US Supreme Court refuses to revisit same-sex marriage ruling

The Catholic Herald • November 11, 2025

The Supreme Court of the United States has declined to revisit its 2015 ruling that legalised same-sex marriage across the country.

The court turned away an appeal by Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples on religious grounds.

The decision, made without comment on Monday, leaves in place a lower court order requiring her to pay about $360,000 in damages and legal costs to a couple denied a licence.

Davis had argued that her refusal was an exercise of conscience, but the courts found that as an elected official she had no right to use her own beliefs to override constitutional protections.

“Davis cannot use her own constitutional rights as a shield to violate the constitutional rights of others while performing her duties as an elected official,” wrote Judge David Bunning when ruling against her in 2022.

Her legal team had urged the justices to reconsider the landmark decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that same-sex couples are entitled to marry under the Constitution. They cited Catholic Justice Clarence Thomas, who has described the 2015 judgment as having “ruinous consequences” for religious liberty.

He was one of four dissenters in that case, alongside Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. While Roberts has remained silent on the matter, Alito has criticised the ruling but said recently he was not seeking its reversal.

Catholic Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court later, has said there are times when past errors should be corrected, referencing the 2022 decision that ended the constitutional right to abortion.

The Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson welcomed the latest decision, telling AP News that “the Supreme Court made clear today that refusing to respect the constitutional rights of others does not come without consequences.”

Davis became a national figure in 2015 when she defied court orders and served six days in jail for contempt after declining to issue licences following the Obergefell decision. She was later released when her deputies issued the documents without her name, prompting Kentucky lawmakers to remove clerks’ names from all marriage forms. She lost her bid for re-election three years later.

Political commentators have noted that the Supreme Court’s refusal to take up the case shows how firmly Obergefell v. Hodges now stands, entrenched culturally. For now, the court appears unwilling to reopen one of the most contentious social debates of modern American life.

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman and therefore cannot recognise same-sex marriage. While it calls for respect, compassion and sensitivity toward people with same-sex attraction, it maintains that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and that legal recognition of such unions is not permissible. A 2003 Vatican document reaffirmed that respect for homosexual persons “cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.” Under Pope Francis, the Church has allowed priests to offer non-liturgical blessings to same-sex couples in certain circumstances but insists these are distinct from marriage.

A recent YouGov poll found that only 54 per cent of American adults supported same-sex marriage, the same proportion recorded in a separate June survey on recognising same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. In that earlier poll, 26 per cent said the issue should be decided by individual states. The results contrast with a 2021 CBS News/YouGov poll that found that 64% of Americans supported same-sex marriage while 36% were opposed. 

The findings suggest a modest but notable softening in public enthusiasm for same-sex marriage after years of steady approval. For Christians opposed to its legalisation, the numbers may appear encouraging, though analysts caution that the results could reflect statistical fluctuation rather than a lasting shift.