Bid to overturn US same-sex marriage ruling heads to Supreme Court

On 26 June 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v Hodges that the Fourteenth Amendment required states to license and recognise same-sex marriages. Now, a decade later, the Court will consider whether to take up a case calling for that decision to be overturned.

The petitioner is Kim Davis, the former Rowan County clerk in Kentucky, who was jailed for six days in September 2015 for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples on religious grounds. Davis is appealing a $100,000 jury award for emotional damages, plus $260,000 in legal fees.

In her petition, filed in July, Davis argues that “the mistake must be corrected,” calling Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell “legal fiction.” Her lawyer, Mathew Staver, wrote: “If there ever was a case of exceptional importance, the first individual in the Republic’s history who was jailed for following her religious convictions regarding the historic definition of marriage, this should be it.”

Lower courts have rejected her argument that the First Amendment shields her from liability, noting that she acted as a state official. William Powell, attorney for Ermold and Moore, told ABC News: “Not a single judge on the US Court of Appeals showed any interest in Davis’s rehearing petition, and we are confident the Supreme Court will likewise agree that Davis’s arguments do not merit further attention.”

Davis’s appeal comes amid a renewed push by some states to restore their pre-Obergefell marriage laws. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 35 states had statutory or constitutional bans on same-sex marriage before 2015. This year, nine states have introduced bills or resolutions urging reversal. In June, the Southern Baptist Convention voted overwhelmingly to prioritise “overturning… court rulings, including Obergefell v Hodges, that defy God’s design for marriage and family.”

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), while not directly involved in the case, has consistently reaffirmed the Church’s teaching that “marriage, by its nature and by God’s plan, is a lifelong union of one man and one woman, for the good of the spouses and the procreation and upbringing of children” (USCCB Catechism Commentary, 2023). The bishops have also warned that redefining marriage undermines both religious liberty and the common good.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in a 2022 concurrence in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, urged the Court to “reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” Davis’s petition cites his statement, drawing parallels to the Court’s reversal of Roe v Wade.

The Court is expected to consider the petition during its autumn conference. If it grants review, arguments would likely be heard in early 2026 with a ruling by June. A denial would leave the lower court’s ruling in place.

‍