Introduction
Sexual expression is a crucial civil right that allows Americans to marry whom they want for their happiness and satisfaction. Obergefell v. Hodges was a Supreme court case in which it was held that same-sex marriage is a civil right protected under the Due Process in the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, the 5-4 justices’ decision stated that the marriage is under the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. While Obergefell v. Hodges stated in the State of Ohio, the Supreme court combined other similar cases from Tennessee, Michigan, and Kentucky states. The U.S. Supreme court ruled out the Defenses of Marriage Act, stating that same-sex couples are entitled to equal treatment. Consequently, same-sex couples are entitled to Social Security, particular tax breaks, and insurance benefits.
Case Outline
Title: Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015)
Facts
The appellant, Obergefell, traveled to Maryland to marry his ailing partner who was suffering from Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Unfortunately, the partner died shortly after the two were married. The Ohio state laws did not allow same-sex marriage, making it impossible for the appellant to be listed as his partner’s surviving spouse (Albritton, 2021). Therefore, Obergefell sued with other plaintiffs to have his Maryland marriage recognized in the state of Ohio. The plaintiff wanted the court to allow his name to appear on his husband’s death certificate. Meanwhile, the other plaintiffs wanted their marriages to be sustained even when they moved between the state that disallowed the marriage.
History
The Supreme court case of Obergefell v. Hodges culminated from four cases from different states: Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Michigan. The original case, Obergefell v. Hodges, started in Ohio state. The case was filed in the Southern District Court of Ohio in 2013, following the Supreme court decision in the case of United States v. Windsor. The district court recognized same-sex marriage, and Ohio’s director of health appealed the court decision, on January 16, 2014. The Court of Appeal reversed the District Court decisions, leading to an appeal at the U.S. Supreme court. At the Supreme Court, four similar cases were combined and a judgment was made against the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee.
Legal Questions
The major legal issues in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges involved the discriminatory nature of the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Michigan’s discriminatory marriage laws. The first issue was whether same-sex marriage is legal and subject to constitutional Due process. The second issue was whether same-sex couples like others are entitled to benefits such as Social Security, particular tax exemptions, and marriage benefits. The last issue was whether the laws of Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Michigan prohibiting same-sex marriage were discriminatory.
Decisions
The U.S. Supreme court decided in favor of the plaintiff, stating that same-sex marriages were protected under Constitutional Due Process. According to the Supreme court, the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages performed in other states (Covais, 2022). the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects liberties which include “intimate choices” (Greenberg & Page, 2018). The Supreme Court justices concluded that the Constitution protects personal choices as to marriage.
Opinions
The court opinion, the denial of same-sex marriage was discriminatory, was authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, and supported by Justices Ruth Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Meanwhile, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito dissented. The final court’s verdict was that same-sex marriage is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment and Constitutional Due Process.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court decision led to mixed reactions among the residents of Ohio. The decision impacted the perception of same-sex marriages, and people would view it from a law and moral perspective. Individuals in Ohio intending to marry same-sex partners benefited from the decision since their marriages were legally recognized. The decision was good in that it promoted equality in access to Social Security and other benefits enjoyed by married couples in Ohio.
References
Albritton, A. M. (2021). Separation equality: Retroactive community property regimes for long-term same-sex couples. Tulane Journal of Law and Sexuality: A Review of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the Law, 30, 153. Web.
Covais, J. R. (2022). Baby, we were born this way: The case for making sexual orientation a suspect classification under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Touro Law Review, 38, 283. Web.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2071, 576 U.S. 644, 191 L. Ed. 2d 953 (2015).
Greenberg, E. S., & Page, B. I. (2018). The Struggle for Democracy (12 e.d.). Pearson.