Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What You Should Know About the Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
Explainer: What You Should Know About the Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
Jul 3, 2025 4:13 PM

What was the same-sex marriage case that was decided by the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court issued its ruling on the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which is consolidated with three other cases—Tanco v. Haslam(Tennessee);DeBoer v. Snyder(Michigan);Bourke v. Beshear(Kentucky). These cases challenged two issues concerning whether the Fourteenth Amendmentmust guarantee the right for same-sex couples to marry.

What issues was the court asked to decide?

The two issues that were answered in this case are:

1.Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?

2.Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?

These are known as the “marriage” and “recognition” questions, respectively. The Court answered both in the affirmative.

What did the Court rule?

The Court ruled the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State. As Justice Kennedy wrote, “The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry.”

Why did the argument relyon the Fourteenth Amendment?

The Supreme Court rarely recognizes new “fundamental rights” in the Constitution that have previously existed, which is what many opponents of same-sex marriage say was being demanded. Because of this obstacle LGBT marriage advocates claimed that the right to marry isalready well established and they simply want access to itin order to marry a person of their choosing.

What is the argument that the Court is creating a new “fundamental right” by allowing same-sex couples to marry?

As the ruling notes, marriage is currently considered a “fundamental right” by the Supreme Court and clearly applies to opposite-sex couples.When considering whether an asserted right is “fundamental,”says Chris Gacek, we are to rely on the test that the court set out in Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).

First, the court requires the presentation of a “‘careful description’of the asserted fundamental right or liberty interest.” The claimed right must be described precisely. Second, such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.”

Furthermore, the right must be “so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental.” The sought-after right must be “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” so that “neither liberty nor justice would exist if (it was) sacrificed.”

In the current cases, a broad definition like “being able to marry the person of one’s choice” does not describe what the plaintiffs seek. They are permitted to marry at present, but they must marry a person of the opposite sex.

That is how the right to marry has always been understood, but that is not the type of marriage the challengers want. Rather, they seek the legitimation of a new right—a right to a governmentally recognized conjugal arrangement for persons of the same sex.

Why didn’t the Supreme Court let the American people decide the issue?

Justice Kennedy explained the Court’s reasoning by saying, “While the Constitution contemplates that democracy is the appropriate process for change, individuals who are harmed need not await legislative action before asserting a fundamental right.”

Who wrote the opinion for the Court?

Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, which was joined by Ginsburg, Bretyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Justice Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia and Thomas joined. Scalia also wrote an opinion that was joined by Thomas. Thomas also filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Scalia. And Alito filed a dissent that was joined by Scalia and Thomas.

Prior to this ruling, in how many states was same-sex marriage already legal?

37. Of those 37, 6 were decided by court decision, 8 by the state legislatures, and 3 by popular vote. The breakdown is as follows:

By Court Decision

Alabama (Feb. 9, 2015), Alaska (Oct. 17, 2014), Arizona (Oct. 17, 2014), California (June 28, 2013), Colorado (Oct. 7, 2014), Connecticut (Nov. 12, 2008), Florida (Jan. 6, 2015), Idaho (Oct. 13, 2014), Indiana (Oct. 6, 2014), Iowa (Apr. 24, 2009), Kansas (Nov. 12, 2014), Massachusetts (May 17, 2004), Montana (Nov. 19, 2014), Nevada (Oct. 9, 2014), New Jersey (Oct. 21, 2013), New Mexico (Dec. 19, 2013), North Carolina (Oct. 10, 2014), Oklahoma (Oct. 6, 2014), Oregon (May 19, 2014), Pennsylvania (May 20, 2014), South Carolina (Nov. 20, 2014), Utah (Oct. 6, 2014), Virginia (Oct. 6, 2014), West Virginia (Oct. 9, 2014), Wisconsin (Oct. 6, 2014), and Wyoming (Oct. 21, 2014).

By State Legislature

Delaware (July 1, 2013), Hawaii (Dec. 2, 2013), Illinois (June 1, 2014), Minnesota (Aug. 1, 2013), New Hampshire (Jan. 1, 2010), New York (July 24, 2011), Rhode Island (Aug. 1, 2013), and Vermont (Sep. 1, 2009).

By Popular Vote

Maine (Dec. 29, 2012), Maryland (Jan. 1, 2013), and Washington (Dec. 9, 2012).

How many states had banned same-sex marriage?

13. Of those 12 were by constitutional amendment and state law and 1 by constitutional amendment only; 8 of them have had their bans overturned by the courts, but the appeals were still in progress at the time of this ruling. The breakdown is as follows:

By Constitutional Amendment and State Law

Arkansas (2004, 1997), Georgia (2004, 1996), Kentucky (2004, 1998), Louisiana (2004, 1999), Michigan (2004, 1996), Mississippi (2004, 1997), Missouri (2004, 1996), North Dakota (2004, 1997), Ohio (2004, 2004), South Dakota (2006, 1996), Tennessee (2006, 1996), and Texas (2005, 1997).

