海角大神

After the US Supreme Court鈥檚 decision declaring same-sex marriage a fundamental right last week, many county clerks and local magistrates soon found themselves at the center of new questions about the scope of religious liberty and the civic responsibilities required by their jobs.

Should there be a kind of 鈥渃onscientious objector鈥� or religious exemption status for those with deeply held religious objections to same-sex marriage, if other government employees are available to provide couples with their constitutionally guaranteed rights? Can clerks and judges opt out of participating in personally issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples?

So far, the number of clerks refusing to issue licenses for religious reasons . And the vast majority of counties, even in the 13 states most resistant to same-sex marriage, have been issuing licenses to all couples seeking them without incident.

But on Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky filed a federal on behalf of four couples 鈥� two same-gender and two opposite-gender 鈥� who were denied marriage licenses in a jurisdiction east of Lexington, where a clerk has refused to issue them to anyone.

The Kentucky branch of the ACLU said that the clerk 鈥渉as the absolute right to believe whatever she wants about God, faith, and religion, but as a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, she cannot pick and choose who she is going to serve, or which duties her office will perform based on her religious beliefs.鈥�

A Texas couple this week also said they would after a Hood County office continued to refuse to issue them a marriage license. A handful of other Texas jurisdictions likewise continue to refrain from issuing paperwork to same-sex couples.

Even before the high court鈥檚 landmark decision making same-sex marriage the law of the land last Friday, religious conservatives had been seeking to bolster legal protections for religious liberty as the landscape for same-sex marriage shifted quickly and dramatically. Such moves had sparked questions about the 鈥減ublic accommodation鈥� responsibilities of religious businesses that object to providing services for same-sex weddings. 听

Then, earlier this week, the GOP attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton, outlined a legal position in which he said federal and state 鈥渞eligious freedom restoration acts,鈥� as well as the religious freedom rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, 鈥渕ay allow accommodation of [county clerks鈥� and employees鈥橾 religious objections to issuing same-sex marriage licenses.鈥� He made the comments in to state officials.

The legal test for any burden placed on religious liberty, according to federal law and at least 19 state laws, is that the burden is the 鈥渓east restrictive means鈥� available to ensure a 鈥渃ompelling state interest.鈥� If there are other authorized individuals available to issue marriage licenses within a county office, Mr. Paxton reasoned, state officials should be able to maintain their conscience.

Though Paxton noted that clerks and judges with religious objections could expect lawsuits, that his office will 鈥渄o anything we can to help our County Clerks and public officials who now are forced with defending their religious beliefs against the Court鈥檚 ruling.鈥�

While Paxton came under fire for his assessment of what he called a 鈥渓awless鈥� high court ruling, some legal experts found his reasoning sound.

鈥淚f, for instance, there are two clerks in an office, only one of whom objects to same-sex marriage, it would be consistent with [the Supreme Court ruling] to allow the non-objector to issue same-sex licenses 鈥� as long as this practice neither stigmatized same-sex couples nor imposed significant burdens on them,鈥� wrote Kermit Roosevelt, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, . 听

鈥淎nd in this sense, Paxton is right,鈥� Professor Roosevelt continued. 鈥淭he state of Texas must issue same-sex marriage licenses, but in appropriate circumstances, individual clerks may be excused.鈥�

Earlier this week, Hood County Clerk Katie Lang e-mailed her office saying, 鈥淲e are not issuing [licenses] because I am instilling my religious liberty in this office.鈥� After a backlash, however, Ms. Lang said that although the 鈥渞eligious doctrines to which I adhere compel me to personally refrain from issuing same-sex marriage licenses,鈥� her office would have staff 鈥渁vailable and ready鈥� to issue licenses once it gets the 鈥渁ppropriate forms鈥� delivered.

The attorney for the couple seeking a marriage license in Hood County said the office indicated it might take three weeks to get the new paperwork. 鈥淲e sent them the link to the website with the form they are supposed to use,鈥� said attorney Jan Soifer, The Dallas Morning News. 鈥淚t鈥檚 posted. It鈥檚 available to them. We know 205 other counties in Texas have already been issuing them.鈥�

鈥淭his is just a pretext to deny them of their constitutional right to get married,鈥� said the couple鈥檚 other attorney, Austin Kaplan. 鈥淭his is a humiliation. And this is what the Supreme Court says can鈥檛 happen anymore.鈥� They plan to sue the county on Monday.

On Friday, about 150 Texas attorneys signed a letter to Paxton, warning that they may file a complaint with the state bar over his legal position.

鈥淚t seems to us that your edict to encourage Texas clerks to violate a direct ruling of the United States Supreme Court violates鈥� the state bar's rules requiring attorneys to uphold the US Constitution, , according to The Texas Tribune.