Fat damages for denied gay wedding: US conservative heroine Kim Davis damaged the rights of a same-sex couple and now she has to pay for it. Literally

A Kentucky court has ruled that Kim Davis, a former city clerk and registrar, must pay $100,000 in damages to a gay couple for refusing to issue them a marriage license. Davis did so based on her religious belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

But her actions contradict a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the legal ban on marriage for gays and lesbians violates the principle of equal treatment enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. This ruling legalized same-sex marriage in all US states and all registrars must comply.

However, Davis refused to do so, and in 2015 she served five days in jail for it. That's when she first refused to issue a marriage license to a gay couple. However, she was set free by the court after her office finally issued the marriage certificates at her request, albeit without her name.

For her actions against the rights of same-sex couples, Davis has become a hero to conservatives in the US. Some conservative politicians even travelled to Kentucky to show their support for her.

More in Gallery

Sources: Adobe Stock, Adam Beam / AP Photo / se svolením

She's guilty and must pay a fine

Although she has already been prosecuted once for this, Davis acted the same way in 2019, when she again refused to issue documents to a couple of two men. They took the case to court, which ruled that Davis had again acted illegally and violated the constitutional rights of both spouses.

Now another trial has been held in Ashland, Kentucky, to decide what sanction will be enforced against Davis. The result is damages - $50,000 (approximately CZK 1,140,000) for each spouse. In the wake of the ruling, Davis's attorney from the evangelical law firm Liberty Council let it be known that she "is looking forward to appealing this decision and taking the case to the Supreme Court."

But whether Davis will be able to appeal remains to be seen, as the US Supreme Court has already rejected one of her appeals in a similar case from 2020.