14th amendment gay marriage supreme court
Some Republican lawmakers grow calls against same-sex attracted marriage SCOTUS ruling
Conservative legislators are increasingly speaking out against the Supreme Court’s landmark 2015 decree 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 own followed suit with calls to the Supreme Court.
In North Dakota, the resolution passed the mention House with a vote of 52-40 and is headed to the Senate. In South Dakota, the state’s Dwelling 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 own yet to deal with legislative scrutiny.
Resolutions hold no legal rule and are not binding law, but instead allow legislative bodies to convey their collective opinions.
The resolutions in four other states ech
Gay marriage declared legal across the US in historic supreme court ruling
Same-sex marriages are now legal across the entirety of the United States after a historic supreme court judgment that declared attempts by conservative states to forbid them unconstitutional.
In what may prove the most key civil rights case in a generation, five of the nine court justices determined that the right to marriage equality was enshrined under the matching protection clause of the 14th amendment.
Victory in the case – known as Obergefell v Hodges, after an Ohio man who sued the state to get his name listed on his late husband’s death certificate – capped years of campaigning by LGBT rights activists, high-powered attorneys and couples waiting decades for the justices to rule. It immediately led to scenes of jubilation from coast to coast, as campaigners, politicians and everyday people – gay, straight and in-between – hailed “a victory of love”.
The ruling, in which Justice Anthony Kennedy cast the deciding vote,means the number of states where gay marriage is legal will rise – albeit after some stalling – from 37 to 50.
“They ask for identical dignity in the eyes of the law,” Kennedy wrote in
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 equal considerations relevant to investigation 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 dictate the present.
The nature of injustice is that we may not always view it in our hold times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to realize 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 interpretation. . . .
Th
Obergefell v. Hodges
Overview
Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark case in which on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held, in 5-4 decision, that mention bans on queer 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 marry 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 equal protection clause, by virtue of the shut connection between liberty and equality. In this decision Justice Kennedy also declared that “the reason marriage is fundamental…apply with equal power to same-sex couples”, so they may “exercise the fundamental right to marry.” The majority choice was signed by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor. Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas
The Court first considered the matter in the 1986 case of Bowers v Hardwick, a challenge to a Georgia law authorizing criminal penalties for persons found guilty of sodomy. Although the Georgia rule applied both to heterosexual and homosexual sodomy, the Supreme Court chose to consider only the constitutionality of applying the rule to homosexual sodomy. (Michael Hardwick, who sought to enjoin enforcement of the Georgia law, had been charged with sodomy after a police officer discovered him in bed with another man. Charges were later dropped.) In Bowers, the Court ruled 5 to 4 that the Due Process Clause "right of privacy" recognized in cases such Griswold and Roe does not hinder the criminalization of lgbtq+ conduct between consenting adults. One of the five members of the majority, Justice Powell, later described his vote in the case as a mistake. (Interestingly, Powell's concurring belief suggests that were Georgia to ha