...Obergefell v. Hodges 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4250 (2015) decision granting the LGBT community to legally marry, pushes the issue of including sexual orientation discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In July 2015, the high profile case of Obergefell v. Hodges allowed the Supreme Court to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment in which it requires states to issue marriage licenses between two individuals of the same sex. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, 37 states had legalized same-sex marriage. With legally issued marriage licenses, it will grant same-sex couples spousal benefits, but does not protect same-sex couples from being discriminated against at work in the private sector. Our country will allow same-sex...
Words: 1283 - Pages: 6
...review, the willingness of the Supreme Court to use its powers to significantly change public policy is judicial activism, contrarily, the willingness of the Court to limit the extent of its power in the process of judicial review and avoid making significant changes to public policy is judicial restraint. Certain actions of the Supreme Court demonstrate the use of judicial activism. A looser and more adaptable interpretation of the Constitution is applied in this type of judicial review and the Constitution’s text is not taken literally. Additionally, the Court’s ruling may not align with prior decisions of similar cases, thus stare decisis is not applied. Lastly, judicial activism results in Justices’ enacting change...
Words: 671 - Pages: 3
...Obergefell v. Hodges Alcorn, 3 Obergefell v. Hodges: Right to Privacy Amy Alcorn Liberty High School 3AB AP Government Obergefell v. Hodges was a case that brought much controversy within 2015. It pertained to the idea that states bans on same gender marriage were unconstitutional. The case helped decide that under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the right to marriage applies to not only heterosexual couples, but same sex ones as well (ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2015). This case began with a group of fourteen same sex couples deciding to sue state agencies in Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and Michigan. They were fighting for the idea that the states banning same sex marriage and not acknowledging legalized same gender couples was unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. The cases that went through trial courts regarding this were all found in favor of the plaintiffs. Though it appeared the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit felt a different way, as it was declared that it did not violate their rights to due process or equal protection. This caused the case to find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2015). There are two constitutional questions that come to play here; is a state required to allow a marriage between people of the same gender by the...
Words: 863 - Pages: 4
...state court, claiming that to deny the marriage license would violate their Constitutional rights.” Thus began the long judicial history of same-sex marriage , as well as the conversation about the interpretation of Constitutional rights that runs parallel with it. This history has most recently culminated in the Obergefell v Hodges case, in which the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage across the entire nation. This paper begins with a brief glimpse at the history of the topic of same-sex marriage in the United States. The paper will then focus on the case of Obergefell v Hodges, and will specifically analyze the contentious role of the interpretation of the Constitution involved in the final decision. Cleary the Supreme Court, an extremely high authority in the United States, found that that the nationalizing of same-sex marriage was constitutional. However there were dissenting opinions that opposed the decision on the grounds that the Constitution specified that such rights were up to the state legislature. Lastly,...
Words: 424 - Pages: 2
...The conflict that occurred during the Stonewall Riots of 1969 inspired the gay rights movement that led to the landmark decision in the Supreme Court Case Obergefell v. Hodges. This compromise only makes the government endorse same-sex marriages, not the public. In 1969, homosexuality was considered a mental illness and engaging in homosexual acts was considered illegal. Electroshock therapy and lobotomies were often used to try and fix homosexual people. The Stonewall Inn, located in Greenwich Village in New York, was one of the many gay bars were LGBT people sought refuge. On Saturday, June 28, 1969, police raided the bar and arrested the owners for operating a bar without a liquor license. They also began arresting people who were not wearing at least 3 articles of gender-appropriate clothing, in accordance with New York law. Instead of scattering, the patrons fought back. Around 400 patrons threw bottles, threw debris, and set the bar on fire, with police officers inside, to protest the arrests. The riot continued...
Words: 565 - Pages: 3
...decision for a case on June 26, 2015 would help open America’s minds was brought to the Supreme Court. Obergefell v. Hodges was the case that declared it unconstitutional to discriminate against same sex couples. The case involves James Obergefell and John Arthur James, after the couple was denied recognition of their legal marriage by their home state of Ohio. James and John were together for around 20 years, when they noticed John was losing with his mobility. He was diagnosed with ALS, a disease that would eventually take his ability to move. The couple decided they wanted to bond their union and get married because they knew John’s wasn’t going to make it much longer. Since same sex marriage wasn’t allowed in their state, James had to fly to a state that it was legal in, Maryland....
