtain a direct benefit from a court-ordered victory, such as in this case, they can be entitled to their legal expenses to deter future civil rights violations by government officials,” William Sharp, legal director of the Kentucky ACLU, told reporters.

“The ACLU is not entitled to attorney’s fees according to the prevailing standard in the Sixth Circuit,” also remarked Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, in a statement. “Kim Davis won the case and the case is closed. County clerks are now able to perform their public service without being forced to compromise their religious liberty.”

As previously reported, Bunning dismissed the outstanding legal challenges against Davis this past August after the state legislature passed a law that removed the names of county clerks from all marriage licenses, thus assuaging Davis’ concerns.

“In light of these proceedings, and in view of the fact that the marriage licenses continue to be issued without incident, there no longer remains a case or controversy before the court,” he wrote.

Davis had been in national headlines last year after she declined to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses as long as her name was on the documents. Davis, who attends a Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal assembly, said that she would do so if her name was removed.

  • Connect with Christian News

Her refusal soon led to three lawsuits—Miller v. Davis, Ermold v. Davis and Yates v. Davis—filed by homosexuals who sought to force Davis to issue the licenses.

The ACLU led the legal push, and in September 2015, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered that Davis issue the licenses despite her religious identity. As she continued to refuse to issue the licenses without the accommodation, Bunning ordered that Davis be placed behind bars until she was willing to comply. In the meantime, the judge arranged for a deputy clerk to sign the licenses in her absence.

Davis was released from the Carter County Jail five days later after her attorneys filed an appeal of the contempt order, and also because Bunning was satisfied that her deputy clerks were providing the licenses instead. He stipulated her release on the condition that she not interfere with her deputies.

By the end of the year, new Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin issued an executive order for the Department for Libraries and Archives to release new licenses that do not cite the county or the name of the county clerk. Months later, the state legislature passed a law altering the licenses similar to Bevin’s order.

Because the matter was therefore settled in the legislature and not in the courts, Liberty Counsel believes that the ACLU is not entitled to any fees. See its rebuttal here.

“The door has been shut on the ACLU’s attempt to assess damages against Kim Davis,” Staver said. “Kim is a fiscally responsible elected official who is fulfilling her duty to protect public funds in this case.”

The Lexington Herald Leader also reports that Jeffrey Mando, an attorney for Rowan County, doesn’t believe the money should come from the county coffers as Davis’ actions were independent of the government.

“County clerks are not employees of the county, but instead are the holders of elective office pursuant to the Kentucky Constitution,” he wrote in a legal brief.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • johndoe

    If Stsver was ever correct in his thinking, I would be concerned

    • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

      Are you guys all in one room? Or can none of you spell?

      • johndoe

        Your brilliance is that of a 2 watt light bulb

  • Musky

    They sure to love to beat up on Christian women.

    I can remember a time when men who beat up on women were considered scum.

    • johndoe

      Nobody beat up on her. She denied other human beings a marriage license. She is public servant who is expected to do their job without prejudice.

      • Jargonaut

        As always, you liars try to disguise your hatred for Christians by pretending you care about the law.

        We’re not that stupid. If we were as dumb as you atheists think we are, we couldn’t make it through the day.

        You care nothing about the law. You just enjoy hating.

        Be honest.

        • johndoe

          I have no hate for this woman. I do, however, have issue with her refusing to do her duty as a public servant, paid with taxpayers dollars. You have no idea about me or what I think, or are you a prophet?

          • Scott Davenport

            no one should be forced to be a part of perverts perverted pervations…they should seek the help they need or else have extremely late term abortions……

          • james blue

            She is a public servant. Part of her job is to issue marriage licenses to all who meet the legal requirements whether she approves or not.

          • johndoe

            Is that your version of christian love

          • BIGOTIST

            Ah, are you queer?

          • johndoe

            No, I’m not gay. Is that helpful to you?

          • BIGOTIST

            Yep!

        • Ambulance Chaser

          What law do we “not care” about? Multiple courts have ruled against her. The only one flouting the law in this scenario is Kim Davis.

