THEN WHY HAVEN’T CHARGES BEEN LEVELED?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Sep. 3, 2015) — On Thursday, The New York Times reported on Rowan County, KY head court clerk Kim Davis, who was earlier taken into federal custody by U.S. marshals for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses or allow her assistants to do so.
The Times quoted White House spokesman Josh Earnest as having said, in response to Davis’s decision to defy a federal judge’s order to issue the licenses, “No one is above the law. That applies to the president of the United States and it applies to the clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, as well.”
Davis was elected by the voters of Rowan County in 2014.
For the first time in U.S. history, the Supreme Court found in June that the 14th Amendment gives “equal protection” to same-sex couples to marry. “It cannot be denied that this Court’s cases describing the right to marry presumed a relationship involving opposite-sex partners,” the court wrote in its opinion on page 16.
On page 24 of the opinion, the majority stated, “Under the Constitution, same-sex couples seek in marriage the same legal treatment as opposite-sex couples, and it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right. The right of same-sex couples to marry that is part of the liberty promised by the Fourteenth Amendment is derived, too, from that Amendment’s guarantee of the equal protection of the laws. The Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause are connected in a profound way, though they set forth independent principles. Rights implicit in liberty and rights secured by equal protection may rest on different precepts and are not always co-extensive, yet in some instances each may be instructive as to the meaning and reach of the other. In any particular case one Clause may be thought to capture the essence of the right in a more accurate and comprehensive way, even as the two Clauses may converge in the identification and definition of the right.”
Some have questioned whether or not a court opinion equates to making “law” in the United States.
After Davis first refused to issue licenses to same-sex couples following the Supreme Court’s published opinion, two traditional couples and two same-sex couples filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force her to comply. Davis then ceased issuing all marriage licenses. On Thursday morning, she said that she was willing to go to jail so as not to violate her deeply-held religious belief that marriage is a covenant sanctioned by God between a man and a woman.
According to Earnest’s statement, federal law applies to “the president” in the matter of the long-form birth certificate forgery posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 which was declared fraudulent by a criminal investigation conducted by the Maricopa County, AZ Cold Case Posse.
Obama personally attested a connection to the image when it was first posted in a televised press conference.
On March 1, 2012, the image and Obama’s Selective Service registration form were described as “computer-generated forgeries” at a formal press conference which major media shunned.
Obama’s short-form birth certificate has also been deemed by experts to be a forgery.
U.S. Code states that counterfeiting a “government seal” “shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”
Obama’s “documents” each contain a government stamp or seal. According to U.S. Code, each instance of forgery constitutes “a separate offense.”
Later in the Davis article, The Times quoted a Los Angeles law professor as having stated that although Davis was found in “civil contempt” by U.S. District Court Judge David L. Bunning, the finding “is not supposed to be punitive, it’s supposed to coerce the person to obey the judge’s order…Judges really don’t like it when people disobey their order.”
TIME Magazine, once an example of classic presenter of facts to the American public, offered its own opinion on Thursday that “Davis has tried to wriggle out of her dilemma by refusing to issue any marriage licenses at all. But that’s another way of saying that she doesn’t want to do her job. It’s not as if she has been conscripted into service. A number of other candidates also wanted the job when Davis ran in 2014.”
Davis’s supporters claim her beliefs and actions are protected by the First Amendment.
In January 2012, Obama or his attorney was ordered to appear in the courtroom of Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi in Atlanta, GA for a hearing over whether or not Obama met the constitutional requirements to serve as president. At the time, Obama was seeking his second term in the White House, regardless of his eligibility, which has still not been conclusively determined.
Obama’s Georgia attorney, Michael Jablonski, issued a letter to Malihi stating that he was “suspending participation” in the hearing Malihi convened on January 26, 2012. Neither he nor Obama appeared for the hearing.
No penalty was assessed against Jablonski or Obama, and Obama’s name appeared on the Georgia ballot despite the reported forgery of his birth certificate.
Ballot challenges against Obama in other states resulted in plaintiffs’ being barred from speaking and Obama’s name being placed on the ballot.
The mainstream media have ridiculed Cold Case Posse investigators rather than launched a probe of their own to prove or disprove the conclusions. In contrast, the media has been quick to report on Davis’s arrest.
