As the world awaits the Senate confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barret, an old case may once again make it's way to the Supreme Court.  Could SCOTUS justices signal apparent willingness to revisit same-sex marriage.

Two US Supreme Court Justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, sent a resounding message Monday in the rift between religious liberty and same-sex marriage as the Justices criticized the Court's 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling which opened the door to such unions. Thomas wrote that the decision "enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss." CNN reports Thomas went on to say that the court chose to "privilege" a "novel constitutional right over the religious liberty interests explicitly protected in the First Amendment, and by doing so un democratically, the Court has created a problem only it can fix." He issued his opinion as SCOTUS begins a new term. The Court declined to hear the case of Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk, who refused to issued same-sex marriage licenses in 2015. Though, he agreed with the decision to decline her case because he says it wasn't properly presented, Thomas says she's "one of the first victims" of the decision, but won't be last.  Did the court simply usurp one constitutional right for another? Was the 2015 ruling simply lazy? Is there a way to protect everyone's liberty? What do you think the Court's new composition would do?