...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
...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
...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
...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
...The plaintiffs in this case were fourteen same-sex couples, and two men whose same-sex partners were deceased at the time of this ruling. James Obergefell was one of these plaintiffs. The named defendant, Richard Hodges, is the Director of the Ohio Department of Health. Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman and did not recognize same-sex marriages. The plaintiffs challenged these laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution by filing lawsuits in federal district court in their home states. The plaintiffs argued that the Fourteenth Amendment required the States to allow same-sex marriage and to recognize the validity of such marriages performed in other jurisdictions. In each case, the federal district courts ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit consolidated the cases and reversed the rulings. The plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. The question and answers under the holding and Kennedy rule of law said: “Do same-sex couples have the right to marry in every State? Yes. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that same-sex couples have the right to marry in every State. Must the States grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples? Yes. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the States must license marriages to same-sex couples. Must the States recognize same-sex marriages that have been licensed and performed lawfully...
Words: 1581 - Pages: 7
...Sonia Sotomayor is the first Latina Supreme Court Justice in the history of the United States and the third woman. She was nominated by President Barack Obama in May of 2009 and assumed the role in August of 2009. She was born in the Bronx during 1954 to Juan and Celina Baez Sotomayor. Sonia parents were born in Puerto Rico and later moved the United States for a better life. Her father died when she was nine and her mother assumed the role of single parent. Sonia's mother made sure to instill in her children the importance of higher education and learning English. Her mother made many sacrifices to make sure her kids would have a better life. When talking about Sotomayor's mother Antonia Felix writes " Celina's ability to forge a strong sense...
Words: 1631 - Pages: 7
...CANICOSA, Albert Joshua F. BSLM4A Research Paper in Legal Research On June 26, 2015, the United States of America made history when the United States Supreme Court decided that the denial of same sex marriage violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. In their ruling, the Supreme Court held that “The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State.” (Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department Of Health, et al., 576 U.S. __ No. 14-556 (2015) making same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states, giving them as Justice Anthony Kennedy said “equal dignity in the eyes of the law”. Though most are happy with the decision, there are some who are not glad with it. In his dissent Chief Justice John Roberts believes that it is not the Supreme Court’s duty to decide whether a law should be passed or not. “Judges have power to say what the law is, not what it should be” he adds “the Constitution authorized courts to exercise neither force nor will but merely judgment.” And because of the decision that the court made, people who are against same sex marriage will be forced to accept it. Many conservatives are disappointed with the decision; some of them are moving to make a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. In an interview, Republican Presidential Candidate and Florida Governor...
Words: 1461 - Pages: 6
...should be able to get married” (CNN Politics 2012), during an interview with ABC News. In addition, the Obama administration argued that DOMA, the law that defined marriage only as a union between a man and a woman, was unconstitutional and completely encourage the Justice Department to stop enforcing it. The US Supreme court then, proclaimed on June 26, 2013, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional because it “denies same-sex couples the ‘equal liberty’ guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment” (National Public Radio 2013) in the case United States v. Windsor, which was a court case brought by a lesbian woman named Edith Windsor who was denied tax exemption and was being imposed $370,000 in estate taxes by the government because they did not acknowledge their marriage due to DOMA when her wife, who had married Windsor in Canada, died back in 2009 and left her estate to Windsor. Thus, Doma, which was one of the biggest obstacles for attaining same-sex marriage, dissipated as gay couples receive equal benefits and rights as their heterosexual counterparts including pension rights and tax exemptions. Despite the importance of the case United States v. Windsor on giving full rights to gay couples, many states still had bans on same-sex marriage and some other parts of DOMA were still intact. However, with 61% of the total U.S. population supporting full rights for the gay community including the right to marry (The Washington Post, 2015), 45 years of social activism...
Words: 1253 - Pages: 6
...Racial & Ethnic Short-Answer Questions (15) Should reparations be paid to the descendants of victims of slavery? • Some reject the decision made in the Bakke case that providing a remedy for the effects of racial discrimination is unconstitutional. They argue that the idea of reparations is rooted in international law. • Affirmative Action is inadequate, the ‘Maafa’ (meaning disaster, i.e., slavery) is a crime against humanity, and therefore compensation is required. • In the past 50 years apologies and financial compensation has been given to a wide range of groups, including survivors of the Jewish holocaust (as well as descendants of the victims), Japanese-Americans who were imprisoned during the Second World War and native Americans who had their land illegally seized in the USA. • African Americans have been demanding compensation for slavery since the end of the American Civil War. Immediately after the abolition of slavery, the demand was for 40 acres and a mule to ensure they would not be dependent on their former slave-owners. Then, between 1890 and 1917, there was a movement to lobby the government for pensions to compensate for their unpaid labour under slavery. Since 1989, Congressman John Conyers Jnr (Michigan) has introduced a bill every year to study the case for reparations. Each of these initiatives has been largely ignored by the political establishment. • Reparations would ensure full recognition of the scale of the Maafa and, at the same time...
Words: 8688 - Pages: 35