The Supreme Court has refused to hear any of the myriad cases challenging Obama’s eligibility both before and after the posse declared Obama’s only publicly-proffered documentation fraudulent. “We’re evading that issue,” U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas chuckled during a hearing with a congressional committee in 2010, referring to presidential eligibility.
In its 2013-2014 session, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Obama had violated his constitutional authority by nominating three people to the National Labor Relations Board when, they opined, the Senate had not actually been in recess, as the U.S. Constitution requires in such instances.
Summarizing the court’s decision in Canning, The New York Times reported, “Mr. Obama violated the Constitution in 2012, the justices said, by appointing officials to the National Labor Relations Board during a break in the Senate’s work when the chamber was convening every three days in short pro forma sessions in which no business was conducted.”
On March 10, 2009, U.S. Army soldiers were deployed into Samson, AL to perform law enforcement activity following a shooting under Gen. Martin Dempsey, who reported to Obama as putative commander-in-chief. Several months later, an inspector general’s report found that the Posse Comitatus Act had been violated, as was claimed in a formal complaint of treason filed by LCDR Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III (Ret.) on March 17, 2009.
Fitzpatrick is currently in prison, but Obama is not.
Rather than facing discipline, Obama promoted Dempsey to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2012. Dempsey later testified, along with then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, that “building an international consensus” was given precedence by the Pentagon over U.S. “unilateral action” in Syria.
Obama is currently being sued by the U.S. House of Representatives for allegedly overstepping his constitutional constraints on various points.
A fund has been established to assist Davis with legal costs. Two other Kentucky clerks may face the same fate.
What we’re witnessing are graduates of the American extension of the “Joseph Goebbels College of Twisting the Facts” having their day in the sun.
Little do they know that history won’t think of them as much as they think of themselves.
Following “illegal orders” has been a one-way ticket to the hangman and, at least from my perspective, an amusing entertainment watching the Obots and other “HATE the CONSTITUTION” minded people digging themselves deeper and deeper; closer and closer; waving goodbye to any chance at salvation and redemption, to an inglorious end.
Surprised? Not us: THEM.
The ship left and they’re stuck on the pier; the bus left and they’re standing choking on the fumes; the train left and they’re still at the station and they just can’t figure-out why we purposely left them behind.
That’s right: we’ll sacrificed them for the heck of it.
You think ISIS will be contained in the Middle East?
Think 9-11, Fort Hood and all the other murders throughout the world by Muslims and add it all up: Obama and his Muslim Brotherhood faction are contributing 100% to the Christians being killed and placing Israel on the chopping-block.
Same-sex “marriage” people at the head of the list, followed by Obots.
There’s no “grey area”; no “whines” allowed; no pleading ignorance and stupidity. Either support the Constitution or take a one-way hike.
So I have a bird feeder right outside the window I have my desk. One day I dozed-off and I found myself talking “Bird Language”.
Now you may not know this, but birds, even though they share they same basic pronunciation of words, have accents, and some are very strange.
When I was in Great Britain I came across a Scotsman whom I just, for the life of me, could not understand. I found a person who I could address the issue and they asked this Scot what language he spoke. He answered “The Queens’ English, it is”, and then said I was surely a “Colonial” for the way I was murdering “English”.
As I said, birds have accents but there are some words they share, and pronounce, explicitly-exactly: DANGER!; WATER!; FOOD!; MARRIAGE!
So these two Cardinals are chomping away at some sunflower seeds and I asked them about same sex marriage.
You know what they did? They laughed.
They said, no matter what species in the Bird Kingdom, marriage is between a man and a woman. The female Cardinal said that was wrong, it was between a woman and a man. Surely they were a married couple.
A farmer has 2 cows: no marriage.
Another farmer has a bull and a cow: blissful matrimony.
The idiots took a word with a very defined definition — throughout the animal world — and changed the meaning because short-circuited people want to make us pretend that they are in a relationship that is biologically equal to the union of female and a male capable of producing offspring.
A same-sex couple cannot, under any circumstances, produce little prodigies of themselves. Now if they want to go around playing husband-and-wife, let them do so in, let’s say, Pakistan, for instance.
If they want to live among us, they are more than welcome to have a Civil Union and stop shoving the “marriage” nonsense down our throats.
A public record of one’s homosexuality is not a really smart idea if, and when, Sharia Law is introduced in America.
