Summary: The Obergefell V. Hodges Supreme Court Case

Plaintiffs James Obergefell and John Arthur James originally filed their case against the state of Ohio to challenge its refusal to recognize their marriage on their death certificates, despite being legally married in Maryland. The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court case was formed from four similar same-sex marriage cases originating in Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan, and Kentucky that were consolidated by the Supreme Court under the title of Obergefell v. Hodges. It was accepted by the Supreme Court on January 16, 2015 whenever the petitioners were granted cert. The case was originally filed in the United States District Court for Southern District of Ohio, in which the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. The judge held that “Ohio’s
The right to marriage can not be denied under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and states must also recognize marriage legally performed in other states. Under the Equal Protection clause, people can not be denied their right to marry because of the gender they decide to marry.
The Fourteenth Amendment can not be extended to consider modern cases such as that of gay marriage, because the country is constantly evolving. If a marriage is valid in one state, then every other state has an obligation to legally recognize it in the country. The government has no right to not recognize same-sex marriages, but private institutions do.
The article recognizes specific clauses that can be applied to a case involving marriage, particularly same-sex marriage. It highlights equal protection under the law and analyses what can be considered as “due process.” I support the legality of same sex marriage as the Constitution allows for it to be allowed and the article identifies how it can exactly be justified with the founding document. The article stated that people may not support same-sex marriages, but the government has an obligation to protect its citizens and their rights.
2. ACLU
As a believer of equality of all citizens, laws can not be in place that hinder people’s quality of life. Marriage is a liberty that people can not be deprived of.
3. Washington Post The Supreme Court was divided with a narrow vote on the legality of same-sex marriage. The majority of justices determined that the Fourteenth Amendment grants people the right to marry others of the same sex while the minority believes that the Constitution gives no basis for such a ruling. Fourteen states prohibited same-sex marriage prior to the ruling, but the ruling forced states to allow for such marriages. The majority of judges practiced judicial activism by expanding the application of the Constitution while the others resisted. The country took a step to reduce the oppression of people’s rights. The case guaranteed that people have the right to choose what sex they want to marry. Gay marriage was now not only recognized by certain states, but by the whole country. Same-sex couples could now have the same rights as other wed couples as they received equal recognition. States compiled to a ruling of the national government. It was not an issue for states to decide, as people’s rights are to be protected throughout the