I Was Part of 303 Creative's Case. I Back Gay Marriage—but SCOTUS Is Right

Contents:

• SCOTUS WILL RULE ON GAY MARRIAGE THIS TERM
• WHERE WILL SCOTUS FALL ON GAY MARRIAGE?
• THE GAY MARRIAGE SCOTUS CASE
• GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
• THE VIEW STAR REVEALS WHY SHE AGRE WH SUPREME COURT LG FOR SIGNER WHO OPPOS GAY MARRIAGE
• JUDGE US SUPREME COURT’S GAY WEDDG WEBSE RULG FOR HER OWN ANTI-LGBTQ LAWSU
• I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT
• GAY MARRIAGE CLARED LEGAL ACROSS THE US HISTORIC SUPREME URT LG
• TEXAS JUDGE WHO DON’T WANT TO PERFORM GAY MARRIAGE CEREMONI HOP WEB SIGNER’S SUPREME COURT SE HELPS HER FIGHT

SCOTUS WILL RULE ON GAY MARRIAGE THIS TERM

The Supreme Court said Friday that will take on four s challengg gay-marriage bans this term, and will explicly tackle the qutn of whether stat are nstutnally obligated to issue marriage licens to same-sex upl (as well as whether stat are required to regnize gay marriag performed elsewhere). Even eply culturally nservative stat like Utah and Wt Virgia have now been allowg gay upl to marry for months, wh ltle drama.

There haven’t been mass protts the streets; fact, every state that has legalized gay marriage has seen a subsequent uptick public support for .

… Acrdg to last week’sWashgton Post/ABC News natnwi poll, gay marriage is supported by 64 percent of people stat where is legal, and 54 percent stat where is not. Even many who don’t support gay marriage seem to have accepted : Nearly three-quarters of Amerins nsir the legalizatn of gay marriage evable. A DOMA cisn uld terme the feral legal stat of gay marriag and whether stat where gay marriag aren’t regnized mt regnize gay marriag granted other stat.

WHERE WILL SCOTUS FALL ON GAY MARRIAGE?

Intertgly, the SCOTUS Blog’s “In Pla English” lumn explas how this argument seems to clear the way for gay upl who nnot or do not wish to have children to marry. 8 on the basis that state bans on gay marriage where same-sex civil unns are allowed vlate the right to equal-protectn enshred the Constutn.

At issue today is whether discrimatg agast gay upl at the feral level, as the Defense of Marriage Act do, vlat the equal-protectn clse of the Fourteenth Amendment. By one vote, the urt l that same-sex marriage nnot be banned the Uned Stat and that all same-sex marriag mt be regnized natnwi, fally grantg same-sex upl equal rights to heterosexual upl unr the 1971, jt two years after the Stonewall Rts that unofficially marked the begng of the stggle for gay rights and marriage equaly, the Mnota Supreme Court had found same-sex marriage bans nstutnal, a precent which the Supreme Court had never challenged. As homosexualy gradually beme more accepted Amerin culture, the nservative backlash was strong enough to force Print Bill Clton to sign the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), prohibg the regnn of same-sex marriag at the feral level, to law 1996.

THE GAY MARRIAGE SCOTUS CASE

Obergefell origated wh a gay uple, Jim Obergefell and John Arthur, who were married Maryland, where same-sex marriage was legal, but whose marriage was not regnized by Oh thori.

Comparg that evolutn to society's views of gays and lbians, Kennedy noted that for years, "a tthful claratn by same-sex upl of what was their hearts had to rema unspoken. Together, they volve a dozen upl who challenged same-sex marriage bans Oh, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennsee — the only stat wh bans on marriage between gay and lbian upl that had been staed by a feral appeals urt.

GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Before Friday's lg, gay marriage had already been ma legal 37 stat and the District of Columbia — by eher legislative or voter actn or by feral urts that overturned state' bans.

As NPR's Na Totenberg reported when the Supreme Court heard the current se back April, nservative jtic had poted qutns for the attorneys: "Jtice Slia asked whether misters would be able to refe to marry two gay men.

THE VIEW STAR REVEALS WHY SHE AGRE WH SUPREME COURT LG FOR SIGNER WHO OPPOS GAY MARRIAGE

He said, but that uld happen — uld happen that a mister would be forced to marry two gay men, vlatn of his beliefs. The urt noted the change thkg, statg: "Well to the 20th century, many Stat nmned same-sex timacy as immoral, and homosexualy was treated as an illns.

