In our system, the Supreme Court determines the constitutionality of laws, and there is no higher authority than it. When it gets things wrong, as it sometimes does, it does so with no less finality.
The Supreme Court adjudged the continuing denial of state sanctioned marriage to same sex couples to be unconstitutional based on equal protection provisions of the 14th Amendment. The decision was controversial, and it was poorly rendered.
An official of a county in Kentucky believes that she cannot in good conscience, provide same-sex couples with marriage licenses, as it is her responsibility under the law, to do, as long as such other laws as are in force in that jurisdiction are followed. She is neither following the law or doing her job.
The complication here is that there is a religious practice issue, one worthy of respect. The official in question refuses to grant same sex couples licenses on religious grounds. The law under which she previously in good conscience, performed her duties, has changed, and its constitutionality has been validated.
And so, this official must A) issue licenses or B) quit. There really is no middle ground here, I'm sorry.
One can cite all sorts of other instances where public officials aren't following the law (Obama immigration, DC open carry, etc), and one would be correct in pointing out that these are also unacceptable.
What is most dangerous of all to the continuing function of our democracy is the degree to which previously clear thinking individuals now believe it is acceptable to pick and choose among the laws we follow of which we approve. Worse yet, is the "they are doing it, so why shouldn't we" mentality that often accompanies this behavior.
Conservatives are special, and useful, and dare I say, correct--in no small part because we tend to embrace principles while eschewing the emotion of the moment. And while it may be initially satisfying to call for resistance and take to the barricades over a local official standing her ground against the immorality of the federal government, the truly conservative manner in which to view this situation is the long view, one in which we think CLEARLY about the long term consequences of allowing government officials to pick and choose laws to enforce. Some of those laws are likely to be among ones conservatives value. And because those with whom we disagree seem to have decided to make this practice of selective enforcement a habit, in no way requires us to do the same.
In other words--don't come bitching to me about Hillary and her servers and her email and her TS/SCI traffic on unclassified channels if you in the next breath, support the actions of a county clerk to deny legally able citizens their right to marry. Both actions are wrong. And we must not become confused about this.