Miller v. Davis

123 F.Supp.3d 924

April MILLER, et al., Plaintiffs

v.Kim DAVIS, individually and in her official capacity, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 15–44–DLB.

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division, At Ashland.

Signed Aug. 12, 2015.

Daniel J. Canon, Laura E. Landenwich, Leonard Joe Dunman, Clay Daniel Walton Adams, PLC, William Ellis Sharp, ACLU of Kentucky, Louisville, KY, for Plaintiffs.

Anthony Charles Donahue, Donahue Law Group, P.S.C., Somerset, KY, Jonathan D. Christman, Roger K. Gannam, Liberty Counsel, Orlando, FL, Cecil R. Watkins, Morehead, KY, Claire E. Parsons, Jeffrey C. Mando, Adams, Stepner, Woltermann & Dusing, PLLC, Covington, KY, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DAVID L. BUNNING, District Judge.

I. Introduction

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 2). Plaintiffs are two same-sex and two opposite-sex couples seeking to enjoin Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis from enforcing her own marriage licensing policy. On June 26, 2015, just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court held that states are constitutionally required to recognize same-sex marriage, Davis announced that the Rowan County Clerk's Office would no longer issue marriage licenses to any couples. See Obergefell v. Hodges, –––U.S. ––––, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 192 L.Ed.2d 609 (2015). Davis, an Apostolic Christian with a sincere religious objection to same-sex marriage, specifically sought to avoid issuing licenses to same-sex couples without discriminating against them. Plaintiffs now allege that this "no marriage licenses" policy substantially interferes with their right to marry because it effectively forecloses them from obtaining a license in their home county. Davis insists that her policy poses only an incidental burden on Plaintiffs' right to marry, which is justified by the need to protect her own free exercise rights.

The Court held preliminary injunction hearings on July 13, 2015 and July 20, 2015. Plaintiffs April Miller, Karen Roberts, Jody Fernandez, Kevin Holloway, Barry Spartman, Aaron Skaggs, Shantel Burke and Stephen Napier were represented by William Sharp of the Americans for Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") and Daniel Canon. Jonathan Christman and Roger Gannam, both of the Liberty Counsel, and A.C. Donahue appeared on behalf of Defendant Kim Davis. Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins and Jeff Mando represented Defendant Rowan County. Official Court Reporters Peggy Weber and Lisa Wiesman recorded the proceedings. At the conclusion of the second hearing, the Court submitted the Motion pending receipt of the parties' response and reply briefs. The Court having received those filings (Docs. # 28, 29 and 36), this matter is now ripe for review.

At its core, this civil action presents a conflict between two individual liberties held sacrosanct in American jurisprudence. One is the fundamental right to marry implicitly recognized in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The other is the right to free exercise of religion explicitly guaranteed by the First Amendment. Each party seeks to exercise one of these rights, but in doing so, they threaten to infringe upon the opposing party's rights. The tension between these constitutional concerns can be resolved by answering one simple question: Does the Free Exercise Clause likely excuse Kim Davis from issuing marriage licenses because she has a religious objection to same-sex marriage? For reasons stated herein, the Court answers this question in the negative.

II. Factual and Procedural Background

Plaintiffs April Miller and Karen Roberts have been in a committed same-sex relationship for eleven years. (Doc. # 21 at 25). After hearing about the Obergefell decision, they went to the Rowan County Clerk's Office and requested a marriage license 2 from one of the deputy clerks. (Id. at 25–26). The clerk immediately excused herself and went to speak with Kim Davis. (Id. at 28). When she returned, she informed the couple that the Rowan County Clerk's Office was not issuing any marriage licenses. (Id. ). Plaintiffs Kevin Holloway and Jody Fernandez, a committed opposite-sex couple, had a similar experience when they tried to obtain a marriage license from the Rowan County Clerk's Office. (Id. at 36).

Both couples went straight to Rowan County Judge Executive Walter Blevins and asked him to issue their marriage licenses. (Id. at 30–32, 36). Blevins explained that, under Kentucky law, a county judge executive can only issue licenses when the elected county clerk is absent. See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 402.240. Because Davis continued to perform her other duties as Rowan County Clerk, Blevins concluded that she was not "absent" within the meaning of the statute. (Id. ). Therefore, he did not believe that he had the authority to issue their marriage licenses. (Id. ).

