Same-Sex Courting
The United States of America has always been ground for controversial issues. Slavery, segregation, and individual rights are just a few of the many topics argued within the United States Supreme Court. Although all topics argued in the Supreme Court are important, one issue has stood out in more recent years. This topic is same-sex marriage. The earliest Supreme Court case regarding same-sex marriage can be dated back to 1972 with Baker v. Nelson. The most recent same-sex, Supreme Court case took place in 2015. This landmark case was Obergefell v. Hodges.
The Supreme Court acts as a referee while Congress, the President, the state police, and government officials are players. The Supreme Court monitors these positions
…show more content…
Nelson. In 1972, two University of Minnesota students of the same-sex applied for marriage. Their request was denied because of a state law that restricted marriage to “persons of opposite sex”. The couple filed a lawsuit against the marriage clerk that denied their request, Gerald Nelson. The coupled stated that the denial violated their due process and equal protection rights granted in the Fourteenth Amendment and their privacy right granted in the First and Ninth Amendments (Scarinci, 2012). The couple also tried using the precedent of the Loving v. Virginia case of 1967, which allowed interracial marriage (Loving v. Virginia, n.d.). The lower court upheld the denial, and when brought to the Supreme Court, the denial remained upheld. The Courts believed there was no correlation between couples of the same-sex, and couples of different races (Scarinci, 2012).
The next same-sex case was in 2003. This case is Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. In this case same-sex couples were granted the right to be married in the state of Massachusetts. This case had a 4-3 verdict and was the first of its kind in the country by a final Appellate Court (Goodridge et al., n.d.) This case was also the case that began same-sex couple acceptance in the United
…show more content…
The next two cases occurred in the same year, at around the same time. These cases were Hollingsworth v. Perry, and United States v. Windsor. Both of these cases regarded same-sex marriage, but each one regarded it on different terms. Hollingsworth v. Perry was a California case that began with a proposition (Proposition 8). This proposition was to amend California’s constitution to make marriage only between a man and a woman. Respondents were same-sex couples that wanted to marry. They filed against the proposition in the federal court, saying it violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court ruled the proposition unconstitutional after a bench trial. Petitioners, unsatisfied with the ruling, appealed the ruling to the California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court believed the petitioners were in the right to protect Proposition 8, however, the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s ruling. The case was then taken to the United States Supreme Court where Chief Justice Roberts held that the petitioners were not supposed to defend a proposition, and that the allowance of this was out of the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction (Hollingsworth et al.,
In the case Obergefell v. Hodges, the sixth Circuit recognized that banning same-sex marriage did not violate the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. James Obergefell and John Arthur James, who were legally married in Maryland in 2013, filed a lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio for charging the state’s refusal to recognize same-sex marriages on death certificates on July 19, 2013, and the case was assigned to Judge Timothy S. Black. On July 22, 2013, Judge Black agreed a temporary restraining order that required the state to recognize the marriage of Mr. Obergefell and Mr. Arthur on Mr. Arthur’s death certificate. In addition, on September 26, 2013, the plaintiffs
The Petitioners were married in the District of Columbia pursuant to its laws. Shortly after their marriage, the Petitioners returned to Virginia and were charged by a grand jury with violating Virginia’s ban on interracial marriages. The Petitioners pled guilty to the violation and left the State of Virginia pursuant to a condition of their judicial sentence. The Petitioners filed suit in a Virginia state court to have the sentence vacated pursuant to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The state court denied the motion to vacate the sentences. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision based on the rationale that the State had a legitimate purpose in preserving the
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the plaintiffs, including fourteen same-sex couples, argued for their marriages performed legally in another state to be recognized in their state of residence. They were asking that the privileges and responsibilities of marriage be granted to them as they would to any opposite-sex couple. The plaintiffs gave examples of how unequal protection negatively affects them to convince the judges that they should have their marriage recognized. Obergefell was denied being included in his spouse’s death record. DeBoer was disallowed adoption with her spouse, which could cause issues should one of the children become sick or one of the parents die.
