A federal appeals court has ruled that Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk who denied marriage licenses to a same-sex couple because she believed their relationship was immoral, could be held individually liable for her refusal.

Davis, formerly an employee of Rowan County, Kentucky, ignited controversy with her actions after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the right to same-sex marriage. She was sued by the couple, David Ermold and David Moore, but in defense claimed that she was immune from liability both as a government employee and as an individual.

"This case comes to us at a relatively early stage. The district court hasn't issued a final ruling, a trial hasn't occurred, and the parties haven't completed discovery. That means we don't look at evidence; we look at allegations. So we ask not whether Davis definitively violated plaintiffs' rights but whether they adequately allege that she did," Judge Richard Griffin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit wrote.

"The district court ruled that Davis, as an official, acted on Kentucky's behalf, meaning sovereign immunity protected her," he continued. "Plaintiffs dispute that ruling. The court also ruled that plaintiffs pleaded a plausible case that Davis, as an individual, violated their right to marry and that the right was clearly established, meaning qualified immunity didn't protect her. Davis disputes that ruling. We agree with the district court on both issues and therefore affirm."

Griffin said that because Davis acted on Kentucky's behalf when she was employed at Rowan County, she was shielded from liability by sovereign immunity.

The same could not be said of her as a defendant in her individual capacity, however.

The question turned to whether the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged claims against Davis sound enough to survive summary judgment.

"That they do. Plaintiffs allege that: (1) the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees them the right, as same-sex couples, to marry; (2) they sought marriage licenses from Davis, whom Kentucky tasked with issuing those licenses; (3) under Kentucky law, they qualified for licenses; and (4) Davis refused to license them," Griffin said. "Put differently, they identify the specific right they sought to exercise, what they did to exercise it, who thwarted their efforts, and how she did so. Plaintiffs therefore adequately alleged the violation of a constitutional right. And that right was clearly established when Davis acted. To be clearly established, the right's contours must have been so obvious that a reasonable official would have known that her conduct was out of bounds."

In a concurrence in part, Judge John Bush of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed with the majority's holding but differed with its reasoning.

"I agree that Davis violated Plaintiffs' constitutional rights and is not entitled to qualified immunity. But, unlike the Majority, I don't find that Davis's actions constituted an outright ban of same-sex marriage, and I believe they should be reviewed using tiers-of-scrutiny analysis. Her conduct, however, does not survive even rational-basis review because of her antihomosexual animus," Bush said.

Religious liberty advocacy group Liberty Counsel represents Davis. Founder and chairman Mat Staver issued a statement.

"Regarding Kim Davis, this case is not over. Kim Davis sought a religious accommodation, and today every Kentucky clerk benefits from her efforts thanks to Governor Matt Bevin and the entire general assembly. I believe Kim Davis will prevail on the individual damages claim," said Staver.

Michael Joseph Gartland of Delcotto Law Group represented the plaintiff.

Of the court's sovereign immunity ruling ,Gartland said. "We don think the court got it right, we're seriously consideration filing a motion for en banc review," Gartlan said of the court's ruling regarding sovereign immunity."