The Supreme Court is set to review a petition from Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk, who is seeking to overturn the landmark same-sex marriage ruling from 2015, Obergefell v. Hodges. This request comes ten years after the Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Davis, who gained national attention after being jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, is appealing a jury verdict that ordered her to pay $100,000 in damages and $260,000 in attorney fees.

In her 90-page petition, Davis argues that her First Amendment rights to religious freedom protect her from liability. She claims that the Obergefell decision was "egregiously wrong" and describes the majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy as "legal fiction." This marks the first time since the original ruling that the Supreme Court has been asked to reconsider the precedent on same-sex marriage.

Davis is viewed as one of the few individuals with the legal standing to challenge Obergefell effectively. Her case is unique because she was the first public official jailed for refusing to comply with the ruling based on her religious beliefs. Lower courts have largely dismissed her claims, with a recent federal appeals court ruling that the First Amendment does not protect her actions while acting in her official capacity.

The context surrounding Davis' petition is significant. At the time of the Obergefell decision, 35 states had laws banning same-sex marriage, while only eight states had legalized it. In recent years, several states have introduced legislation urging the Supreme Court to revisit the ruling. The Southern Baptist Convention has also made overturning Obergefell a priority in its agenda.

Public opinion on same-sex marriage remains strong, with about 70% of Americans supporting it, according to recent polling. However, support among Republicans has declined from 55% in 2021 to 41% in 2025. Davis' legal team draws parallels between her case and the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, suggesting that the Court may be willing to reconsider substantive due process precedents like Obergefell.

Davis' attorney, Mat Staver, argues that the Supreme Court has an opportunity to correct what he calls an "egregious opinion" from 2015. Meanwhile, William Powell, representing the same-sex couple Davis refused to serve, expressed confidence that the Supreme Court will not take up the case, stating, "Marriage equality is settled law."

The Supreme Court is expected to decide this fall whether to hear Davis' appeal. If the Court agrees to take the case, arguments could be scheduled for spring 2026, with a ruling anticipated by June of that year. If the Court declines to hear the case, lower court decisions against Davis will remain in effect. Even if Obergefell were to be overturned, existing same-sex marriages would still be recognized under the 2022 Respect for Marriage Act.