From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
|
|
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
|
{{Short description|2025 Supreme Court case}} |
{{Short description|2025 Supreme Court case}} |
||
|
<!– Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the discussion has been closed. –> |
|||
|
{{Article for deletion/dated|page=Ermold v. Davis|timestamp=20251105082328|year=2025|month=November|day=5|substed=yes}} |
|||
|
<!– Once discussion is closed, please place on talk page: {{Old AfD multi|page=Ermold v. Davis|date=5 November 2025|result=””‘keep”’}} –> |
|||
|
<!– End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point –> |
|||
|
{{Orphan|date=November 2025}} |
{{Orphan|date=November 2025}} |
||
|
{{Notability}} |
|||
|
{{Infobox court case |
{{Infobox court case |
||
|
|name = Ermold v. Davis |
|name = Ermold v. Davis |
||
Latest revision as of 08:24, 5 November 2025
2025 Supreme Court case
Ermold v. Davis, also known as Davis v. Ermold,[1] is a case appealed by Kim Davis to the Supreme Court of the United States seeking to overturn the court’s past decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which recognized the fundamental right of same-sex couples to marry.
Questions presented
[edit]
(1) Whether the First Amendment free exercise clause provides an affirmative defense to tort liability based solely on emotional distress damages with no actual damages in the same manner as the free speech clause under Snyder v. Phelps; (2) whether a government official stripped of Eleventh Amendment immunity and sued in her individual capacity based solely on emotional distress damages with no actual damages is entitled to assert individual capacity and personal First Amendment defenses in the same or similar manner as any other individual defendant like in Snyder; and (3) whether Obergefell v. Hodges and substantive due process should be overturned.[1]
On July 24, 2025, a petition for a writ of certiorari was filed.
On October 22, 2025, the case was distributed for the conference on November 7.[2]
The Supreme Court is scheduled to decide on November 7, 2025, whether to hear the case.[3]