          • peanut butter

            Amendment One.

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Oh really? So why has every court that heard this matter ruled in our favor?

          • BIGOTIST

            Your favor? You must be a stem puffer, cupcake~

        • Croquet_Player

          Persecution complex much? Public servants are expected to do their jobs, not just part of the job. Frankly it makes no difference what her reasons were for refusing, whether they were personal religious convictions, or if she just didn’t feel like showing up to work on Mondays. The honorable thing for her do do would have been to simply resign. But no, she wants to still get a paycheck from the taxpayers, and only do part of the job. Under what other circumstances would we permit that? None.

          • peanut butter

            One word: Odumbo.

          • Croquet_Player

            That’s not a word, but nice try.

          • peanut butter

            It’s a synonym.

          • Jargonaut

            You don’t respect someone with morals because you have none yourself.

            Explaining “conscience” to atheists is like trying to explain Mozart to someone who was born deaf. You just can’t fathom it.

          • Croquet_Player

            Yes, I’ve heard this before. Atheists have no morals. Well, you may believe what you like, but I am a law abiding-citizen with a strong sense of civic duty. I love my family, my friends, and my neighbors. I do volunteer work, contribute to charity, and work to make the world a better place. My one run-in with the law was getting a speeding ticket when I was driving home from college thirty years ago. I paid it. I have a strong sense of moral conviction. So If you want to believe the tiresome myth that “atheists” have no morals, which is a nasty but easy way to dismiss anyone who doesn’t share your particular religious beliefs, you go right ahead. I happen to know it isn’t true.

          • Jargonaut

            This is the internet.
            You can lie all you want to, and no one will know any better.

            Considering the millions of people killed by atheists, I tend to believe that people who have no scruples about murdering their fellow human beings will also have no scruples about lying.

        • Palsgraf’s Scale

          Actually, the law is the majority of what I care about.

          As a matter of law, the ACLU can likely make her pay for the attorney fees. There is nothing about hate there. Its just good business to make sure the other side bears the cost. Hate doesn’t play into it.

          • Jargonaut

            Nope, you are hater.

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            So people following regular legal conventions are haters, then?

    • Liberal Elitist

      Jesus wants us to be nice to each other. Ms. Davis wasn’t being nice.

      • Amos Moses

        yeah …. the “couples” wanted to jump off a cliff and she wanted to stop them from doing so …… what evil ……….. how dare she ….

        • Liberal Elitist

          She’s a county clerk, not a marriage counselor or a high priestess.

          • Amos Moses

            and if they want to jump off a cliff ….. they can do it without her assistance ……….

          • Ambulance Chaser

            No, they can’t. That’s actually the whole point.

          • Amos Moses

            there is no requirement for a license …………..

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Uh, yeah, there is. Otherwise you’re NOT MARRIED. It’s a pretty simple concept.

          • Amos Moses

            uh, nope …… only if you want the state to part of your marriage ……….. and you can be married without it ……. but of course homomarriage is not a real marriage …… so i guess you might be right ……. if you have to alter the language to fit your paradigm …….. no …. thats not the right word …. lie …. yeah …. thats the right word ………

          • Ambulance Chaser

            Yes, that’s what the whole issue is. Legal, state marriage. The gay couples wanted a state license for their marriages and Kim Davis wasn’t letting them have one. That’s the WHOLE POINT.

          • Amos Moses

            Nope …. it is about a state sanctioned lie ……………

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            Marriage is as much a function of the state as a function of religion in this day. She refused to do her job, which was to sign off on a legal document which granted legal rights to a couple. There was no cliff to jump off.

            By your own god’s word, these couples were already going to hell. What cliff was she preventing them from leaping off of?

          • Amos Moses

            first …. you do not end a sentence with a preposition ……….. second ….. if they want to jump …. then let them do it on their own …… why do they need anyones signature to do it ….. stupid is as stupid does …………

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            If you’re going to critique my grammar, you would do well to pay attention to your own.

            You are misusing ellipses. An ellipsis is a series of three full stops, never more. They are not lead by spaces, nor are they followed by spaces. They are to be used sparingly, not in place of other punctuation.