How many same-sex couples currently have marriage licenses?

A new research paper suggests that the number of married same-sex couples in the United States in 2013 was around 170,000.

What the bottom line on the ruling?

This ruling states that same-sex marriages—inall 50 states—is now the law of the land.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
NHS staff told ‘do not resuscitate’ COVID-19 patients with learning disabilities
After a year-long legal battle, a British hospital apologized for placing 51-year-old Andrew Waters under a “Do Not Resuscitate” order without his family’s consent during his 2011 hospital stay, because he suffered from Down syndrome and “learning difficulties.” A disturbing news report shows that doctors have placed blanket “Do Not Resuscitate” (DNR) orders against people with learning disabilities in order to mitigate an NHS shortage of medical supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mencap, a group that advocates for those with...
Scientism cannot cure COVID-19
On Monday, a grim milestone was passed: 500,000 COVID-19 deaths have been reported in just over a year since the arrival of the pandemic in the United States. President Joe Biden has ordered the American flag to be flown at half-staff on public buildings and grounds until sunset on Friday. This pandemic has brought forth change and sacrifice by ordinary citizens, remarkable scientific innovation, resentment and anger, and a political crisis of responsibility. Last year, the World Health Organization told...
Xavier Becerra would destroy the First Amendment
If Xavier Becerra wins confirmation as secretary of Health and Human Services, he will make history, because Becerra would likely e the first Cabinet secretary to believe the First Amendment does not grant churches the freedom of religion. Such an extreme view, endowed with the full power of the federal government, would vitiate the religious liberty of all Americans. For those tempted to dismiss this as a caricature of Becerra’s position, allow him to dispel that notion – under oath....
How much is good parenting worth?
Recent policy debates over direct cash grants to parents from the federal government expose our society’s dysfunctional attitudes toward work and parenting. Over at the Detroit News, I have some thoughts and (mostly) concerns. Or as I put it, “The creation of a new, permanent entitlement program for parents seems particularly unwise while our federal debt skyrockets and reform for already existing entitlement programs is so desperately needed.” Oren Cass worries that universalizing a child benefit “goes too far” by...
In the Acton Institute’s grant programs, ‘iron sharpens iron.’ Apply now
Ideas are inherently social. Teaching and learning, talking and listening, and all forms of salutary social change are cooperative. As the prophets teach, “Do two walk together, unless they have agreed to meet?” (Amos 3:3) The Acton Institute’s mission “to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles” naturally extends beyond itself. As such, the Acton Institute seeks to equip and empower others who share its mission. One of the ways it does...
A biblical theology of work, Part 1: Why work?
A recent article on the Powerblog celebrating the work of delivery drivers, who never seem to be included in the definition of an “essential worker,” reminded me that we do not spend enough time thinking about work from an economic or theological point of view. This series will present a biblical theology of work in three parts over ing weeks, reflecting on both the spiritual and economic significance of work. I begin with three brief anecdotes that illustrate why this...
The ‘new normal’ creates transactional living
This essay won third place in the essay contest of the Acton Institute’s 2020 Poverty Cure Summit, which took place on Nov. 18-19, 2020. The author will receive a $1,000 prize. Her essay is presented as it was submitted, with only light, grammatical edits. – Ed. The author of the following quotation has been hotly debated, but I fear that its significance has been forgotten: “You do not have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.” COVID-19...
Law and morality: not a simple affair
The role of the state, in spheres ranging from public morality to the economy, is one of several axes around which debates about the conservative movement’s future are presently revolving. In a 2020 article, I mon-good constitutionalism for its misreading of how the natural law tradition treats the role of the state and law vis-à-vis morality. Far from giving legislators, judges, and governments a free hand to aggressively shape the moral culture, I maintained that the natural law’s conception of...
John Henry Newman on Dr. Fauci and the COVID-19 lockdowns
Johnson & Johnson’s new COVID-19 vaccine brings the hope that all American adults could be vaccinated by June and, with it, the prospect of returning to a normal life. To this, Dr. Anthony Fauci has emerged to tell the public, “Not so fast.” “There are things, even if you’re vaccinated, that you’re not going to be able to do in society … For example, indoor dining, theaters, places where people congregate,” Fauci said. “That’s because of the safety of society.”...
Emanuel Cleaver: People get ‘saved’ through government spending (video)
The Bible says that eth by hearing, but some believe eth by earmarks. One congressman pared government spending with eternal salvation in our Lord Jesus Christ. Earmarks are dedicated spending amendments that congressmen often attached to larger, “must-pass” legislation. They fund projects in thee congressman’s home district, typically awarding the contract to a specific vendor. Since most earmarks support indefensible projects that could never garner enough votes to pass on their own, congressmen often trade votes or use them to...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved