Supreme Court Case Study

In The Gay Marriage Case, Obergefell v Hodges, the United States Supreme Court decided that a state may not prohibit same-sex marriage. Instead, it emphasized that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to the gay society through the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment of the United States of America Constitution. The involved decision maker in the case was Justice Anthony Kennedy, who gave four primary reasons for his decision.

What was the court’s decision in the case? What reason did they give? What landmark case did they cite?

The Supreme Court’s decision finalized the questions of whether states have the right to pass laws treating marriages differently based upon sex, and if states have to acknowledge the marriage of same-sex couples who were married in another state. On a 5-4 decision, the Court determined that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because they cannot be treated differently than opposite sex couples. The court also determined that states have to recognize same-sex marriages the same way they do with opposite-sex. However, the Supreme Court did not create a law about same sex marriage, it just stated that

I join the opinion of the court in favor of Hodges and offer these accompanying thoughts. In order to determine if the state is required under the Fourteenth Amendment to license a marriage of same sex, we must establish a foundation in regards to marriage and its entitlements. The court argues that marriage “is not a fundamental right,” and with this conclusion, the state is not be required to legally recognize any marriage it does not see fit. Fundamental rights are due strict scrutiny, but issues of liberty interest only require rational basis. There is a significant difference between the two approaches with ‘rational basis’ only requiring that the law be related to a government interest. “Rational basis” review is generally used in cases where fundamental rights are of issue and is thus fitting for this case under these assumptions.” The constitution does not specifically list marriage as a fundamental right in the Bill of Rights or any of its additional amendments and thus leaves ample room for interpretation of is significance. The defense attempts to use the Fourteenth amendment in their defense as it asserts,

1) What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

A landmark case in United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States,

The Chief Justice that presided over this case was C.J. Rehnquist, the other presiding Justices were J. O'Connor, J. Stevens, J. Souter, J. Breyer, JJ. Thomas, J. Kennedy, J. Scalia, and JJ. Ginsburg. Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion over the case with Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas filed concurring opinions. Whereas, Justices Breyer, Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion. Before I go into the opinion that Rehnquist delivered I would like to go in to some of the opinions that the other Justices' had stated as to their dissenting opinions.

Name of the Justice who issued the majority opinion of the case: Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

Hodges, because the US Supreme Court case brought equal marriage rights to same-sex couples in every state. Fourteen same sex couples, with two individuals whose same sex partners were deceased, filed suits in federal districts courts of their home state’s, arguing that respondents’ state officials violated the 14th Amendment denying the individuals the right to marry or lawfully marry in another state given full recognition. One of the petitioners, Obergefell, had established a lasting commitment together with John Arthur but unfortunately Arthur was diagnosed with Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Due to that Obergefell and Arthur wanted to marry before Arthur died. The two married in Maryland but when Obergefell and Arthur came back to the state of Ohio where they encountered

The judges based their decision on the principle of equality of all before the law. The 14th Amendment requires a state to celebrate a marriage between two persons of the same sex. According to US constitutional law, each US state has its own Constitution, but it is above all the US Federal Constitution. To date 37 of the 50 American states, as well as the District of Columbia, recognized gay marriage. Now, the 14 American states that still refuse to unite two persons of the same sex will not only have to marry

The Supreme Court ruled in Obergerfell v. Hodges that States are required to grant a marriage license to same-sex couples and recognize the licenses of same-sex marriages from other states. In the oral arguments leading up to the June decision, the Obama’s Solicitor General, Donald Vierilli admitted before the Justices that religious institutions may lose their tax-exempt status if they continue to affirm that a marriage is between a man and a woman.

The government’s standing, in this case, was that it was necessary to defend DOMA. Despite an announcement made by the President and the Attorney General against the defense of DOMA, a Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) of the House of Representatives went ahead and filed a petition to dismiss the case. The motion to dismissed the case filed by the House of Representatives was summarily denied and in a later holding found that DOMA was unconstitutional, the motion was later affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

The Court further noted the relationship between the liberty of the Due Process Clause and the equality of the Equal Protection Clause and determined that same-sex marriage bans violates the latter. Concluding that the liberty and equality of same-sex couples was significantly burdened, the Court struck down same-sex marriage bans for violating both clauses, holding that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all fifty states. Due to the "substantial and continuing harm" and the "instability and uncertainty" caused by state marriage laws varying with regard to same-sex couples, and because respondent states had conceded that a ruling requiring them to marry same-sex couples would undermine their refusal to hold valid same-sex marriages performed in other states, the Court also held that states must recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other

Once the lawsuit was filed the district courts found for the plaintiffs in each occurrence, however the state officials filed an appealed for the Sixth Circuit to the United States Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals combined the cases and ruled out under the constitution that states did not have to license or welcome same sex marriage. The plaintiffs responded by petitioning the United States Supreme Court for certiorari, and it was granted. On April 28, 2015, oral arguments in all four cases under the Obergefell

The right to same sex marriage has been involved within the Constitution as part of Amendments V, VIII, and XV. Marriage is both global and central. All across our country, in every region, every social class, every race and ethnicity, every religion or non-religion, people get married. Same sex marriage was a division of social and political. An example of a court case dealing with same sex marriage is Baehr v. Lewin. In 1993, Hawaii’s high court issues first-of-a-kind ruling that a barrier to marriage is discrimination, launching the freedom to marry movement. Three years later in 1996, a full trial took place and was decided that the same-sex couples are entitled to marriage licenses. Later in 1998, Hawaii amends its constitution with regard to marriage by exempting same-sex couples from protection of equality guarantee, giving legislature the power to define marriage as limited to a man and a woman. However, a year later in 1999, Baehr v. Lewin Hawaii’s high court rules that Hawaii’s constitution no longer protects lesbian and gay individuals with regard to their freedom to marry. As in today, some states in the United States did not approve the right for same sex marriage. On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to force same-sex marriage on all 50 states. According to the Supreme Court Justice page, “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that there is a federal constitutional right to