In June of 2015, the United States Supreme Court made history when it issued a landmark decision in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges. This highly publicized case centered around the issue of same-sex marriage and whether or not it was legal across the nation. At the center of the case were couples from four different states, all of whom had challenged the existing laws in their states that prohibited same-sex marriage. The Supreme Court’s decision ultimately had a profound impact on the lives of millions of Americans.
The Legal Background
The plaintiffs in the case argued that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution protected the rights of same-sex couples to marry and have their marriages recognized by all states. Prior to Obergefell v. Hodges, a patchwork of state laws meant that same-sex couples were only able to marry in certain states, creating a complex web of legal issues regarding the recognition of these marriages across state lines.
There were a number of cases that preceded Obergefell v. Hodges and paved the way for the Supreme Court’s decision. One such case was United States v. Windsor, which challenged the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court struck down DOMA and ruled that same-sex couples who were married in states that recognized same-sex marriage were entitled to the same federal benefits as opposite-sex couples.
Building on the legal precedent set by cases like United States v. Windsor, same-sex couples in states across the country began to challenge state laws that prevented them from marrying. This led to a number of district court decisions that struck down these state laws, as well as appeals court decisions that upheld them.
The Obergefell v. Hodges Decision
In June of 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy stated that “The fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs.”
The Court ultimately found that same-sex couples have the right to marry and that all states are required to recognize same-sex marriages. This decision effectively legalized same-sex marriage across the entire country and was widely celebrated by the LGBTQ+ community.
The Impact of the Decision
The impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges was profound. It not only legalized same-sex marriage across the entire country, but it also had ripple effects in other areas of law. For example, the decision has been cited in cases involving discrimination in housing and employment.
In addition, the decision sparked a national discussion about LGBTQ+ rights and helped to pave the way for further progress in this area. For example, just a few years after Obergefell v. Hodges, transgender individuals were finally able to serve openly in the military, and the Supreme Court issued another landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which affirmed that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited under federal law.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges was a watershed moment in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights in the United States. The decision not only legalized same-sex marriage across the entire country but also helped to pave the way for further progress in this area. While there is still a long way to go in terms of achieving true equality for all individuals, the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges was a significant step forward.
FAQ
Who established the power of judicial review?
One of the most significant contributions to the United States legal system was the establishment of judicial review. This power, which allows the judicial branch of the government to declare a law unconstitutional, was established through the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
The case arose when President John Adams was leaving office, and he appointed several new judges to the federal judiciary. One of these appointees was William Marbury, who sought to challenge the appointment of James Madison as Secretary of State, arguing that his appointment had been improperly withheld. The Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled that Marbury could not hold the appointment he sought, but more importantly established the principle of judicial review.
In the decision, Chief Justice Marshall wrote that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that any law passed by Congress that conflicts with its provisions is, therefore, void. He went on to assert that it was the duty of the courts to interpret the Constitution and that the judiciary must act as a check on the other branches of government. This decision was a groundbreaking development in American jurisprudence and established the strong, independent judiciary that we have today.
The establishment of judicial review was a crucial addition to the system of checks and balances that the founding fathers had established to prevent any one branch of the Federal Government from becoming too powerful. It ensures that all laws passed by the legislative branch, as well as executive actions and decisions, do not violate the Constitution and the rights of individuals.
Chief Justice John Marshall established the power of judicial review through his decisive ruling in Marbury v. Madison. Judicial review is one of the cornerstones of our legal system, and it has played a critical role in protecting the fundamental rights and liberties of American citizens.
Was Obergefell V Hodges judicial activism?
Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark case in the United States that recognized same-sex marriage as a constitutional right, leading to the legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide. While many celebrated the historic decision, others questioned whether it was indeed constitutional or merely an instance of judicial activism. In this context, the question arises – Was the Obergefell v. Hodges decision judicial activism?
The answer to this question depends on how one defines judicial activism. Broadly speaking, judicial activism can be defined as a judicial ruling that goes beyond applying established law and instead creates new law or expands existing law. If we look at the Obergefell v. Hodges case, the ruling appears to be a clear example of judicial activism.
Four judges of the Supreme Court dissented, with each issuing a separate opinion. Justice Antonin Scalia stated: “This ruling, which has nothing to do with the Constitution, represents perhaps as clear of an example of judicial activism as any we have seen in recent years or are likely (hopefully) to see in the future.” Similarly, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that “Our Constitution does not enact any one theory of marriage. The people of a State are free to expand marriage to include any combination of a man and a woman, a man and two women, or a woman and two men. But the Constitution does not require them to do so.”
The majority opinion in the Obergefell case, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, relied on the notion of substantive due process and equal protection to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples. The court overturned the marriage laws of 31 states, claiming that they violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process and equal protection guarantees. However, neither due process nor equal protection guarantees explicitly mention the right to marry or the right to same-sex marriage. Additionally, same-sex marriage was not thought to be a constitutional right for most of American history. Therefore, Justice Kennedy and the majority were seen by some as overstepping their bounds as judges.
On the other hand, some argue that the Obergefell ruling is not an instance of judicial activism, but instead of interpreting and applying the Constitution correctly. They claim that the majority opinion rests on a long line of cases that have recognized an evolving and expanding understanding of personal liberty and autonomy. Additionally, they argue that Obergefell is in line with the principle of equality under the law, which has been a cornerstone of American legal jurisprudence for centuries.
The question of whether Obergefell v. Hodges was an instance of judicial activism is a contentious one. While the case could be viewed as an example of judicial activism for the way it extended the meaning of due process and equal protection in the law, others view it as a natural extension of the Constitution’s emphasis on individual rights and liberties. the interpretation of the Obergefell case will vary depending on one’s political and personal views. Regardless of one’s opinion, it remains an important legal decision that has irrevocably changed the landscape of marriage law in the United States.