            Additionally, you have failed, entirely, to use commas or capitalization. What you meant to write should have looked like this.

            [F]irst[,] you do not end a sentence with a preposition[.] [S]econd[,] if they want to jump[,] then let them do it on their own[.] [W]hy do they need anyone[‘]s signature to do it[?] [S]tupid is as
            stupid does[.]

            They do need a signature to get the legal benefits that marriage brings married couples. That signature is absolutely necessary to that end. They would go to hell, according to your god, whether or not they got that signature for being gay. So, I ask you why it matters whether or not Kim Davis stopped them? They would go to hell either way. So, what reason is there to refuse them their marriage license?

        • BIGOTIST

          No, they wanted to stick their dick up someones
          butt and then suck on it!!!! Whoa, way disgusting~

        • Palsgraf’s Scale

          A cliff they have the legal right to leap from. Who are you to deprive them of their choice?

    • Robert

      She is i think is oneness pentecostal they do not believe in the Trinity. They want to say there christian just like some homosexuals want to think they can be really Married. So in her own way she is just as confused as homosexuals are.if she is oneness pentecostal..

    • SFBruce

      The facts are not on your side here. Ms. Davis’ difficulties have nothing to do with her gender or her faith. And contrary to your suggestion, she wasn’t attacked physically. The six plaintiffs, which included women, and who rightly felt her decision not to do here job was harmful to themselves did the responsible thing: they took her to court, where they prevailed. They shouldn’t have to bear the cost of Ms. Davis’ bad decision.

  • james blue

    If Ms. Davis was a self employed person in the private sector I would support her to the end, but she is not. She is a public servant and has to treat everyone without personal prejudice.

    • bowie1

      It seems to happen in the private sector too…you know the one about a wedding cake?

      • james blue

        And as the first part of my comment states I would support her all the way if she was self employed.

        A self employed person should be able to do or refuse to do business with whomever they wish for whatever reason they wish. A self employed Christian photographer should be able to refuse to do gay weddings and a non Christian should be able to refuse goods, services, employment etc to Christians.

        On the other hand if A christian photographer is employed by a company that does cater gay weddings, he should do the gig or seek employment elsewhere. Employers should not be forced by law to make accommodations for our faith. It’s nice when employers do make accommodations, but they should be forced to by law.

        It is up to us to make the sacrifices in life in order to live by our faith, not have others make accommodations for us. If this means certain jobs are not suited to us, so be it.

    • Scott Davenport

      Being against mental illness being paraded as jolliness is not a prejudice…it’s common sense to anyone except an idiot or someone that wants to use a bunch of useful idiots….

      • james blue

        She can be against anything she wishes, but government issued documents are not subject to the personal views of government employees.

      • johndoe

        Opinions vary. Homosecuality is no more a mental illness than christianity

        • samuel nelson

          Take your meds.

          • johndoe

            Already have sweetie

          • Patriot

            Sickening perv.

          • johndoe

            Awww….your christian love is showing!

  • http://www.gmail.com/ David van Heerden

    Losers want their money back. Try that at the casino ya nutters.

    • johndoe

      Too funny!

  • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

    Trump will put an end to their madness and short-lived victories. 😀 yay!

    • johndoe

      Yall have put this guy on a pedestal haven’t you?

      • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

        Nice try.

    • Michael C

      What exactly do you think President Trump would change about this specific situation?

      What exactly do you think is possible for a president to do to change this specific situation?

      • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

        Repeal any “law” enacted by judges.
        Protect Christians from and throw out frivolous lawsuits so they may practice their religion freely.
        Stop the LGBTQ gaystopo and other harassing, bullying movements created within the past decade in their tracks.
        Make the gays or any other money hungry citizens pay for their own legal costs for bringing such asinine, self serving lawsuits to the courts.
        This would be a great start.

        • Michael C

          What “law” has been enacted by judges? Judges don’t have the power to enact laws. Only the legislative branch has that ability. No law has been created by the judicial branch of our government.