Plaintiffs Barry Spartman and Aaron Skaggs also planned to solemnize their long-term relationship post-Obergefell . (Id. at 42–44). Before going to the Rowan County Clerk's Office, they phoned ahead and asked for information about the marriage licensing process. (Id. ). They wanted to make sure that they brought all necessary documentation with them. (Id. ). One of the deputy clerks told the couple "not to bother coming down" because they would not be issued a license. (Id. ).

Seven neighboring counties (Bath, Fleming, Lewis, Carter, Elliott, Morgan and Menifee) are currently issuing marriage licenses. (Doc. # 26 at 53). All are less than an hour away from the Rowan County seat of Morehead. (Id. ). While Plaintiffs have the means to travel to any one of these counties, they have admittedly chosen not to do so. (Doc. # 21 at 38, 48). They strongly prefer to have their licenses issued in Rowan County because they have significant ties to that community. (Id. at 28–29, 47). They live, work, socialize, vote, pay taxes and conduct other business in and around Morehead. (Id. ). Quite simply, Rowan County is their home.

According to Kim Davis, the Rowan County Clerk's Office serves as a "pass through collection agency" for the State of Kentucky. (Doc. # 26 at 24–25). She and her six deputy clerks regularly handle delinquent taxes, oversee elections, manage voter registration and issue hunting and fishing licenses. (Id. ). A portion of the fees collected in exchange for these services is used to fund the Office's activities throughout the year. (Id. ). The remainder is remitted to the State. (Id. ).

Under Kentucky law, county clerks are also responsible for issuing marriage licenses.¹ See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 402.080. The process is quite simple. The couple must first go to the county clerk's office and provide their biographical information to one of the clerks. See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 402.100. The clerk then enters the information into a computer-generated form, prints it and signs it. Id. This form signifies that the couple is licensed, or legally qualified, to marry.² Id. At the appropriate time, the couple presents this form to their officiant, who must certify that he or she performed a valid marriage ceremony. Id. The couple then has thirty days to return the form to the clerk's office for recording. See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. §§ 402.220, 402.230. The State will not recognize marriages entered into without a valid license therefor. See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 402.080.

The Kentucky Department of Libraries and Archives ("KDLA") prescribes the above-mentioned form, which must be used by all county clerks in issuing marriage licenses.³ Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. §§ 402.100, 402.110. It is composed of three sections, which correspond to the steps detailed above: (1) a marriage license, to be completed by a county or deputy clerk; (2) a marriage certificate, to be completed by a qualified officiant; and (3) a recording statement, to be completed by a county or deputy clerk. The marriage license section has the following components:

(a) An authorization statement of the county clerk issuing the license for any person or religious society authorized to perform marriage ceremonies to unite in marriage the persons named;

(b) Vital information for each party, including the full name, date of birth, place of birth, race, condition (single, widowed, or divorced), number of previous marriages, occupation, current residence, relationship to the other party, and full names of parents; and

(c) The date and place the license is issued, and the signature of the county clerk or deputy clerk issuing the license.

See Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 402.100(1) (emphasis added).

Davis does not want to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because they will bear the above-mentioned authorization statement. She sees it as an endorsement of same-sex marriage, which runs contrary to her Apostolic Christian beliefs. (Id. at 42). Four of Davis' deputy clerks share her religious objection to same-sex marriage, and another is undecided on the subject. (Id. at 49). The final deputy clerk is willing to issue the licenses, but Davis will not allow it because her name and title still appear twice on licenses that she does not personally sign. (Doc. # 29–3 at 7).

In the wake of Obergefell , Governor Beshear issued the following directive to all county clerks:

Effective today, Kentucky will recognize as valid all same sex marriages performed in other states and in Kentucky. In accordance with my instruction, all executive branch agencies are already working to make any operational changes that will be necessary to implement the Supreme Court decision. Now that same-sex couples are entitled to the issuance of a marriage license, the Department of Libraries and Archives will be sending a gender-neutral form to you today, along with instructions for its use.

(Doc. # 29–3 at 11). He has since addressed some of the religious concerns expressed by some county clerks:

You can continue to have your own personal beliefs but, you're also taking an oath to fulfill the duties prescribed by law, and if you are at that point to where your personal

...