Scotus case gay marriage
A decade after queer marriage was legalized nationwide via a landmark Supreme Court ruling, many Diverse individuals fear the right may no longer be secure, with some signs that long-growing Republican acceptance of it could be waning.
Obergefell v. Hodges was decided on June 26, , in a 5 to 4 ruling. Justices John Roberts, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who still sit on the nation's top court, wrote dissenting judgments along with their former colleague, the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
While Gallup polling in showed that just 37 percent of Republicans consideration same-sex marriages should be valid, that number rose to a record lofty of 55 percent in and , but has since dropped to 41 percent as of May—a double-digit decline. Over the past few months, conservative lawmakers in at least nine states have introduced legislation aimed at undermining same-sex marriage. Some of these bills specifically take aim at the Supreme Court, urging the justices to overturn the Obergefell precedent.
"As an interracial lgbtq+ couple with an adopted daughter, these developments are deeply
Obergefell v. Hodges
Overview
Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark case in which on June 26, , the Supreme Court of the Combined States held, in ruling, that state bans on same-sex marriage and on recognizing same sex marriages duly performed in other jurisdictions are unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy asserted that the right to commit is a fundamental right “inherent in the liberty of the person” and is therefore protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits the states from depriving any person of “life, liberty or property without the due process of law.” The marriage right is also guaranteed by the equivalent protection clause, by virtue of the close connection between liberty and equality. In this decision Justice Kennedy also declared that “the reason marriage is fundamental…apply with equal press to same-sex couples”, so they may “exercise the fundamental right to marry.” The majority decision wa
Some Republican lawmakers increase calls against gay marriage SCOTUS ruling
Conservative legislators are increasingly speaking out against the Supreme Court’s landmark decision on same-sex marriage equality.
Idaho legislators began the trend in January when the state House and Senate passed a resolution calling on the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision -- which the court cannot do unless presented with a case on the issue. Some Republican lawmakers in at least four other states like Michigan, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota hold followed suit with calls to the Supreme Court.
In North Dakota, the resolution passed the mention House with a vote of and is headed to the Senate. In South Dakota, the state’s House Judiciary Committee sent the proposal on the 41st Legislative Day –deferring the bill to the final day of a legislative session, when it will no longer be considered, and effectively killing the bill.
In Montana and Michigan, the bills have yet to face legislative scrutiny.
Resolutions have no legal power and are not binding rule, but instead allow legislati
Obergefell v. Hodges
Same-sex marriage has been controversial for decades, but tremendous progress was made across the Together States as states individually began to lift bans to same-sex marriage. Before the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges, U.S. ___ () was decided, over 70% of states and the District of Columbia already acknowledged same-sex marriage, and only 13 states had bans. Fourteen same-sex couples and two men whose homosexual partners had since passed away, claimed Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee violated the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them the right to marry or have their legal marriages performed in another state recognized.
All district courts found in favor of the plaintiffs. On appeal, the cases were consolidated, and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and held that the states' bans on lgbtq+ marriage and refusal to acknowledge legal same-sex marriages in other jurisdictions were not unconstitutional.
Among several arguments, the respondents asserted that the petitioners were