          The President does not have the power to “throw out frivolous lawsuits.”

          In this situation, it was Kim Davis who bullied the gay couples who were simply trying to obtain what it is her job to provide. The President cannot stop law abiding citizens from going about their law abiding lives.

          In our court system, the person in the wrong is responsible for the reasonable legal fees of the person in the right. Do you disagree with this system? Do you think that President Trump should change this aspect of American law?

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            Oh Michael, we have never agreed in the past and I do not ever see that changing. I have very clearly stated to you before, the common sense of this situation that you and others do not seem to grasp. You just don’t get it. It’s all the same rhetoric. Why do you and others like you bother with the same old argument with the same people who oppose you? Neither one of us is going to change our stance. Try someone new that isn’t privy to your disdain for living one’s faith freely. I almost didn’t answer your original comment, but oopsy…. I won’t make that mistake again. Ciao.

          • Michael C

            I’m not talking about opinions. I’m asking for facts. What do you honestly think a President could do about this situation. So far, you haven’t provided a single idea of what a President might do change this specific situation. Donald Trump isn’t going to change this because he doesn’t have the power.

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            I hit post too soon. In reaction to your quote by Trump himself… well, I suppose I can’t and won’t debate about it.. maybe even snack on a little crow. 😛 However, he is being exposed to Christianity and what it stands for, so I am hopeful that he can do something that makes it fair to all involved. She should not have had to go through this because suddenly a “law” was passed that didn’t take into consideration all people affected by it..

          • Michael C

            She should not have had to go through this because suddenly a “law” was passed…

            No new law was created by the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision.

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            Oh good grief! Move on Michael.

          • Michael C

            “I will say that this was not the right job for her. …because we had a ruling from the Supreme Court and we are a country of laws and you have to do what the Supreme Court ultimately, whether you like the decision or not, and it was a 5-4 decision, whether you like the decision or not, you have to go along with the Supreme Court. That’s the way it is.”

            -Donald Trump, Sept. 9, 2015

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            A ruling from the Supreme Court. A ruling people are calling law.

          • johndoe

            A ruling that struck down an unconstitutional law….hmmmm

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            Sigh… you’re such a bore no matter how many times you change your name.

          • johndoe

            As are you sweetie!

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            Oh looky, you got a vote up. Awwww. 😀 ♥

          • johndoe

            The truth will set you free.

          • james blue

            President Obama signed the ACA into law, It became a law at that moment. It went through congress and the president signed it.

            Had the SCOTUS overturned it would that be legislating from the bench?

          • Palsgraf’s Scale

            We have a common law system. Judges interpret the law in situations where the letter of the law is ambiguous. In that way, judges really do make the law. That would be how we have legal protections for speech on the internet without the need for a statute that states it. Its how we find the difference, legally, between a motorized wheelchair and a motorized scooter when the statute only reads “No Vehicles”.

            The kind of system you’re describing is the European system of civil law. If you want a system where judges never make law, you need to move to Europe.

          • Miss Deplorable Chrissy Vee

            Thank you for clearing that up for me. No, I do not want to move, but thanks for the tip.

        • johndoe

          Sure he will…..sure he will

        • james blue

          What about Christians who sue because they are told not to wear crosses over their uniform?

        • Ambulance Chaser

          You seem to think presidents have limitless power. In reality, they can’t do any of the things you just said.

          You’re describing a despot.

          • peanut butter

            Once again… Odumbledorf.

      • peanut butter

        Pen and phone, just like Odumbo. Trump has PLENTY of those.

  • SFBruce

    The six plaintiffs who had to sue Kim Davis for failing to perform her job are among the taxpayers who pay her salary. They shouldn’t have to pay $338,058 simply to obtain marriage licenses, something straight couples do every day.

  • Croquet_Player

    She should have done her job or resigned. She’s still getting a paycheck from the public, and not doing her job. Shame on her.

  • peanut butter

    I thought that since the shoe was on the other foot, Kim Davis would be suing for being put through such an ordeal, just for standing on her first amendment right to worship freely. I’m in hopes that ALL who had to pay in these instances will be repaid with a double amount of cash.

