2015 gay rights case
Obergefell v. Hodges ()
Excerpt: Majority Opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy
The identification and protection of fundamental rights is an enduring part of the judicial duty to interpret the Constitution. That responsibility, however, “has not been reduced to any formula.” Rather, it requires courts to exercise reasoned decision in identifying interests of the person so fundamental that the State must accord them its respect. . . . That process is guided by many of the equal considerations relevant to examination of other constitutional provisions that set forth broad principles rather than specific requirements. History and tradition guide and discipline this inquiry but do not set its outer boundaries. That method respects our history and learns from it without allowing the past alone to principle the present.
The nature of injustice is that we may not always look it in our control times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to realize the extent of independence in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its definition. . . .
The fo
OBERGEFELL v. HODGES
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary reproduce of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. , of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary produce goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________
Nos. 14–, , and 14–
_________________
JAMES OBERGEFELL, et al., PETITIONERS
14– v.
RICHARD HODGES, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, et al.;
VALERIA TANCO, et al., PETITIONERS
14– v.
BILL HASLAM, GOVERNOR OF TENNESSEE, et al.;
APRIL DeBOER, et al., PETITIONERS
14– v.
RICK SNYDER, GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN, et al.; AND
GREGORY BOURKE, et al., PETITIONERS
14– v.
STEVE BESHEAR, GOVERNOR OF KENTUCKY
on writs of certiorari to the together states court of appeals for the sixth circuit
[June 26, ]
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express
Obergefell v. Hodges
Same-sex marriage has been controversial for decades, but tremendous progress was made across the Combined 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 gay 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 not seeking to produce a new and nonexistent right to same-sex marriage. Justice Kennedy, writ
Obergefell v. Hodges
Overview
Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark case in which on June 26, , the Supreme Court of the Together States held, in verdict, 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 unite 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 identical 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 oblige to same-sex couples”, so they may “exercise the fundamental right to marry.” The majority decision was signed by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor. Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Ali
.