Lawsuit Filed Against Clerk Who Refused Marriage License to Same-Sex Couple

[RKP5637]

Good!!!

http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202730863750/Lawsuit-Filed-Against-Clerk-Who-Refused-Marriage-License-to-SameSex-Couple?slreturn=20150530161335

A same-sex couple in East Texas, who allege that Smith County Clerk Karen Phillips denied them a marriage license on June 26, seeks a court order to force Phillips to issue them a license in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges.

The lawsuit that Karen Wilkerson and Jolie Smith filed on June 26 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas came after the U.S. Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Wilkerson v. Phillips was filed two days before Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an opinion on June 28 that Texas government employees have the right, on religious freedom grounds, to refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses or conduct same-sex marriages.

In their motion for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order, Wilkerson and Smith allege that Phillips refused to issue them a marriage license on the ground that the form used by the clerk's office has separate sections for a male/man and a female/woman.
However, Wilkerson and Smith allege that the true reasons are "prejudice against same-sex couples, to try to humiliate and shame the plaintiffs, to deprive them and their relationship of the dignity to which they are by law entitled, and to inconvenience the plaintiffs."

They allege that Phillips is "just mean-spirited and petty."
Wilkerson and Smith allege in the motion that their families were ready on June 26 to attend a ceremony and that a preacher was "standing by" to perform it.

They allege that the delay is causing them mental anguish and economic loss.
Wilkerson and Smith seek the court order under Rule 65(a) and/or (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and seek damages under §1983 of 42 U.S.C.

[Angry Dragon]

1. If a clerk can not fulfill their job because of their religion then they need to resign

and if they refuse to resign then they have to prove their religious beliefs

[shenmue]

3. Yep, stop taking taxpayer money, if she feels that bad about it

[truebluegreen]

37. Absolutely he/she needs to resign

but how would he/she "prove" his/her religious beliefs?

[randys1]

2. I wonder why we cant arrest the bigot?

[onenote]

9. Because she hasn't committed a crime?

Or even acted in contempt of an order of a court with jurisdiction over her....yet.

[randys1]

10. Disobeying the law of the land is not a crime?

When will it be a crime for this bigot ass ?

[onenote]

11. When the following has occurred:

First, a judicial action is brought against the clerk who refused to issue a marriage license in the State of Texas and an order is issued from a court in that case directing the clerk to issue a marriage license. The action has been brought, but the court hasn't ruled yet. It is conceivable that such an order could be issued without a hearing, but if an argument is presented that the clerk has a first amendment right to not issue the marriage license it is possible that a hearing or at least briefing would occur before the court, presumably, formally rejected that argument and issued the order. There could be an appeal of the order, but it is highly unlikely that the court's order would be stayed pending that appeal.

If the clerk continues to refuse to grant the marriage license after being ordered to do so by a court with jurisdiction over the clerk it would set the clerk up for an action by the court that issued the order holding the clerk in either civil or criminal contempt.

[Aerows]

28. She defied a public law

Why do you support that?

[jberryhill]

35. Nobody supports that

in order to arrest someone for a crime, they have to violate a criminal law.

Civil rights violations fall under 42 usc 1983.

How is explaining the liability of this clerk under the law "supporting that"?

[Aerows]

36. she's an asshole

I support that.

[jberryhill]

38. Absolutely

Being an asshole is not a criminal offense.

However, I'm pressed for time at the moment, but would like to come back later and explain why suits under 42 usc 1983 are a really potent thing going forward with the various assholes who are going to walk right into them.

[Aerows]

39. I'll be glad to hear them!

because she is an asshole, criminal, or not!

[jberryhill]

43. Here ya go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026926765

[Aerows]

45. Thanks for breaking it down.

This is such an interesting set of circumstances.

[onenote]

46. WTF is wrong with you?

On what fucking planet did anything I said suggest I support in any way, shape or form what this clerk has done?

The question was posed why we couldn't arrest her.
I answered because she hadn't committed a crime "yet".
WHen asked what it would take, I explained that once the court where she was being sued issued an order directing her to issue marriage licenses, she would be subject to an order holding her in civil or criminal contempt.

At no point did I suggest or even hint that I supported what she did. That came out of your twisted imagination. You need to get help.

[jberryhill]

31. Up to one point

While the clerk can't avoid the fee recovery provisions of 1983 suits, being held in contempt would end as soon as the clerk resigned, since civil contempt is not punitive. Having resigned, the basis for being held on contempt goes away, and detention serves no purpose.

[jberryhill]

27. This is actually better

a 42 Usc 1983 violation is not a crime.

It does provide grounds for filing suit and recovering legal fees and monetary damages.

A lot of DU has missed the point on how this plays out going forward. I'll write a longer op later on tonight.

