Windy City Media Group Frontpage News
Celebrating 30 Years of Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Trans News
home search facebook twitter join
Gay News Sponsor Windy City Times 2020-03-17
DOWNLOAD ISSUE
About WCMG Publications News  Entertainment Features Donate Bars & Clubs Calendar Advertisers OUT! Guide    Marriage

Sponsor
Sponsor

  WINDY CITY TIMES

Relationships & the Law Today: Possible Supreme Court marriage outcomes
VIEWS
by Leslie A. Gutierrez
2015-05-13

facebook twitter google +1 reddit email


On April 28, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on the legal challenges to bans on marriage rights for same-sex couples in Obergefell v. Hodges. Specifically, the Court was tasked with addressing two questions: ( 1 ) whether states must perform same-sex marriages; and ( 2 ) whether states must recognize same-sex marriages performed in another state where such marriages are legal.

The Supreme Court is comprised of nine Justices. The "liberal bloc" of the Supreme Court consists of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Elena Kagan, and Justice Stephen Breyer. All indications suggest that they will rule in favor of marriage equality. The clear conservatives on the bench include Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Samuel Alito, and Justice Clarence Thomas. There is little doubt that they will side against marriage equality. The remaining two Justices—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy—provide the ambiguity.

Justice Roberts is one of the more conservative Justices on the bench and has a record of casting votes in favor of conservative outcomes far more often than not. However, in in recent years, he has voted consistent with the Court's liberal bloc on several occasions. Some legal scholars believe he may vote in favor marriage equality. That said, many believe that if he does rule in favor of marriage equality, he will choose to write the opinion that will accompany the ruling and he will likely write it in a narrow way, limiting the opinion's applicability to marriage rights only ( without leaving any room for the opinion to be applied to extend further rights to LGBT individuals and families ).

However, same-sex couples do not need Justice Roberts' vote to achieve victory. Even if Justice Roberts votes against marriage equality, the tie-breaker will belong to the infamous "swing-vote" on the bench—Justice Kennedy. In the past, Justice Kennedy has voted in favor of gay rights. He voted in favor of striking down "laws against sodomy" in Lawrence v. Texas and just less than two-years ago in U.S. v. Windsor, he voted in favor of striking down the section of the federal "Defense of Marriage Act" law that defined marriage as between a man and woman only.

Thus, even without Justice Roberts' vote, if Justice Kennedy follows his prior pattern of analysis, the Supreme Court should issue a national mandate for marriage equality with a 5-4 decision. Both Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy asked tough questions to both sides during oral argument, not giving any clear indication as to which way they will decide. While the ultimate decision is still up in the air, we do know that there are a few outcomes.

First, marriage equality could lose 5-4 if both Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy side against same-sex couples. Most legal scholars believe that such a decision is unlikely, but possible. If that were the case, same-sex marriage would still be legal in the states that currently allow it. However, the remaining states would be permitted to continue to ban and/or refuse to recognize same-sex marriage.

Second, the Court could rule narrowly, answering no to the first question but yes to the second question. In other words, the Court may find that states do not have the obligation to perform same-sex marriages but that they must recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states, though it is difficult to imagine how the Court could conceive of a legal distinction between the two. Nonetheless, if the Court feels unready to hand down a broad, sweeping decision that would make same-sex marriage the law of the land, this option provides the Court a way to grant some rights but postpone the question of full marriage rights.

Finally, the Court could issue a complete victory for same-sex marriage. If the court decides that there is a constitutional right to marry and that states are required to perform and recognize same-sex marriages, then same-sex marriage will be allowed nationwide. Such a decision will also deem all current same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional and all states that currently have such bans in place will have to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The Supreme Court will release its ruling on Obergefell v. Hodges in June.

Leslie A. Gutierrez is an Associate at Clark Hill PLC and focuses her practice on business litigation and estate and trust litigation.


facebook twitter google +1 reddit email





Windy City Media Group does not approve or necessarily agree with the views posted below.
Please do not post letters to the editor here. Please also be civil in your dialogue.
If you need to be mean, just know that the longer you stay on this page, the more you help us.