  • Robert

    I think the lady is oneness pentecostal.. Christians are not onesness. pentecostal Christians believe in the Trinity .yEt she is right ABOUT Marrage . It only can be 2 people of opposite sex . Any thing else is just fake..

    • samuel nelson

      like you.

  • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

    I disagree with the Liberty council. The civil rights violation and the case began BEFORE the legislature changed the law. The amended law should not be retroactive after expenses have been incurred. Clearly she broke the law and was legally challenged.

    • HopScot

      Your blockbuster, mega-best-selling novel is ranked at
      2,551,037 on Amazon.
      How many homes have you purchased with the fortune you made as a writer?

      • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

        So, that’s the extent of your intellectual capacity? You must have been among the woefully hypocritical Christian Trump voters.

        Rather than address the argument, you look for a way to personally attack someone making a civil argument. A really good example of Christianity, you are.

        • HopScot

          I did not attack anyone.
          I posted verifiable information about your book.
          Last time I checked, telling the truth is a Christian virtue.

          Since you have no ethics and post on Christian blogs in order to promote your book, you should have no complaint with someone posting information about the product.

          You seem to give the distinct impression that you are ashamed of writing a flop. You should be.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            I did not attack anyone.

            Exactly what has the sales of my book have to do with my statement to which you responded? It is an obvious attempt to condescend with a fallacious argument (attack the person, not what he said). And, according to you, demeaning a person is a Christian value.

            However, I have hidden nothing and I am not concerned at all about my book. Any number of reasons can contribute to low sales numbers.

            Secondly, you are suggesting that low sales of my book means that whatever I have to say is irrelevant. This, too, is a fallacious argument.

            The reason folks like you attack the person is because they have no intellectual argument against what was said. This is a sign of insecurity. They haven’t the knowledge and critical thinking skills to argue the point and they know it.

            You haven’t even read the preface which is available online. I know that I needn’t offer the URL because it is likely you would rather remain ignorant and just make personal attacks, likely to make yourself feel better about your ignorance. Most folks need someone to look down upon, especially Christians like you.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        What’s your novel ranked at?

        • HopScot

          I am not an atheist promoting my novel on a Christian blog,
          and that is what he is. Anyone with any ethics would find that distasteful.

          Since he’s promoting his atheist novel on a Christian blog,
          I’m just supplying the potential buyers
          of just how popular his product is.

          Do you have some objection to giving consumers information about products? There’s something called Consumer Reports, which is very highly regarded.

          • http://maxfurr.com HobbesianWorld

            And exactly where in my original statement to which you responded did I say anything about my novel? You are the one who brought it up. Not likely most folks on this blog would even bother to look at my profile.

            My statement concerned civil law, but since you could not address my statement, you had to try to find some other reason to attack me.

            The reason I am an atheist is the very reason I wrote my novel, and I laid that out in the preface.

            I was once very much in your camp, (i.e., a de facto Christian fundamentalist). But because of three significant events in my early life, I began a journey of objectivity, placing what I was taught to believe in abeyance, enrolling in college and studying world religions, philosophy (including Aquinas, Augustine and other religious thinkers), and paleoanthropology.

            I came to understand that all people are the same, and were taught to believe the religion/mores of their society. Had you, my friend, happened to have been born to a Muslim family, you would have been taught to believe in Islam and likely you would have believed it just as fervently as you now believe Christianity. It is no fault of theirs and no fault of yours.

            The bottom line is that I now live my life by one tenet: Do unto others as I would have them do unto me. That tenet is virtually universal in its scope and appeal, yet most folks do not abide by it because it contradicts other, more emotionally stirring, exclusive tenets in their religion (what they were most often taught from tot-hood to believe).

            The exclusive tenets give the believer a feeling of being special among humans and superior to those who believe what they were taught to believe.

            So, your attack doesn’t bother me. I understand why you believe what you believe and become angry with your tree is shaken.

            It is amazing how inclusive a free mind can be.

          • samuel nelson

            Who-who, them apples do not fall far from the old tree.