The New York Times eviscerates Kim and Casey Davis for refusing to issue LGBT marriage licenses

Read the entire piece at the New York Times' editorial page editor's blog here.

     To quote Justice Antonin Scalia in a recent case involving another First Amendment claim of religious freedom, “This is really easy.”

     In short, Ms. Davis has no right, constitutional or otherwise, to refuse to do the job Kentucky pays her to do. As a municipal official, she is required to issue marriage licenses to anyone who may legally get married. Since June 26, when the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution forbids states to ban same-sex marriage, that population includes April Miller, Karen Roberts, David Ermold and David Moore — the two couples she rebuffed on Tuesday.

    The Davises don’t seem to understand the two-sided game they’re playing, appealing to the Constitution even as they violate it. Perhaps they forgot that the First Amendment protects the people from the government, not the other way around... it’s worth repeating once again: No one is telling Ms. Davis what she may or may not believe, or how to live her own life in accord with the dictates of her conscience and her God. What they are saying is that as an employee and representative of the government, she lives under the law, not above it.

Over at Slate, Mark Joseph Stern wonders if the well-heeled Liberty Counsel isn't hanging Kim Davis out to dry while milking her case for publicity and donations.