Crazy, isn’t it, that the person who will hang them from the streetlight is the very same person they voted for: Mr. Muslim Brotherhood Obama himself.
Call it ironic justice.
OPOVV,
Excellent comment and entertaining as well.
Good points all.
I concur.
If you will permit, regarding your point on civil unions:
I might add that “marriage” was a religious rite long before secular authority found it convenient to validate that rite for civil reasons. It is interesting that now, civil authority has actually co-opted the term as if THEY had created it to start with.
ELmo
Most of the “DNC” would be in prison for life if they had not illegally blocked all Criminal Presentments with illegal “no standing” rules to protect their cronies and criminal assistants including the “Judicial” that violated their oaths and have lived Misprision Of Felony since 2008 when Pelosi and Biden falsified Obama’s identity and “dual citizen” status rendering him illegal under Article 2 requirements for POTUS. Obama is “natural born” since he was the son of Radical Muslim/Black Panther/Citizen Malcolm X and Elizabeth Ann Newman of the Bronx who was a bomber/terrorist with Bill Ayers in “The Weather Underground” in the 1960’s that bombed the Washington Navy Yard Computer Building and the Pentagon with the blessing of the Radical DNC Operatives.
I have read here many articles on this site citing the need to uphold the Constitution as the “Law of the Land.
The Supreme Court has spoken here and I presume Davis has taken an oath to uphold it. She was elected to carry out the duties of the Clerk’s office. If she has decided that her religious beliefs won’t allow that becuause of events beyond her control – she should resign.
What if the clerk decided that she was morally obligated to protect animals and therefore (after being elected) could not issue fishing or hunting licenses?
If it turns out that she cannot do the job she was elected and which (I’m willing to bet) she swore an oath to perform (presumably that’s religiously important also), then her moral obligation is to resign the job and let someone do it who is not restricted by their religion.
Religious freedom does not compel the Government to accommodate one’s religion at the expense of legal government services.
Just imagine if Police and Firemen decided that they couldn’t work on Sunday because God designated it a “day of rest”. C’mon folks, Davis is out of line – Not in her insistence to practice her religion, but on her insistence that her religion must be accommodated at the expense of the Pubic’s right to legal Government services. She is failing to understand that sometimes strict religious observance comes with a price. Do the job or resign the job!
ELmo
Kentucky state marriage law is written throughout with the concept and assumption of valid marriage existing only between one man and one woman. This concept is integrally interwoven in the existing law such that it is not severable. Since the law has been struck down by the SCOTUS (exceeding their Constitutional authority, I might add, but that is another discussion), no valid marriage law currently exist in Kentucky. Until one is created by the state legislature, no marriage licenses can be legally issued.
Kim Davis is only guilty of following the law such as it exists. For this, she was wrongly held in contempt of court by a rouge judge whose contempt holding will likely be overturned on appeal. His actions may even be found to have been illegal (and, by rights, should be considered tantamount to kidknapping or illegal state imprisonment).
Good for the goose, but not good for the gander. Lady Liberty (who stands in most courthouses) is no longer blindfolded.
Kim Davis did not break any law. The 14th Amendment only compels equal treatment under the law (never mind that according to its authors, it was only intended to ensure that recently freed slaves and their children, who would be otherwise completely stateless, be made U.S. citizens).
Kentucky state law defines legal marriage as between one man and one woman, regardless of sexual preference. All citizens, regardless of sexual proclivity, have equal access to marriage as lawfully defined by the people of Kentucky. No explicit Kentucky state law or federal government law compelling Kim Davis to legally sanctify same-sex marriage exists. The court has no business forcing Kim Davis to obey a nonexistent law. They may only compel her to apply the existing law equally, something she is more than willing to do (she would be happy to grant a homosexual person a marriage license to marry a willing partner of the opposite sex).
In this case, as well noted by the author of this blog piece, the court was a complete lawless jackass.
Think again – she is in contempt of court. She refused to obey a judges legal order – THAT is the law she broke.
I, like you, admire her dedication and religious devotion. But there is a price to pay for civil disobedience. We all must work to get the law changed but in the meantime, The SCOTUS has ruled and Judge Bunning did his job because Davis refused (after multiple opportunities) to do the job she was elected to do.
When she refused to follow the Judges legal order – She was in violation of the law. That’s why she’s in jail.
ELmo