海角大神

On Friday, the Rowan County, Ky., clerk鈥檚 office will be open for business and issuing marriage licenses for the first time since June.

The clerk, meanwhile, is in jail.聽

At a hearing Thursday in Ashland, Ky., Federal District Judge David Bunning found Kim Davis, an Apostolic 海角大神 at the heart of the same-sex marriage controversy, in contempt for refusing to honor a United States Supreme Court ruling that made gay marriages legal throughout the country. Ms. Davis has cited 鈥淕od鈥檚 authority鈥� in her refusal to do her official duty.

Her arrest came after repeated refusals by Davis to heed Judge Bunning鈥檚 orders to commence signing marriage licenses for all eligible couples, including same-sex ones. Davis is one of three county clerks in Kentucky to refuse to issue marriage licenses since the Supreme Court ruling in June.

Before Davis became the first person to be jailed for failing to obey the Supreme Court鈥檚 Obergefell ruling, some 1,000 dueling protesters flocked to the courthouse in Ashland. 鈥淚鈥檝e weighed the cost, and I鈥檓 prepared to go to jail, I sure am,鈥� Davis told Fox News on Thursday. 鈥淭his is a fight worth fighting.鈥�

Bunning said Davis will remain in federal custody until she agrees to issue the licenses. According to state law, deputies can sign the documents if the head clerk is incapacitated.

Perhaps most crucially, Davis鈥檚 decision to stand her ground on what she says is a 鈥淗eaven or Hell decision鈥� is already resonating around the country. At the least, she has galvanized politicians trying to appeal to the evangelical vote, a key primary audience in critical early Southern states.聽

The legal case against Davis is simple: It says a government official can鈥檛 put their own private beliefs ahead of their official duties, no matter how personally repugnant they might find them.聽

Yet Davis鈥檚 defiance has become the focal point for a broader debate over religious liberty. Her supporters say they are testing the breadth to which religious Americans can hew to a higher authority than the Constitution. The three Kentucky clerks note that their oath of office includes the words 鈥渟o help me God,鈥� first added to official oaths by President George Washington.

鈥淚 think [Davis鈥檚 arrest] moves the needle on the religious liberty debate,鈥� says John Eastman, a Chapman University constitutional scholar, comparing Davis鈥檚 stance to civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.鈥檚 decision to spend time in a Birmingham, Ala., jail rather than abide by what he deemed an unlawful judicial order to stop picketing. 鈥淩emember, lot of other ministers chastised King for taking a stand in Birmingham, but he said that when you refuse to comply with an illegitimate law, you should be willing to take the consequences in hope that by doing so you will call attention to the injustice of the act.鈥�

The stance of the elected, and thus difficult to remove, clerk 鈥� and now her jailing 鈥撀爃as made Davis a pivotal figure among Americans who see same-sex marriage as a Biblical wrong, and the judicial legalization of it a federalist perversion. A jailed Davis could raise the stakes for an election where a struggle for 鈥渞eligious liberty鈥� amid changing cultural and legal norms has galvanized critical evangelical voters.聽

鈥淭here鈥檚 a very real sense that people of faith now need to be protected in some way to make sure they cannot be punished for acting in accordance with their faith,鈥� Dan Holler, a spokesman for Heritage Action, told The Washington Post. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 something that resonates with conservative primary voters.鈥�

As of Thursday, Republican presidential candidates Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee and Marco Rubio have all made statements of support. Senator Paul called her protest part of 聽鈥渢he American way,鈥� Mr. Huckabee noted that 鈥淒avis is showing more courage and humility than just about any federal office holder in Washington.鈥澛�

But Bunning, a Republican appointee, said he had no other option than to take Davis into custody.

鈥淭he court cannot condone the willful disobedience of its lawfully issued order,鈥� he said at the hearing. 鈥淚f you give people the opportunity to choose which orders they follow, that鈥檚 what potentially causes problems.鈥�

Bunning earlier had struck down Davis鈥檚 claims that she was exercising her First Amendment right of religious freedom by refusing to issue the licenses. Other courts, on up to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear her appeal, agreed with Bunning鈥檚 assessment that the government can鈥檛 function if its agents hold their personal beliefs above their duties. In the past, critics point out, religious liberty arguments have also been used (unsuccessfully) to defend segregation and laws banning interracial marriage.

On Thursday afternoon, Bunning offered a compromise: He would release Davis from jail if she would allow her deputies to issue the marriage licenses. Davis refused.

In that vein, Davis鈥檚 defiance has brought her withering critique from many Americans, who see her as openly flouting the fundamental contract of the country, which relies on government officials to carry out their legal duties, whether they personally agree with them or not. 鈥淒o your job!鈥� has been a frequent cry of protesters.聽

The Supreme Court has agreed with that view in the past. 鈥淲hen a citizen enters government service, the citizen by necessity must accept certain limitations on his or her freedom,鈥� the court said in a 2006 ruling.

On the whole, the notion of a government official facing sanctions for refusing to accept federal court rulings is 鈥渦nusual, but not unprecedented,鈥� says Douglas Laycock, a religious studies scholar at the University of Virginia and an expert on religious liberty.

But for many Americans, Davis鈥檚 decision to hold her strongly held beliefs above personal freedom is part of a broader look at what Senator Rubio, in a statement, called 鈥渁 balance between government鈥檚 responsibility to abide by the laws of our republic and allowing people to stand by their religious convictions.鈥澛�

Rubio added that while Davis, as an elected court clerk, has a duty to carry out the law, 鈥渢here should be a way to protect the religious freedom and conscience rights of individuals working in the office.鈥