Words: 642 - Pages: 3
...Imagine if Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case legalizing abortion throughout the United States, was repealed. Think about the consequences that would go along with reversing Obergefell v. Hodges, the Court case that legalized same-sex marriage across the nation. These two cases, along with so many others that provide such critical rights to United States citizens, could be taken away if Supreme Court justices are given term limits. Fundamental rights could be taken away with term limits because term limits could have the primary effect of creating a Supreme Court composed entirely of republicans. Term limits are a bad idea because judicial rulings would be based more on political ideology than on constitutionality, there is no unanimous theory as to how the transition would work, and the old age decline argument is flawed. One of the main reasons why term limits should not be put in place is because it would increase the likelihood that justices would make decisions based on their own political ideology and less on constitutionality. For example, if the Supreme Court were debating the constitutionality of a law that would repeal Roe v. Wade, a Republican term-limited justice may feel pressured to rule in favor of this stance simply because a majority of the justice’s political...
Words: 1875 - Pages: 8
...In Baehr v Lewin, Hawaiian couples argued that denying same-sex couple marriage licenses was a form of gender discrimination that was prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause in Hawaii’s State Constitution. The judge agreed with the couples, and the couples won their case. However the judge called for a commission to secure the right to same-sex marriage and advise the couple to sue again. When they sued again in Baehr v. Miike (1996), the judge found that denying same-sex couples to right to marriage was gender discrimination that was prohibited by the state’s Equal Protection Clause. The judge said that same-sex marriage should be legal, but the ruling stayed pending on an appeal to the Supreme Court. During this time, Republicans in Hawaii’s congress passed the Hawaii State Constitutional Amendment on Marriage, in early 1998, banning same-sex marriage in the state of Hawaii. In late 1998, the Supreme Court ruled that it cannot allow same-sex marriage because same-sex marriage is prohibited by the state’s constitutional amendment on...
Words: 1702 - Pages: 7
...And if you agree with what the judge has done, you call them heroic and honest” (Wojdacz, 2009). Usually a judge is called an activist when they make a ruling that is based on their interpretations of the Constitution or laws. After all, the job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the law where it is unclear or in question and when laws or rulings of lower courts are challenged, it is the Supreme Court justices that must examine the law and determine if the intention of the law has...
Words: 472 - Pages: 2
... In 225 years, the United States’ Constitution has only been formally amended 27 times. However, the Supreme Court is constantly make informal amendments to the Constitution. The Supreme Court hears only 100-150 of the thousands of cases they are requested to review each year ("About the Supreme Court"). Although an informal amendment doesn’t change the wording of the actual Constitution, it can make a huge impact on how America views a law or action as constitutional or unconstitutional. These informal amendments have allowed the Constitution to remain the supreme law of the land for over two centuries. Through considerable research, one can prove the Constitution is a living...
Words: 665 - Pages: 3
...A NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM?: OBERGEFELL V. HODGES Kenji Yoshino The decision in Obergefell v. Hodges1 achieved canonical status even as Justice Kennedy read the result from the bench. A bare majority held that the Fourteenth Amendment required every state to perform and to recognize marriages between individuals of the same sex.2 The majority opinion ended with these ringing words about the plaintiffs: “Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”3 While Obergefell’s most immediate effect was to legalize same-sex marriage across the land, its long-term impact could extend far beyond this context. To see this point, consider how much more narrowly the opinion could have been written. It could have invoked the equal protection and due process guarantees without specifying a formal level of review, and then observed that none of the state justifications survived even a deferential form of scrutiny. The Court had adopted this strategy in prior gay rights cases.4 Instead, the Court issued a sweeping statement that could be compared to Loving v. Virginia,5 the 1967 case that invalidated bans on in––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law. I gratefully acknowledge receiving financial support from...