[randys1]

29. I like this better too...I get it now. But can the damages come from the individual?

Or will they come from the city or county which employs him or her?

I.E. can the award of damages, the monetary award, have to be PAID by the individual bigot fuck who is doing this?

[jberryhill]

34. Depends

...classic lawyer answer I know, but the violation of rights is done by the individual.

Whether there was a conspiracy to deprive might change things.

[Gothmog]

4. There will be more such lawsuits before the homophobes will give up

[musiclawyer]

5. Most states and cities legally cannot indemnify ....

Any official who acts out of fraud , oppression, or malice. Such official is on his or her own to find a lawyer and pay lawyer frees and judgment costs out of pocket. Once these officials figure out that it's either their job or personal bankruptcy , their religious beliefs will get checked at the door in real fast

[BrotherIvan]

6. +1 Good point

[RKP5637]

7. Good! n/t

[joeybee12]

17. That's very interesting...

And these clerks will think twice before shelling out bucks to defend themselves...a one-time spot on Fox Noise only gets you so much.

[mnhtnbb]

8. Good.

[Vinca]

12. The clerk is filling out a form and taking some money.

She's not marrying anyone. If she can't perform those simple duties, she needs to resign.

[daleanime]

13. If you refuse to do your job...

leave it.

[hifiguy]

16. Absolutely 1 krillion percent THIS! nt

[bonniebgood]

14. This clerk knows exactly what she's doing. She has made the

calculations to cash in low wage job in exchange for her 15 minutes of fame by setting up a 'go fund me' page and sit back and watch the hate money roll in. this should be a crime in itself. cashing in on hate, only in america.

[awoke_in_2003]

20. Yep

She is going to make money off this for sure.

[hifiguy]

15. In many states that request for an injunction or a TRO would be automatically granted.

Who knows about Texas.

[jberryhill]

44. yep

Smith County, Texas just learned this right quick.

I was out of the country last week, but I really should have thought ahead. This could have been a very fun week.

[mountain grammy]

18. The Clerk is a servant of the taxpayers who pay her salary.

If she wants to be god's servant, she should work in a church.

[onecaliberal]

19. ^^^^THAT^^^^

[SusanCalvin]

41. Yep. She needs to follow THE LAW.

And get a load of the guy who's egging her on:
http://www.lonestarproject.net/after-admitting-crimes-paxton-should-exit-ag-race

[griffi94]

21. she folded

http://www.dallasvoice.com/smith-county-folds-agrees-issue-marriage-license-same-sex-couples-10199611.html

[dbackjon]

22. Awesome

She still should be sued for mental anguish

[RKP5637]

24. Yep! n/t

[RKP5637]

23. More of them will likely come to realize "they" do not make the laws and neither does their

mystical figure in the sky.

[griffi94]

33. she's a typical texas conservative

as soon as there's a negative consequence for them personally
they usually back off the crazy shit pretty fast.

you may have noticed that our AG put a disclaimer in support for anybody
who refused on religious grounds. he said they may have to face lawsuits and other litigation
but there were a bevy of lawyers standing by to represent them. some of them willing to work pro bono.

i'd be willing to bet the lawyers waiting to
represent them didn't reach double digits.

[Glimmer of Hope]

40. Nice but she still needs to be fired for not doing her job.

[DiverDave]

25. As a truck driver I would get FIRED

Why is this 'christian' any different? Cant do your job?
I wouldn't have one.
Hell, I'll take her job, get me out of traffic.

[LuvNewcastle]

26. There are miserable people like that woman.

She's so afraid that someone else might be happy that she uses what little power she has to make them miserable too. You meet all kinds in the South, just like everywhere else. I wish we had a lot fewer people like her.

[realFedUp]

32. I believe she is so brainwashed

That she thought she was doing what's best for her, albeit against her job requirements. That is the problem w Christianity made so much a hammer these days. It used to be an unsaid and private area of one's life.

[JudgementalArmadillo]

30. Damn good!

We can't live in a society where homophobes are free to deny basic services to the LGBTQ community. Just because their [possibly false] religion "doesn't allow it". It's time for change. Besides, a store clerk who can't perform his job because of a religious disposition? Bullshit! He could be fired for incompetence! It's time that we start opening our minds to change, and people like him just aren't helping. But it's good to see people taking action against injustice. Hopefully one day the whole world will be
LGBTQ-friendly.

[Rhiannon12866]

47. Welcome to DU, JudgementalArmadillo!

It's great to have you with us!

[Gothmog]

42. Paxton's AG opinion basically told these officials to violate the law and hope that a pro bono

lawyer will step in to defend them. Paxton is a bad attorney and that was a worthless legal opinion. Paxton needs to be held responsible for this stupidity