George Reynolds Polygamy Case Study

Opinion: The court voted 7-2 in favor of Griswold. The court decides that the Bill of Rights creates a right to privacy. The first, third, and ninth Amendments create a right which provides privacy in marriage situations. The Connecticut law breaks this right which makes it void.

The court also referred to its 1955 decision in “Naim v. Naim” as stating the reasons supporting the validity of the anti-miscegenation laws. In Naim, the state court concluded that the State's legitimate purposes were "to preserve the racial integrity of its citizens," and to prevent "the corruption of blood," "a mongrel breed of citizens," and "the obliteration of racial pride," obviously an endorsement of the doctrine of White Supremacy. The court also reasoned that marriage has traditionally been subject to state regulation without federal intervention, and consequently, the regulation of marriage should be left to exclusive state control by the Tenth Amendment.

government by using the “right to privacy” argument for many other court cases and not just for married couples. Griswold v Connecticut has influenced other cases’ decisions like Eisenstadt v. Baird to take it one step farther and let unmarried couple use contraception also. Similarly, Roe v Wade also used Griswold v Connecticut to help decide their case as well. This case was also quoted in linked cases that led the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision to allow same sex marriage in the court case Obergefell v. Hodges.

Polygamy is a practice of having more than one wife. George Reynolds already had a wife but he married again in order to have a second spouse. With polygamy being banned in all fifty states, Reynolds was convicted of bigamy. However, Reynold stated that the law was unconstitutional on First Amendment basis. He told the court that he was a member of the Mormon Church. The Mormon church had a doctrine that practiced polygamy. He argued that because he was a member of the church, he was expected to marry twice. He told the court he was fulfilling a religious duty. Because he convicted

The first case that the Supreme Court displayed its power of deeming a person guilty for practicing their religion is during the case of Reynolds v. the U.S. (1878). In this court case, George Reynolds was arrested for having multiple wives. His reasoning for having multiple was was due to him practicing his religion. With a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court deemed Reynolds of being guilty. This was mainly because the First Amendment protected their beliefs,

United States (1878) where he says, “Polygamy has always been odious among the northern and western nations of Europe, and, until the establishment of the Mormon Church, was almost exclusively a feature of the life of Asiatic and of African people. At common law, the second marriage was always void,” The court then agreed that this act of multiple marriages would not line up with the traditions our country was founded on. In other words, the court does not believe polygamy should be allowed because the United States was founded on certain principles and morals that polygamy would challenge and even go against.

Individuals in America possess many freedoms that individuals in foreign countries like China, South Korea, and Afghanistan do not have access to. The liberties granted by the First Amendment gives people the right to express their personal and religious beliefs without interference from the Government. The protection given to the people by the First Amendment stops the Government from becoming too strong or monarchical, a fear that comes from the oppressive rule of Great Britain that the Founding Fathers desperately wanted to avoid happening again. The preservation of individuals expressing their political, religious, or personal beliefs is an important right of American citizens that should not be overlooked. A recent illustration of the First Amendment in use for individuals can be seen with the Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015. The Court ruling directly impacts individuals by giving people the legal right to have same-sex marriages.

The Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia (1967) resulted in the striking down of state laws that prohibited whites and African Americans from marrying. Mildred Loving, one of the parties in the case, issued a statement on the fortieth-anniversary of her case in which she urged that same-sex couples be allowed to marry.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.

The argument brought before the Supreme Court was to eliminate the ban on same sex marriage that was still held by thirteen states. This was done as part of a lawsuit called Obergefell versus Hodges. Court documents outline that, “14 same-sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners are deceased, filed suits in Federal District Courts in their home States, claiming that respondent state officials violate the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them the right to marry or to have marriages lawfully performed in another State given full recognition.” (United States Court of Appeals)

Judge Moore informed probate judges on the eve of the historical same-sex marriage decision that the federal ruling did not apply to them. Later on, in a separate ruling, it was ordered that the many of the counties that were holding back from marrying same-sex couples were to start issuing licenses to same-sex couples. Still Judge Moore says he stands firm in that while the court can authorize same-sex marriages but they cannot force a constitutional officer to disobey his oath by doing so (Elliott, 2015). Federal district judges held the law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman unconstitutional (Eastman, 2015). However, the United States Supreme Court met and ratified Chief Justice Moore’s stance.

The proposed legalization of same-sex marriage is one of the most significant issues in contemporary American family law. As a heavily campaigned development currently discussed in law assessment; these extremely confrontational and debatable political questions are facing present day American courts. If same-sex marriage is legalized, its affect on the parents, children, same sex couples, families, and the social and political world will be astronomical. The arguments surrounding the issue though confrontational nonetheless are easily seen from a wide array of perspectives. One of the perspectives states that marriage is a promise to a spouse to stay loyal and faithful in all

Hyde v Hyde 1866 defined the term marriage as: “The voluntary union of one man and one woman at the exclusion of all others for life”. This definition is built of the back of a very morally religious country, and in fact prior to the definition it uses the words “in christendom” . The basis of this concept can be traced right back to the creation of religion with the creation of Adam and Eve as Husband and Wife in the bible . This position has stood the test of time and is still to some extent true in today’s society. However the Legislature and Judiciary have over the last forty to fifty years appeared to severely weaken the position and in some instances have gone as far as saying Hyde is no longer relevant .

A woman pushes as hard as she can for the last time. “It’s a baby girl!” the man announces, as the new mother hangs her head in sight of the hardships her baby, Elizabeth, will face. Miles away in a hospital, another woman gives birth to a healthy baby girl, Marley. As she sees her baby for the first time, she smiles knowing all the great adventures this baby will experience in her life. The polygamous mom takes the little girl home to her family, a family where she has more than one mother and many brothers and sisters. As she grows up she lives her life trying to be “proper” and “sweet” in the eyes of the prophet. Somewhere far away, Marley is outside playing with her mother and learning how to be a kid. At the age of fourteen, young girls like Marley are innocent and should be going on dates, having fun with friends, and living their life, but for a fourteen year old Elizabeth, she is married to a man twice her age to be his second wife. As she begins her life with her husband, she sees the jealousy of the first wife and the neglect she feels by her presence. Shortly after, the young girl is replaced by another new wife after having a child. Ever since the day she was born, she had no control over these stages happening. Her fate was determined from time of birth and is determined by men until the day she dies. Her fate will be ruled by the religion of Polygamy.

Polygamy has been illegal in the United States since 1878, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that freedom to practice the Mormon religion did not extend to having multiple wives (Reynolds v United States 1878). Federal law does not allow prospective immigrants who practice polygamy into the United States. Although, there has been polygamy found in New York among some immigrants from countries in which