Mar 8, 2017
CINCINNATI, OH — Today Liberty Counsel will present oral argument in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit urging against the reinstatement of Ermold v. Davis. This case was dismissed with two other marriage license lawsuits that were filed against Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis in 2015, including Miller v. Davis, which led to Davis spending six days in jail as a prisoner of conscience. The dismissal delivered Davis a decisive victory in her fight for religious freedom. But eighteen months after Davis’s time in jail—and with a marriage license already in hand—these plaintiffs are still attempting to punish Davis for living out her faith.
Two years ago, David Ermold and other plaintiffs sued Davis when she refused to violate her conscience by adding her name and authority to marriage licenses being issued to same-sex couples. After her time in jail, Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin signed an executive order creating a new marriage license form that does not require a county clerk’s name and title. The Kentucky General Assembly unanimously made Governor Bevin’s accommodation permanent in the Kentucky statutes. Then the trial court dismissed all three 2015 marriage license cases in their entirety, finding nothing left for the court to decide. Today’s argument is regarding the Ermold plaintiffs’ appeal of that dismissal last year.
Two days ago, on March 6, Judge Edward Atkins issued an order denying the outrageous request of the Miller v. Davis plaintiffs for $231,000 in attorney’s fees from Davis. The judge ruled that they were not the “prevailing parties” and were not entitled to any money from Davis.
“The Ermold plaintiffs are not satisfied with the marriage license they received while Kim Davis was in jail,” said Roger Gannam, Liberty Counsel’s Assistant Vice President of Legal Affairs. “Their vain claims for money and attention were rightfully dismissed,” Gannam continued, “and the court should deny their vindictive attempt to take away the religious liberty victory Kim Davis secured for all Americans who want to perform public service without giving up their constitutional rights.”