...
By Robert Alexander
Senior Crime & Court Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The U.S. Supreme Court on November 10, 2025, declined to hear former Kentucky clerk Kim Davis’s petition challenging her civil rights liability for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2015.
The order, issued without dissent, closed a decade-long series of lawsuits that tested the boundaries between religious freedom and public duty.
It leaves a series of lower court rulings intact, holding Davis personally liable and leaving her facing six-figure legal bills.
Read More on U.S.
Newsweek reached out to attorneys for Davis for comment via email outside of normal office hours on Tuesday.
Why It Matters
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Kim Davis’s appeal matters because it quietly reaffirms the principle that public officials cannot use personal religious beliefs to deny others their constitutional rights.
The decision leaves Obergefell v. Hodges—the landmark 2015 ruling guaranteeing marriage equality—untouched, signaling that despite the Court’s conservative shift, same-sex marriage remains settled law.
By ending Davis’s 10-year-long fight, the Court has drawn a clear boundary between private faith and public duty, reinforcing that government authority must operate under the Constitution, not individual conscience.
...
What To Know
Kim Davis, once the Rowan County Clerk, argued that her refusal to issue licenses bearing her name after Obergefell v. Hodges violated no one’s rights and that she was protected by the First Amendment and qualified immunity.
In her 2025 petition for certiorari (No. 25-125), filed through Liberty Counsel, she contended that government officials should not be forced to act in violation of "sincerely held religious beliefs" and urged the Court to reconsider Obergefell itself.
Attorneys for plaintiffs David Ermold and David Moore, represented by William Powell of Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, countered that Davis "took the law into her own hands…in the most extreme way," exercising state authority to deny constitutional rights.
They said the question was not about private belief but whether a public official may "assert a First Amendment right to engage in state action that violates the constitutional rights of private citizens."
The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene leaves intact a series of rulings by the Eastern District of Kentucky and the Sixth Circuit holding Davis personally liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for denying marriage licenses in defiance of court orders.
A 2023 jury awarded $100,000 in damages to Ermold and Moore; later fee awards brought the total to more than $360,000.
Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver called the financial burden "crippling," arguing that Davis was being punished "based on nothing more than purported hurt feelings."
He maintained that "Obergefell was egregiously wrong from the start…it is not a matter of if, but when the Supreme Court will overturn Obergefell."
William Powell welcomed the Court’s decision, stating that "the denial of review confirms what we already knew: same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, and Kim Davis’s denial…plainly violated that right."
With Monday’s order, Obergefell v. Hodges remains binding nationwide, and Davis’s decade-long legal effort to reverse it has reached its final stage.
...
After the Supreme Court’s Decision
On the evening of November 10, 2025, just hours after the ruling, Newsweek spoke exclusively with Professor John Culhane of Delaware Law School.
Culhane described the outcome as predictable: "The Court was never going to take this case," he said. "You didn’t have the votes to overturn Obergefell. We have a very unsympathetic petitioner here—someone who openly defied the law and withheld marriage licenses, claiming a religious liberty interest. That’s no valid reason for denying couples the licenses they were entitled to."
He noted that the Court’s unanimous denial reflected concern for institutional credibility: "Chief Justice Roberts and others are clearly trying to preserve what credibility they have left. Taking this case would have reignited a political firestorm they don’t want."
Culhane also cited reliance interests protecting the marriages established since 2015: "Justice Barrett herself has talked about those reliance interests—millions of marriages and families that exist because of Obergefell. Undoing that would open a whole slew of issues.
"It was a very substantial judgment against Davis. Very. And, you know, a civil judgment. And I wouldn’t be surprised if it forced her into bankruptcy or something. This was her last hope," he added. "She’s gone through every level of the appellate process. There’s nowhere else to go.
"After Dobbs, people feared the Court might keep pushing. But this time, they understood the cost. To overturn Obergefell now would mean chaos—states split on marriage recognition, endless litigation. They weren’t willing to spend that political capital for no real gain."
Jennifer "Jenny" Pizer, a veteran LGBTQ+ civil rights attorney and Senior Director of Strategic Initiatives at Lambda Legal, told Newsweek in an exclusive interview: "Belief is protected absolutely. Conduct is not—and it cannot be. When belief motivates conduct that causes harm or denies others equal participation in public life, the law has always been clear: that conduct is not protected."
Reverend Fred Davie, a civil rights advocate, former vice chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and a leader at Union Theological Seminary, welcomed the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear Kim Davis’s appeal as a reaffirmation that public officials must uphold constitutional equality, while cautioning that continued political and legal efforts to erode marriage rights "should not be underestimated."
Talking to Newsweek, Pastor Davie said: "While I am relieved that the Supreme Court decided not to hear the Davis case, we should be under no illusions that the forces arrayed against the LGBTQ+ community—represented by this case and in so many other attacks—are going to call it a day, fold their tents, and accept defeat.
"As people of faith who believe in a loving, compassionate and inclusive Divine order, we must stay vigilant and faithful to the task of offering hope and thwarting hate, however and wherever it emerges. But today let’s celebrate! This is a victory!"
What People Are Saying
Jenny Pizer of Lambda Law told Newsweek: "We’ve now had 10 years of nationwide marriage equality, and the harms opponents predicted simply didn’t happen. The freedom to marry has strengthened families and harmed no one. The arguments against it have been proven baseless."
In an emailed statement to Newsweek, Liberty Counsel founder and Kim Davis’s attorney Mat Staver said: "Liberty Counsel will continue to challenge Obergefell v. Hodges. We have been working with many state lawmakers to set up directed challenges to Obergefell. Later this month, I will be meeting with lawmakers from a majority of the states to continue our challenge strategy. Liberty Counsel will continue to pursue future cases with the goal of overturning Obergefell.
He added: "Three sitting justices have issued strong dissents to Obergefell. A majority surely knows that the opinion was wrongly decided and has no foundation in the Constitution. The fact that the Court did not take up this case will result in others like Kim Davis coming forward to challenge Obergefell. What Kim Davis began will continue. Now we move to Phase 2, where other individuals, states, and local governments assert their rights to religious liberty and the Tenth Amendment. The days of Obergefell are numbered. It is not a matter of if, but when Obergefell will be overturned. That day will surely come."
What Happens Next
With the Supreme Court’s November 10 denial of review, Kim Davis’s legal battle is over: she remains personally liable for more than $360,000 in damages and fees to the same-sex couple she refused to license, with enforcement returning to the federal court in Kentucky.
Her lawyers at Liberty Counsel say they will continue broader efforts to challenge Obergefell v. Hodges, but Davis has no further appeals. The ruling leaves Obergefell firmly intact, confirming that public officials cannot invoke personal religious beliefs to deny constitutional rights, and will serve as precedent in future First Amendment and civil rights cases. For same-sex couples, it brings renewed legal certainty, even as political debates over religious exemptions are likely to continue.
Update 11/11/25, 11:11 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with comment from Mat Staver and additional information.
Correction 11/11/25, 4:51 p.m. ET: This article was updated to correct Reverend Fred Davie's title. He is the former vice chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines