As the Supreme Court meets for the send time two years to bate gay marriage, the suatn Ameri has changed dramatilly.
Contents:
- WHAT'S AT STAKE AS THE SUPREME COURT RETURNS TO GAY MARRIAGE
- GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
- WHAT EACH SUPREME COURT JTICE HAS SAID ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE
- I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT
WHAT'S AT STAKE AS THE SUPREME COURT RETURNS TO GAY MARRIAGE
* supreme court stance on gay marriage *
When the urt heard arguments on two s March of 2013, gay marriage was still a live issue. Today, 37 stat regnize gay marriage, many of which did so after feral judg took the logic of the Supreme Court’s prev lgs further.
GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
The jtic themselv have personally mirrored this trend, wh liberal Jtic Ruth Bar Gsburg and Elena Kagan officiatg at gay weddgs sce the last cisn.
WHAT EACH SUPREME COURT JTICE HAS SAID ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE
Court watchers predict that a slim majory of jtic — led by swg vote Anthony Kennedy — will fish what they started two years ago, fdg a way to get all 50 stat to regnize gay marriage.
Hodg, is named for Jam Obergefell, who married his now-ceased partner Maryland, where gay marriage is legal, but nnot have his marriage regnized Oh, where is not.
Or they uld more broadly ci that marriage is a nstutnal right that no state may ny to gays and lbians, forcg even reluctant stat to issue same-sex marriage licens of their own. But the unrlyg qutn will rema whether laws sglg out gays and lbians for different treatment—say, by barrg them om marryg—serve extra scty the same way that laws sglg out ethnic or relig mori do.
I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT
On that qutn, the Supreme Court has managed so far to avoid an answer, peggg opns that expand the equaly of gays and lbians on different arguments. It may do so aga, or the jtic may take the first step toward broar regnn of gay rights. Eher way, the fight over gay marriage may be nearg an end, but the bate over gay rights ntu.
Lyle Denniston, the Natnal Constutn Center nstutnal leracy adviser, explas why the Supreme Court will be drawn to the post-Obergefell ntroversy over claims of relig eedom and ntug claims of discrimatn agast gays, lbians and bisexual and transgenr people. Of symbolic importance is the se of a Kentucky unty clerk, Kim Davis, who gaed natnal promence for refg – as a matter of fah – to put her name on marriage licens for gay and lbian upl. It is next to a certaty that, at some pot before long, the Supreme Court will be drawn to the post-Obergefell ntroversy over claims of relig eedom and ntug claims of discrimatn agast gays, lbians and bisexual and transgenr people.
Kennedy, then the center of the High Court, rejected the optns before him, cidg agast sidg wh a same-sex uple who had been nied a ke for their Colorado weddg receptn and agast sidg wh the baker who said his oven was off-lims to gay upl. Jt a few weeks ago, when Transportatn Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the natn’s hight-rankg Senate-nfirmed gay member of the Bin Admistratn, joed TIME’s Washgton Bure for a wi-rangg nversatn, he was blunt: “I mean, Roe fell and that was the law of the land for longer than I’ve been alive.