  ARTICLES YOU MIGHT LIKE

Gay News

COVID-19, closed churches and LGBTQ Catholics 2020-03-29 - Is anyone anywhere around the globe thinking about anything other than COVID-19, the coronavirus that has paralyzed almost all human activity? I imagine ...


Gay News

OPEN LETTER Census 2020: The LGBTQ+ community counts 2020-03-27 - It's a new decade, and that means it's time to complete the Census. The Census is done every 10 years, and informs ...


Gay News

Chief judge weighs in on bail reviews during COVID-19 epidemic 2020-03-21 - The Circuit Court of Cook County, under the direction of Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans, has taken a series of actions since March ...


Gay News

THE AMAZON TRAIL Mick's potato fertilizer 2020-03-17 - When I asked for advice about growing potatoes, our friend Mary wrote, "Here is what Mick does: blood meal, green sand, or wood ...


Gay News

Stop comparing coronavirus to early HIV/AIDS. Just stop. 2020-03-17 - People ask me if our lives today feel like the early years of HIV/AIDS, and I want to scream. There is no comparison. ...


Gay News

Open letter about Coronavirus and the LGBTQ+ communities 2020-03-11 - New York, NY - Over 100 national and local organizations have signed on to an open letter to health and media outlining how ...


Gay News

VIEWS In 2020, being queer could be key to a courageous career 2020-02-08 - Remember, in The Wizard of Oz, how the Cowardly Lion—when he got to see the wizard—was like, "What? I already had courage? WTH?" ...


Gay News

OPINION 'Trans-formal' education 2020-02-05 - "The year started well, but substitute teachers were not told about Dave's name," my friend Pat told me. "My son was called a ...


Gay News

VIEWS Warren's America would center our voices 2020-01-28 - Days before I marched in my first Pride Parade in 2015, I waited anxiously for the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision that ...


Gay News

VIEWS College for LGBTQ students 2020-01-22 - Finding yourself and becoming comfortable with your identity is something that people within the LGBTQ community struggle with every day. There is ...


 



Copyright © 2020 Windy City Media Group. All rights reserved.
Reprint by permission only. PDFs for back issues are downloadable from
our online archives. Single copies of back issues in print form are
available for $4 per issue, older than one month for $6 if available,
by check to the mailing address listed below.

Return postage must accompany all manuscripts, drawings, and
photographs submitted if they are to be returned, and no
responsibility may be assumed for unsolicited materials.
All rights to letters, art and photos sent to Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago
Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) will be treated
as unconditionally assigned for publication purposes and as such,
subject to editing and comment. The opinions expressed by the
columnists, cartoonists, letter writers, and commentators are
their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay,
Lesbian, Bisexual and Transegender News and Feature Publication).

The appearance of a name, image or photo of a person or group in
Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times
(a Chicago Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender News and Feature
Publication) does not indicate the sexual orientation of such
individuals or groups. While we encourage readers to support the
advertisers who make this newspaper possible, Nightspots (Chicago
GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay, Lesbian
News and Feature Publication) cannot accept responsibility for
any advertising claims or promotions.

 

 

 

TRENDINGBREAKINGPHOTOS

Sponsor
Sponsor
Sponsor


 



About WCMG Publications News  Entertainment Features Donate Bars & Clubs Calendar Advertisers OUT! Guide    Marriage


About WCMG      Contact Us      Online Front  Page      Windy City  Times      Nightspots      OUT! Guide     
Identity      BLACKlines      En La Vida      Archives      Subscriptions      Distribution      Windy City Queercast     
Queercast Archives      Advertising  Rates      Deadlines      Advanced Search     
Press  Releases      Event Photos      Join WCMG  Email List      Email Blast     
Upcoming Events      Todays Events      Ongoing Events      Post an Event      Bar Guide      Community Groups      In Memoriam      Outguide Categories      Outguide Advertisers      Search Outguide      Travel      Dining Out      Blogs      Spotlight  Video     
Classifieds      Real Estate      Place a  Classified     

Windy City Media Group publishes Windy City Times,
The Bi-Weekly Voice of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans Community.
5315 N. Clark St. #192, Chicago, IL 60640-2113 • PH (773) 871-7610 • FAX (773) 871-7609.