Religious Liberty

.docx

School

Liberty University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

421

Subject

Law

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by CaptainWildcatMaster1036

Religious Liberty: Research Paper Cortney Caruso Govt421-B04 March 5, 2024

Introduction Throughout the history of the United States, a fine line has always existed between what is politically correct and what is morally and ethically right. Although the Founding Father’s wrote the Constitution as a living document, meant to be able grow, and evolve with our nation, not even the Founding Fathers could have predicted the controversial issues that have recently been brought to the Supreme Court. One such issue, is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, this amendment was created to allow all citizens to have the right to religious liberty. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” ( Declaration of independence and the preamble ) Although our rights to religious liberty have been threatened throughout several court cases, we will focus on two of the most contentious cases to go in front of the Supreme Court recently, the case of Obergefell v. Hodges and the case of Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Civil Rights Commission. Obergefell v. Hodges One of the most controversial Supreme Court Cases of our time is the 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges. In the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, the facts of the case are that fourteen groups of same-sex couples sued their relevant state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of those states' bans on same-sex marriage or refusal to recognize legal same-sex marriages that occurred in jurisdictions that provided for such marriages. ( Obergefell v. Hodges ) In short, the petitioners believed the states violate their Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process and equal protection by denying the right to marry, or to have their marriages lawfully performed in another state. There were two legal questions to

be answered in Obergefell v. Hodges; Does the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution require all states to issue a marriage license to two people of the same sex? They also wanted to know if the amendment that allowed all citizens the right to due process and equal protection would also require all states to recognize a marriage license that was legally performed and issued in another state, to two people of the same sex. The outcome in the landmark case of Obergefell v. Hodges, was determined on June 26, 2015, when the Supreme Court reached a 5-4 decision. The court ruled that state bans on same sex marriage are unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. (Legal Information Institute) The Supreme Court concluded by stating that marriage was a fundamental right given to all United States citizens, regardless of who they loved, as the court ruled in the case of Loving v. Virginia in 1967. In Chief Justice John Roberts dissent letter, that was supported by the court’s most conservative members, Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas; Chief Roberts concluded that the court’s decision was a poor one because it is the Supreme Court’s job to interrupt the laws, not create them. The definition of marriage had long been established as being between one man and one woman. Chief Roberts continued by stating, that the “Although the policy arguments for extending marriage to same-sex couples may be compelling, the legal arguments for requiring such an extension are not. fundamental right to marry does not include a right to make a State change their definition of marriage. A State’s decision to maintain the meaning of marriage that has persisted in every culture throughout human history can hardly be called irrational.” (Clarke, 2015) Analysis- Obergefell v. Hodges

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help