September 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

Subscribe

« The Law Doesn’t Say You Must Quit Your Job | Main | Challenge: The Gospels Were Selected for Political Reasons »

September 07, 2015

Comments

Davis is confused about what it means for her name to be on the documents.

The presence of her name on these documents tells Rowan County taxpayers and voters...

Kim Davis is responsible for the accurate and prompt running of the Rowan County Clerk's Office. If your paper work is processed accurately and promptly, perhaps you want to vote to re-elect her. Her name is not on the documents to indicate she approves of the actions recorded in the documents.

Or perhaps she is pretending to be confused in this way.

Exactly what accommodations are made for other licenses in Kentucky? I have seen this several places but haven't seen any specifics.

Maybe they should just add a disclaimer on the bottom of all documents "the clerks name on this document in no way reflects compliance with the clerks personal beliefs, but rather indicates compliance with all applicable laws" But shouldn't we all realize that anyways?

jennell,

Yes. Simply say explicitly what we already all know!

Interestingly, no suggestion like yours is among the accomodations the laywers working for Davis mention here (bottom of page 30).

Search the doc for 'numerous'.


Thanks Ron, this answers the question of which licenses they provide an opt out for (fish and wildlife) But I still can't find any details about this.

And I am surprised they mentioned North Carolina. My understanding is that the equivalent position to the County Clerk is the register of deeds in North Carolina. And that the register of deeds is"required to ensure that all qualified applicants for marriage licenses are issued a license" but can allow assistant and deputy registers of deeds to opt out of issuing them if someone else is whiling to issue them in the office. And furthermore, the register of deeds name appears on all licenses no matter who issues them.

So it doesn't appear that North Carolina's exception would change anything for Mrs. Davis. Does anyone have any evidence to the contrary?

And sorry that should read "willing" instead of "whiling". I don't always catch my dyslexia mistakes when typing :)

Or perhaps RonH is pretending to be confused in this way - that we are all still waiting with baited breath for his response to Mo on the PP thread.............crickets, still.........

jennell, the point about North Carolina is merely that their legislature acted to provide conscience protections and other states ought to, as well, in order to promote peaceful coexistence. Anderson didn't say NC's exception in particular would change things for Davis. He said, "Perhaps a similar solution could be found in Kentucky, by removing an individual clerk’s name and title from a marriage license." His overall point is that states should, in general, pass concience protection laws to prevent future conflict.

Which 'cheap accommodation' do you favor Amy?

I dunno RonH, which 'cheap accommodation' are you offering?
Anytime you are ready to take a swing; we are still waiting for that PP answer. Accommodate us.......

The one Eugene Volokh recommended in the article I quoted in my previous post.

Amy,

Thanks.

Volokh has updated.

I'm not sure what your answer means...

Do you propose to have the name of the county clerk on the documents she records or not?

Do you propose the give the clerk the choice - as if she were some sort of authority exerting a power?

If you would let her do the job without her name on the documents: What if the legislature values the presence of that name?

It seems, based on my googling, that is very common for the name of the County Clerk to be on the documents she records.

Why?


Yes, I was working on a update as you were writing that, as you've seen now! I don't have the legal knowledge or the knowledge of how their system works to know what would be burdensome. Volokh is a legal scholar, so I defer to him for recommendations, but the decision will need to be weighed by a judge who will have access to the knowledge he needs to make the decision of what is or isn't a reasonable accommodation that doesn't overly burden the state.

The comments to this entry are closed.