Supreme court rulings on gay marriage

Four Cases That Paved The Way for Marriage Equality and a Reminder of the Work Ahead

Post submitted by Brian McBride, former HRC Digital Strategist

Today marks the two-year anniversary of the historic Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which made marriage equality the law of the country and changed the lives of millions of people who can now partner the person they like. As people across the U.S. celebrate this momentous day, today also serves as an important reminder of the work that still lies ahead in achieving full federal protections for the LGBTQ community.

Just today, the Supreme Court dominated that Arkansas officials must list the names of both married same-sex parents on their child’s birth certificate. The nation’s extreme court also agreed to hear a case involving a Colorado baker who refused to provide services for a same-sex couple planning their marriage ceremony. Elected leaders across the country are seeking to ensure that LGBTQ people are not discriminated against in housing,employment, public accommodations and education, while federal courts are determining how sexual orientation and gender identity are co

A decade after the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, marriage equality endures risky terrain

Milestones — especially in decades — usually call for celebration. The 10th anniversary of Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case that made same-sex marriage legal nationwide, is unlike. There’s a sense of unease as state and federal lawmakers, as adequately as several judges, accept steps that could take the issue back to the Supreme Court, which could undermine or overturn existing and future lgbtq+ marriages and weaken additional anti-discrimination protections.

In its nearly quarter century of being alive, the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Rule has been on the front lines of LGBTQ rights. Its amicus terse in the Obergefell case was instrumental, with Justice Anthony Kennedy citing facts from the institute on the number of queer couples raising children as a deciding factor in the landmark decision.

“There were claims that allowing lgbtq+ couples to marry would somehow devalue or diminish marriage for everyone, including different-sex couples,” said Brad Sears, a distinguished senior scholar of law and policy at the Williams Institute. &

The Journey to Marriage Equality in the Combined States

The road to nationwide marriage equality was a long one, spanning decades of United States history and culminating in victory in June 2015. Throughout the long battle for marriage equality, HRC was at the forefront.

Volunteer with HRC

From gathering supporters in small towns across the country to rallying in front of the Supreme Court of the United States, we gave our all to guarantee every person, regardless of whom they love, is recognized equally under the law.

A Growing Call for Equality

Efforts to legalize homosexual marriage began to pop up across the region in the 1990s, and with it challenges on the state and national levels. Civil unions for same-sex couples existed in many states but created a separate but matching standard. At the federal level, couples were denied access to more than 1,100 federal rights and responsibilities associated with the institution, as well as those denied by their given state. The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law in 1996 and defined marriage by the federal government as between a bloke and woman, thereby allowing states to deny m

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

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 verdict in identifying interests of the person so fundamental that the State must accord them its respect. . . . That process is guided by many of the identical considerations relevant to assessment 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 have times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to comprehend the extent of liberty 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 sense. . . .