Words: 15849 - Pages: 64
...judge them? Therefore, Civil unions between same-sex couples should be universally legalized by the United States of America. America has always been a free country. We are told we have the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and of our own privacy. Therefore, it only made sense that was have freedom of who we marry. Although, it is in the bible that this is not right, we do a lot of things nowadays that are not necessarily “right”. So why do we get to continue with our ways of living and sinning when all these people want to do is be free to marry the person they love? Thankfully, the civil unions of same-sex marriage couples is a right defended by the United States Constitution and confirmed by the 2015 Supreme Court ruling in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. Now that same sex marriage has been legalized we have a major controversy of them not getting the same rights as other married couples. This is not fair in any way and is strictly prejudice. If we are going to grant same-sex couples the right to be married, why not just let them have all the same rights? It completely takes away from the point of legalizing it in the first place. Same-sex couples should be provided the same end of life, tax and purchasing rights that are offered to traditional couples. Same-sex couples ability to be married within the church should be restricted to offerings made by the establishment, reserved within their first amendment rights. Same-sex couples should...
Words: 368 - Pages: 2
...TOPIC #1 EXAM 3 Grace Abushalback Introduction to Law November 14, 2017 The Supreme Court can choose how politically active they are. Their decisions influence and impact public policy as well as the current laws in place. They can either choose to interpret a case and use judicial activism or judicial restraint. Judicial activism is the Court’s inclination to enact change in society. It is done in order to adjust to the needs of society in a way which the Justices deem acceptable. On the contrary, there is judicial restraint which is in direct opposition to judicial activism. It allows for the Justices to curtail their powers and they, in turn, avoid making significant changes in public policy. There are three notable processes...
Words: 1392 - Pages: 6
...Racial and Ethnic Profiling in the U.S." Accessed on February 9, 2018, from https://www.aclu.org/report/persistence-racial-and-ethnic-profiling-united-states Benzine, C. 5 "Civil Rights and Liberties: 2 Crash Course Government # 23." PBS Digital studios, Retrieved on February 9, 2018, from http://www.pbs.org/video/crash-course-government-23/ Colb, S. 1 "The US Supreme Court Declares Warrantless Dog Sniffs of Private Front Porches Unconstitutional, Or Does it? A Closer Look at Florida v. 6 Jardines, April 17, 2013, Accessed from https://verdict.justia.com/2013/04/17/the-u-s-supreme-court-declares-warrantless-dog-sniffs-of-private-front-porches-unconstitutional-or-does-it Cornell Law School. 4 "Terry Stop/ Stop and Frisk." 1 Accessed on February 9, 20178, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/terry_stop_stop_and_frisk Findlaw. 7 "Are DUI Checkpoints Legal?" 8 Retrieved on February 9, 2018, from http://traffic.findlaw.com/traffic-stops/are-DUI-checkpoints-legal-.html Findlaw. “Civil Rights: U.S. Supreme Court Decisions" Accessed on 9/2/18 from http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-rights-overview/civil-rights-u-s-supreme-court-decisions.html Harriot, M. 1 "Philly Cops' 5 Habit of Fondling Black Men Sparks Greatest Protest of All Time." Kemp, D. 9 "The Warrant Requirement for GPS Tracking Devices." Verdict JUSTIA, November 4, 2013, Retrieved on February 9, 2018, from...
Words: 1342 - Pages: 6
...In May of 2014, the regulations for medicare was changed so that sexual reassignment surgery would be covered for transgender people. There have been 254 bills introduced by legislatures since 2013, though only twenty of them have became actual laws. In 2013, legislature across the United States responded strongly opposed to the Supreme Court presenting a bill for same sex marriage, legislatures introduced a same sex marriage refusal bill more often than not. In January 2015 after another spike, the Supreme Court decided it would make a ruling on Obergefell v. Hodges. This was a monumental case that would determine whether same sex marriage would be allowed for people nation wide. Once the ruling was announced in 2015, the number of refusals bills skyrocketed by 220 percent. However, only two of the bills were passed. In 2015, sixty one percent of Americans thought same sex individuals should have legal rights get married. This was a complete opposite from a decade before. In June of 2015, the Supreme Court decided to legalize same sex marriages, which has been the most recent wave of legislation. Now same sex marriage is legal in some states, however, there are more bills being introduced largely due to protect government employees and religious people from the legal actions if these individuals choose not to perform marriages. Just last year 2016, seventeen marriage refusal bills have been introduced. During...
Words: 714 - Pages: 3