Qutns about the legal treatment of gays and lbians soon reached the urts, where they uld be discsed the formal disurse of the law. “The Supreme Court’s cisn is a huge victory for same-sex upl the US that will reverberate many untri that still ny people the right to marry the person they love, ” said Boris Dtrich, lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr (LGBT) rights advocy director at Human Rights Watch. The Supreme Court’s cisn overturns the lower urt’s cisn, lg that the bans vlated the nstutnal right of gays and lbians to equal protectn unr the law.

JUDGE US SUPREME COURT’S GAY WEDDG WEBSE RULG FOR HER OWN ANTI-LGBTQ LAWSU

ImageLorie Smh said her Christian fah requir her to turn away ctomers seekg servic to celebrate same-sex Woolf for The New York TimThe Supreme Court sid on Friday wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to sign weddg webs for same-sex upl spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.

’”The se, though amed as a clash between ee speech and gay rights, was the latt a seri of cisns favor of relig people and groups, notably nservative cisn also appeared to suggt that the rights of L. The liberal jtic viewed as somethg else entirely — a dispute that threatened societal protectns for gay rights and rolled back some recent an impassned dissent, Jtice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the oute signaled a return to a time when people of lor and other mory groups faced open discrimatn. ”A Colorado law forbids discrimatn agast gay people by bs open to the public as well as statements announcg such discrimatn.

Kavangh and Amy Coney Barrett, shifted the urt to the urts have generally sid wh gay and lbian upl who were refed service by bakeri, florists and others, lg that potential ctomers are entled to equal treatment, at least parts of the untry wh laws forbiddg discrimatn based on sexual owners of bs challengg those laws have argued that the ernment should not force them to choose between the requirements of their fahs and their livelihoods. A baker refed to make a weddg ke for their receptn on relig Cote for The New York TimHad there been an actual gay person who was refed a weddg-related service at the center of 303 Creative L. Dale that the anizatn uld exclu gay sutmasters bee opposn to homosexualy is part of the anizatn’s “exprsive msage.

I WAS PART OF 303 CREATIVE'S CASE. I BACK GAY MARRIAGE—BUT SCOTUS IS RIGHT

Irish-Amerin Gay, Lbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., a se om 1995 which the urt sid wh the anizers of a veterans para that blocked a group of gay, lbian and bisexual people om marchg the event.

GAY MARRIAGE CLARED LEGAL ACROSS THE US HISTORIC SUPREME URT LG

Jtice Sotomayor seemed pecially ncerned about the way the urt’s opn would send a disapprovg msage to the public about people who are gay, lbian, bisexual or transgenr, or who were same-sex relatnships. Addnally, several stat terpret existg laws agast sex discrimatn to apply to bias relatg to sexual orientatn and genr inty, even though they do not have laws explicly forbiddg such stat that do not offer protectns to gay and transgenr people on those grounds, municipal laws ver many Human Rights Campaign, an L. McCoy for The New York TimThe urt’s cisn favor of a Colorado web signer, Lorie Smh, had an unual feature: It was based on njecture and Smh, who objects to providg weddg-related servic for same-sex marriag, never turned down a gay uple.

ETFriday’s lg was another reassurg cisn for relig celebratory moment outsi the Supreme Court on Friday, after the urt livered the latt a strg of judgments favor of relig Zuhaib/Associated PrsConservativ who have moral and theologil objectns to gay marriage saw the Supreme Court’s cisn on Friday as reassurance that they would be able to assert their beliefs a public square that they see as creasgly hostile to a 6-to-3 vote, spl along iologil l, the jtic agreed wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to provi servic for same-sex marriag, spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.

TEXAS JUDGE WHO DON’T WANT TO PERFORM GAY MARRIAGE CEREMONI HOP WEB SIGNER’S SUPREME COURT SE HELPS HER FIGHT

”Acrdg to pollg om 2021 by the Public Relign Rearch Instute, majori of most major relig groups — cludg Catholics, Jews and Mlims — oppose allowg small-bs owners to refe to serve gay and lbian people on relig grounds. Smh and her lawyers have emphasized that her objectn is not to workg wh same-sex upl or gay dividuals, but to signg webs for gay weddgs.

Several siar s have centered on nservative Christian small bs owners who object to workg on gay weddgs specifilly, cludg a baker Colorado, two vatn signers Arizona and a Kentucky-based a news nference shortly after the lg was issued, Krist Waggoner, general unsel for Alliance Defendg Freedom, which reprented Ms. ” She said her nsiratn acceptg work as a webse signer was the “msage” of the se, not the inty of the Smh’s portfol clus webs for church, real tate pani and polil many nservative Christians hailed the cisn on Friday, drew cricism om some progrsive Christians and terfah groups, cludg those that serve gay people of fah.

“Broad exemptns to allow relig-based discrimatn hurts people of fah, too, ” Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Mistry, which advot for gay Catholics, said a statement.