This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The fight over same-sex "marriage," which the then-leftist Supreme Court created for America several years ago in a decision criticized as being "untethered" to the Constitution, is far from over.
WND previously reported that there's little doubt it eventually will return to the high court, which could, absent leftist activists such as Ruth Ginsburg, send the fight back to the states, as the court did with abortion in its Dobbs decision.
Now the potential vehicle for that change is set for jury selection to start on Monday.
A trial is scheduled before U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning for former Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis.
The case is to determine damages against Davis in the Ermold V. Davis and Yates v. Davis cases.
Bunning, of course, is the far-left judge who earlier sent Davis to jail when she declined to issue marriage certificates, any marriage certificates, under her name when the Supreme abruptly created same-sex "marriages" at a time when state laws remained that banned that status.
Liberty Counsel, a team that has been involved in the same-sex fight since its beginning, is arguing that Davis is not liable for any damages "because she was entitled to a religious accommodation from issuing marriage licenses under her name and authority that conflicts with her religious beliefs."
She was denied that accommodation by a progressive governor, but when the newly elected Republican Gov. Matt Bevin took office in December 2015, he granted religious accommodation to all clerks by executive order.
Liberty Counsel noted then in April 2016, the legislature unanimously granted religious and conscience accommodation to all clerks from issuing marriage licenses that conflict with their religious beliefs.
Liberty Counsel explained, "The Ermold and Yates cases each involve a same-sex couple who sued Davis in 2015 following the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision regarding 'same-sex marriage.'"
Those duos each bypassed other jurisdictions where they could have obtained their documents intentionally in order to "create a shame case" against Davis, Liberty Counsel explained.
The district court entered judgment against Davis in both cases, holding that she is personally liable to the plaintiffs by not issuing marriage licenses during the pendency of her request for religious accommodation, Liberty Counsel said.
However, Davis was entitled to an accommodation of her sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage under both the First Amendment and Kentucky law and she should not be held liable for requesting an accommodation, which she did receive in December 2015.
The legal team pointed out that three of the five justices in the Obergefell majority no longer are on the court.
"Kim Davis is entitled to an accommodation of her religious beliefs under the First Amendment and under Kentucky law. This case could eventually bring down the Supreme Court’s marriage opinion that has no basis in the Constitution," Liberty Counsel chief Mat Staver said.
In fact, the U.S. Constitution doesn't mention marriage, and it specifically allows such issues to be regulated by states through the 10th Amendment.
Leftists like Ginsburg, however, went ahead and unleashed their ideological Obergefell ruling while recognizing it had no connection to the Constitution.
Liberty Counsel earlier confirmed it would fight all the way to the Supremes, as the case in Bunning's court is not expected to make the final decision.
Davis, like others across the country, was caught in the no-win situation of having the Supreme Court order a change in state laws, while those laws had not yet been changed.
As clerk, her name was attached to marriage licenses in the county. But as a Christian, she objected to being ordered to violate her faith.
Her solution was to request an accommodation from her governor, a decision to allow her to withhold her name from those certificates.
However, then-Gov. Steve Beshear, who later was not returned to office, refused, and the leftist Bunning ordered Davis to jail for refusing to allow her name on those certificates.
She actually had been fair in her actions: She announced her office would issue NO marriage certificates until the unstable environment regarding those documents was resolved.
Several activist duos, though, apparently intent on causing her the most damage possible, bypassed several other jurisdictions where they could have obtained their licenses and demanded them from Davis.
"I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage," Davis explained. "To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven-or-Hell decision. For me, it is a decision of obedience."
She pointed out that such religious liberty is "protected" "under the First Amendment, the Kentucky Constitution, and the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Liberty Counsel said, "Eight years later, the couples who could have gotten their marriage licenses from any other county or clerk but chose to target Kim are targeting her again. These folks now want to SUE Kim into bankruptcy."
The legal team noted that during a request to the Supreme Court in 2020, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said: "This petition implicates important questions about the scope of our decision in Obergefell."
In fact, that opinion specifically said Americans retained the right to follow, and act on, their religious beliefs regarding marriage, which might conflict with the court opinion.
"Since Obergefell," Thomas noted, "parties have continually attempted to label people of goodwill as bigots merely for refusing to alter their religious beliefs in the wake of prevailing orthodoxy."
Liberty Counsel then announced, "We intend to take Kim’s case back to the Supreme Court to (1) win the right to religious accommodation, and (2) overturn Obergefell."