Kim Davis, the county clerk who was briefly jailed for contempt of court and ultimately lost her job for refusing to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples, will not get her case heard in the land's highest court. Though the Supreme Court turned her away, two of its justices—Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito—offered a letter attacking the court's decision in Obergefell that made gay marriage the law of the land.
It would be one thing if recognition for same-sex marriage had been debated and adopted through the democratic process, with the people deciding not to provide statutory protections for religious liberty under state law. But it is quite another when the Court forces that choice upon society through its creation of atextual constitutional rights and its ungenerous interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause, leaving those with religious objections in the lurch.
The rationale Thomas offers, that the religious liberties of state officials must be considered before the civil rights of civilians wanting to get married, could apply to other things, too.
The arguments Thomas is making here against Obergefell & marriage equality could also apply to Loving v. Virginia (which overturned anti-miscegenation laws) — with the end result of invalidating Thomas' own marriage.