Obergefell v. Hodges was a case where quite a few same sex couples went to court because their state refused to acknowledge their marriage from other states. It was raised from lower courts to the supreme court because their rights kept being denied. When the supreme court looked at it the issue was if the 14th amendment can force states to recognize same sex marriages from other states. It was a five to four vote ruling that their marriages must be recognized due to the due process clause which states that states cannot arbitrarily withhold rights. The dissenting argument was that “while same-sex marriage might be good and fair policy, the Constitution does not address it, and therefore it is beyond the purview of the Court to decide whether states have to
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court successfully adopts the 14th amendment and applies both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause to establish banning of same-sex marriages unconstitutional.
Out of five key Supreme Court rulings, Obergefell v. Hodges was selected to be evaluated in this piece. The ban on same sex marriage is the law being challenged in the case. According to the case study, “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…” (Oyez, 2014).
In the summer of 2015 the U.S supreme court ruled in favor to legalize same-sex marriage in all 50 countries in the United States. This all occurred because of the Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) case. This very important case involved “14 same-sex couples and two men whose same-sex partners are deceased” and the couples argued that the “state officials violated [their] 14th amendment by denying them the right to marry or to have marriages lawfully performed in another state given full recognition and also violated their equal protection Clause. The supreme court ruled for this case because in the 14th Amendment it clearly declares that all people should have “equal protection under the law”, regardless of race or ethnicity.
On June 2, 1958 Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving went to Washington D.C. to get married and they went back to Virginia a few days later. But because Mildred was of African-American and Native American decent, and Richard was white they were arrested for violating the state law that prohibits interracial marriage. At the time, Virginia was one of 17 states, including Texas and Alabama, that had laws prohibiting interracial marriage (Wolfe). The Supreme Court Case Loving v. Virginia is an important of part of American history that has had a huge impact on racial equality and has helped change the definition of marriage in the United States forever.
Hardwick, decided in 1986. It was overturned in 2003, which upheld 5-4 decisions, it was for the activity of oral and anal sex in private between adults, and it was applied to homosexuals. Lawrence v. Texas was decided in 2003. This was same-sex sexual activity legal, in 13 states and in other parts of the United States. It was 5 justice majorities, which also overturned the same case of Bowers v. Hardwick and did not find a constitutional protection of sexual privacy. DeShaney v. Winnebago Country Department of Social Services, was decided 1989 by the Supreme Court. Which basically held that it has a failure to prevent child abuse by a parent does not violate the child’s right, the liberty of following the 14th amendment. Loving v. Virginia, decided in 1967, and invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Two couples were sentenced to jail for a year, because they had married each other, a white man and black women. Their marriage violated the state’s anti-miscegenation, which prohibited people from marrying each other, especially if they were from a different race. The Supreme Court decision was unanimous, which determined that this prohibition was unconstitutional. Therefore, it was an ending all race legal marriage in the United
Multiple groups of same sex couples sued their state agencies in four different states Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kentucky to challenge the constitutionality of those four states ‘ban on same sex marriage. The plaintiffs of each case argued that the states’ statues violated the Equal Protection Clause and their Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. One plaintiff group also brought up claims under the Civil Rights Act. The Trial court found in favor to all of the plaintiffs cases. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed and held that the states’ ban on same sex marriage and refusal
In April 28, 2015, the Obergefell v. Hodges case was conducting an oral argument about two and a half hours in US Supreme Court. The core issue is whether the rights of same-sex marriage should be protected by The Fourteenth Amendment.
Historically, the same sex marriage movement can be traced back to the early 1970’s, when gay rights activists begun the movement by bringing forward three suits in Minnesota, Kentucky, and Washington, but none of the suits were successful (Rosenberg). Following these actions in 1986, the case of Bowers v. Hardwick was brought before the Supreme Court
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.
Same sex- marriage is still the topic of many peoples conversation across the country. Citizens, divided by politic party, are very passionate about how they feel about it. The president didn’t approve of it at first, but now he finally accepts same- sex marriage, the Judicial System uses its power to dictate to the States, forcing them to accept same- sex marriage. Both houses of Congress continue to debate what marriage means.
In the supreme court case of Obergefell v. Hodges the supreme court ruled that people of the same sex are allowed to be married, with that marriage ban laws across the US became void,