The U.S. Supreme Court weighs two gay marriage s: a challenge to California's same-sex marriage ban, known as Proposn 8; and a challenge to the feral Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which bars feral regnn of same-sex marriag.
Contents:
- SUPREME COURT BOLSTERS GAY MARRIAGE WH TWO MAJOR RULGS
- GAY MARRIAGE THE US SUPREME COURT, 2013
- COURT OVERTURNS DOMA, SISTEPS BROAD GAY MARRIAGE RULG
- THE SUPREME COURT RULGS THAT HAVE SHAPED GAY RIGHTS AMERI
- GAY MARRIAGE
SUPREME COURT BOLSTERS GAY MARRIAGE WH TWO MAJOR RULGS
The urt led unnstutnal a 1996 law nyg feral benefs to legally married same-sex upl and effectively permted gay marriage California. * gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTVioThe Tim’s Adam Liptak tak a look at how the Supreme Court’s cisn to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act Jabsohn/RtersJune 26, 2013WASHINGTON — In a pair of major victori for the gay rights movement, the Supreme Court on Wednday led that married same-sex upl were entled to feral benefs and, by clg to ci a se om California, effectively allowed same-sex marriag lgs leave place laws banng same-sex marriage around the natn, and the urt cled to say whether there was a nstutnal right to such unns. Christopher Gregory/The New York TimHe said the law was motivated by a sire to harm gay and lbian upl and their fai, meang the “moral and sexual choic” of such upl and huiatg “tens of thoands of children now beg raised by same-sex upl.
” He add that the lg applied only to marriag om stat that allowed gay and lbian upl to wed. Texas, which stck down laws makg gay sex a crime. A versn of this article appears prt on, Sectn A, Page 1 of the New York edn wh the headle: Jtic Extend Benefs To Gay Coupl; Allow Same-Sex Marriag In California.
Wdsor cisn, gay marriage bans were overturned by urt lgs several stat, but those lgs were put on hold pendg appeals to the US Supreme Court. 6, 2014, the Supreme Court cled to hear appeals om five of those stat, and the cisn immediately cleared the way for legal gay marriage Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virgia, and Wisns.
GAY MARRIAGE THE US SUPREME COURT, 2013
A pair of 5-4 Supreme Court lgs stck down as unnstutnal a feral law nyg benefs to same-sex upl and cleared the way for gay marriag to rume California. * gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
Six other stat which gay marriage bans had been overturned, Colorado, Kansas, North Carola, South Carola, Wt Virgia, and Wyomg, were also affected by the Supreme Court lg bee they were the jurisdictns of the lower urts that had overturned the gay marriage bans. In a 4-3 lg on May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court overturned state laws banng gay marriage.
COURT OVERTURNS DOMA, SISTEPS BROAD GAY MARRIAGE RULG
Gays and lbians celebrated historic gas Wednday their fight agast laws limg same-sex marriag. * gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
On May 26, 2009, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposn 8’s gay marriage ban, but on Aug. Sce the lower urt had already clared Proposn 8 to be unnstutnal, the cisn was nsired to have cleared the way for gay marriag to rume the state.
THE SUPREME COURT RULGS THAT HAVE SHAPED GAY RIGHTS AMERI
* gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
“Outsi of the marriage ntext, n you thk of any other ratnal basis, reason, for a State g sexual orientatn as a factor nyg homosexuals benefs or imposg burns on them? “I thk there’s substance to the pot that soclogil rmatn [about allowg gay upl to marry] is new. PRO GAY MARRIAGE.
CON GAY MARRIAGE.
GAY MARRIAGE
The Court led favor of gay rights as early as 1958. But s cisns haven't always sid wh the LGBT muny. * gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
“[T]he evince prented at trial shows that gays and lbians are the type of mory strict scty was signed to protect. That fdg follows exorably om this Court’s equal protectn jurispnce, the extensive trial rerd, and Proponents’ repeated ncsns that gay men and lbians have faced a history of discrimatn based on a tra that has no bearg on their abily to ntribute to society… [T]here is no group Amerin society who has been targeted by ballot iativ more than gays and lbians, and they have sentially lost a hundred percent of the ntts over same-sex marriage.
Ined, the undisputed fact that gay men and lbians have been subjected to a history of discrimatn based on a tra that bears no relatnship to their abily to ntribute to society is sufficient, and of self, to renr classifitns based on sexual orientatn ‘spect’ and to give rise to heightened scty.
In a long-sought victory for the gay rights movement, the urt led, 5-4, that the Constutn guarante a right to same-sex marriage. * gay marriage supreme court 2013 *
“The Defense of Marriage Act do not discrimate between heterosexuals and homosexuals, but between oppose-sex married upl and same-sex married upl. Although DOMA admtedly has a greater impact on homosexuals than heterosexuals, that impact, unr this Court’s precents, is not nstutnally relevant unls n be traced back to an tent or purpose on behalf of Congrs to discrimate agast homosexuals, as opposed to the mere knowledge that would have a disparate impact on them.