Over a decade has passed since America's highest judicial body ruled in Obergefell v Hodges that the Constitution contains a right to same sex-marriage.

Although an attempt was made earlier this year to challenge that decision, the Supreme Court was quick to reject it. 

Petition challenged ruling by Sixth Circuit panel

According to The Hill, the request was made by former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed for six days in 2015 after she refused to provide a marriage license to a gay Kentucky couple on religious grounds.

The website reported in July that a 90-page filing was submitted by lawyers with the Christian nonprofit legal group Liberty Counsel, which represents Davis.

It asked the Supreme Court to review a ruling that had been rendered in March by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

The appeals court had upheld a lower court's decision that Davis had violated the constitutional rights of David Ermold and David Moore when she refused to issue them a marriage license.

Davis ordered to pay combined total of $360,000

The pair were awarded $100,000 in damages two years ago and they also received an additional $260,000 to cover legal expenses earlier this year.

Although Davis maintained that her choice to deny the license was protected under the Fifth Amendment, a three-judge panel concluded otherwise.

It stated that as a public official, Davis was precluded from raising a First Amendment defense since she was "being held liable for state action, which the First Amendment does not protect."

Attorney Mat Staver serves as chair of Liberty Counsel, and he said "Kim Davis’ case underscores why the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn the wrongly decided Obergefell v. Hodges opinion because it threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman."

Couple points to question of First Amendment protection for public officials

Liberty Counsel's petition asserted that Obergefell should be overturned "for the same reasons articulated in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center," which was the 2002 that overturned Roe v. Wade.

"Obergefell was wrong when it was decided and it is wrong today because it was grounded entirely on the legal fiction of substantive due process," the petition added.

However, lawyers for Ermold and Moore countered that Davis' appeal was improperly because she had waived the argument that public officials enjoy First Amendment protection when carrying out their duties.

"The Court should hold her to that representation," they wrote. "Reaching the question of whether to overrule Obergefell in the context of this case would also require the Court to first decide thorny questions about how such a ruling would affect Davis’s liability."