- Cooking Mama’s return whips up a fresh batch of memes Tuesday 8:18 PM
- Influencer body-shames model, Photoshops photo of self to ‘prove point’ Tuesday 7:27 PM
- Boosie Badazz goes on transphobic rant about Dwyane Wade’s daughter Tuesday 6:34 PM
- Royal Family’s website accidentally links to porn instead of charity Tuesday 5:39 PM
- Republican senator spreads false conspiracy about coronavirus Tuesday 5:11 PM
- New DNA technology could help exonerate Black man serving life sentence Tuesday 4:24 PM
- ‘SNL’s’ Kenan Thompson to host the White House Correspondents’ Dinner Tuesday 3:58 PM
- Singer Summer Walker dragged for insensitive HIV comments Tuesday 2:39 PM
- This video of a teddy bear getting steam cleaned makes a perfect meme Tuesday 2:27 PM
- Ted Cruz goes on Twitter tirade over proposed vasectomy bill Tuesday 2:22 PM
- Billie Eilish says she’s stopped reading Instagram comments Tuesday 2:13 PM
- Christian group blames satanists for Twitter poll results Tuesday 1:41 PM
- Coronavirus has pandemic-themed video games topping charts Tuesday 12:58 PM
- Bloomberg said kids are drawn to socialism because they think it involves social media Tuesday 12:55 PM
- Jake Paul gives ill-informed advice on how to deal with anxiety Tuesday 12:25 PM
Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples citing religious reasons, can now be sued for damages, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
After the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in 2015, Davis denied several same-sex couples marriage licenses, including David Ermold and David Moore of Rowan County. They, along with two other couples, sued Davis, but the cases were all dismissed by a U.S. District judge on the grounds that Kentucky had changed its licensing policy to remove clerks’ names from marriage licenses, a request Davis had made.
Ermold and Moore, though, appealed the decision, and today the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that even though Kentucky changed its policies in 2016, it does not excuse the harm Davis caused the couples in 2015. Furthermore, it is “not a general challenge to Davis’ policy, but rather seeks damages for a particularized harm allegedly suffered by a specific set of plaintiffs,” the court wrote.
Now the case will circle back to the U.S. District judge. Should he choose to favor the couple, Davis could be held liable for damages.
Davis recently dropped her case against Kentucky, in which she claimed the state was violating her First Amendment rights. However, she is still appealing a ruling requiring her to issue licenses.
H/T the Cut
Anastassia Gliadkovskaya is a lifestyle and politics reporter. Her work has been published by Empire State Tribune and Urban Watch magazine.