Marriage Equality and the Courts

Several court ruling through the 21st century paved the way for marriage equality to be realized in 2015.

Learning Objective

Describe the path towards marriage equality from Lawrence v. Texas, to United States v. Windsor, to Obergefell v. Hodges

Key Points

During Barack Obama’s second term in office, courts began to counter efforts by conservatives to outlaw same-sex marriage. In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) of 1996 was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Lawrence v. Texas (2003) was a landmark decision in which the United States Supreme Court struck down the sodomy law in Texas and, by extension, invalidated sodomy laws in 13 other states, making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory.
United States v. Windsor (2013) was a civil rights case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of "marriage" to apply only to heterosexual unions, by Section 3 of DOMA, is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges (July 26, 2015) was the U.S. Supreme Court case that held in a 5-4 decision that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
While marriage equality was an important step forward for the rights of same-sex couples, LGBTQ people continue to face discrimination, violence, disproportionate rates of poverty and homelessness, and other obstacles to achieving full rights.
During Obama's administration, the rights of transgender people saw advancements through rulings by the U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Term

Defense of Marriage Act
A United States federal law enacted September 21, 1996 that, prior to being ruled unconstitutional, defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman, allowing states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states.

Full Text

Achieving Marriage Equality

During Barack Obama’s second term in office, courts began to counter efforts by conservatives to outlaw same-sex marriage. A series of court decisions declared nine states’ prohibitions against same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court rejected an attempt to overturn a federal court ruling to that effect in California in June 2013. Shortly thereafter, the Supreme Court also ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. These decisions seem to allow legal challenges in all the states that persist in trying to block same-sex unions.

Path Toward Marriage Equality

Lawrence v. Texas

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) was a landmark decision in which the United States Supreme Court struck down the sodomy law in Texas and, by extension, invalidated sodomy laws in 13 other states, making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory. The Court, with a five-justice majority, overturned its previous ruling on the same issue in the 1986 case Bowers v. Hardwick, where it had upheld a challenged Georgia statute and did not find a constitutional protection of sexual privacy. Lawrence explicitly overruled Bowers, holding that it had viewed the liberty interest too narrowly. The Court held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the 14th Amendment. Lawrence invalidated similar laws throughout the United States that criminalized sodomy between consenting adults acting in private, whatever the sex or gender of the participants. The outcome of the case was celebrated by gay rights advocates, who hoped that further legal advances might result as a consequence.

United States v. Windsor

United States v. Windsor (2013) was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of "marriage" and "spouse" to apply only to heterosexual unions, by Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Edith Windsor (born 1929) and Thea Spyer (1931–2009), a same-sex couple residing in New York, were lawfully married in Toronto, Canada, in 2007. The state of New York had recognized the marriage beginning in 2008 following a court decision. Spyer died in 2009, leaving her entire estate to Windsor; however, when Windsor sought to claim the federal estate tax exemption for surviving spouses, she was barred from doing so by Section 3 of DOMA, which provided that the term "spouse" only applied to marriages between a man and woman. The Internal Revenue Service found that the exemption did not apply to same-sex marriages, denied Windsor's claim, and compelled her to pay $363,053 in estate taxes.

On November 9, 2010, Windsor filed a lawsuit against the federal government in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking a refund because DOMA singled out legally married same-sex couples for "differential treatment compared to other similarly situated couples without justification." On June 6, 2012, Judge Barbara S. Jones ruled that Section 3 of DOMA was unconstitutional under the due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment and ordered the federal government to issue the tax refund, including interest. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, affirmed the district court's judgement on October 18, 2012. The case was carried further to the U.S. Supreme Court for review, and on June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision declaring Section 3 of DOMA to be unconstitutional "as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment."

Overturning DOMA

Photo of gay rights advocates gathered on the steps of the United States Supreme Court building on the morning of June 26, 2013, hours before the court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act.

Obergefell v. Hodges

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held in a 5-4 decision that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Decided on June 26, 2015, Obergefell overturned Baker v. Nelson, a 1971 case in which the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a state law limiting marriage to persons of the opposite sex did not violate the U.S. Constitution. Obergefell requires all states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to recognize same-sex marriages validly performed in other jurisdictions; this legalized same-sex marriage throughout the United States and its possessions and territories. The Court examined the nature of fundamental rights guaranteed to all by the Constitution, the harm done to individuals by delaying the implementation of such rights while the democratic process plays out, and the evolving understanding of discrimination and inequality that has developed greatly since Baker. Prior to Obergefell, 36 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam already issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Obergefell v. Hodges

Plaintiffs Gregory Bourke (left) and Michael DeLeon (right) celebrate outside the Supreme Court building on June 26, 2015.

Beyond Marriage Equality

While the achievement of legally-recognized marriage equality was an important step forward for the rights of same-sex couples, LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning) people continue to face immense obstacles to equality in the United States. These obstacles take the form of discrimination (in the workplace, by landlords, in health facilities, in education, and in public accommodations), violence, and disproportionate rates of poverty and homelessness, especially among transgender youth and transgender people of color.

During Obama's administration, the struggle against discrimination based on gender identity has won some significant victories. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Education ruled that schools receiving federal funds may not discriminate against transgender students, and a board within the Department of Health and Human Services decided that Medicare should cover sexual reassignment surgery. This decision is influential because private insurance companies often base their coverage on what Medicare considers appropriate and necessary forms of treatment for various conditions.

Marriage Equality

The White House was illuminated in rainbow colors on the evening of the Supreme Court same-sex marriage ruling.

[ edit ]

Prev Concept

Divided Government

Racial Tensions and Black Lives Matter

Next Concept