# Same-sex marriage in Missouri

Part of the LGBTQ rights series :
Legal status of same-sex unions :
Marriage
Andorra
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Denmark
Ecuador
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Iceland
Ireland
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Malta
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Recognized
Israel
United States:
 • American Samoa :
Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage
Bolivia
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Monaco
Montenegro
San Marino
United Kingdom:
 • Bermuda
 • Cayman Islands :
Minimal recognition
Bulgaria
Cambodia
China
 • Hong Kong
India
Japan
Lithuania
Namibia
Nepal
Netherlands:
 • Sint Maarten
Poland
Romania
Slovakia :
See also
Same-sex union legislation
Same-sex union court cases
Timeline of same-sex marriage
Recognition of same-sex unions in Africa
Recognition of same-sex unions in Asia
Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe
Recognition of same-sex unions in the Americas
Recognition of same-sex unions in Oceania
Marriage privatization
Divorce of same-sex couples
Domestic partnership
Military policy
Adoption
Listings by country
LGBTQ rights by country or territory :
Notes
1 2 Performed in the Netherlands proper (including the Caribbean Netherlands), as well as in Aruba and Curaçao. May be registered in Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed.
↑ Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands.
↑ Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories.
1 2 Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations of the US. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
↑ Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights in Israel. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
1 2 3 4 5 The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. Some member states, including Romania, do not follow the ruling.
↑ A "declaration of family relationship" is available in several of Cambodia's communes which may be useful in matters such as housing, but is not legally binding.
↑ Guardianship agreements confer some limited legal benefits in China, including decisions about medical and personal care.
↑ Hong Kong provides inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents.
↑ Indian courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding.
↑ Most Japanese cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding.
↑ Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse provide residency rights in Namibia.
↑ Romania provides hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status. :
LGBTQ portal :
vte :
Same-sex marriage has been legal in Missouri since the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down state bans on marriages between two people of the same sex on June 26, 2015. Prior to the court ruling, the state recognized same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions pursuant to a state court ruling in October 2014, and certain jurisdictions of the state performed same-sex marriages despite a statewide ban.
On November 5, 2014, a state court ruling striking down Missouri's same-sex marriage ban ordered St. Louis to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In response to this ruling, St. Louis County also began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. On November 7, 2014, a federal court struck down Missouri's same-sex marriage ban but stayed its order directing Jackson County to issue licenses to same-sex couples. Despite the stay, Jackson County began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples immediately following the ruling. Assessing the state of same-sex marriage litigation in December 2014, Marc Solomon of Freedom to Marry said, "Missouri is the most complex state on this issue."

## Legal restrictions

In August 2004, 71% of Missouri voters ratified Amendment 2, which restricted the validity and recognition of marriage in Missouri to the "union of one man and one woman". State statutes also banned same-sex marriage.
In December 2022, Representative Chris Sander introduced a constitutional amendment to repeal the ban. Sander said, "My intent with the language is to have the Missouri Constitution in line with federal law because I believe federal law is the correct ruling. This country has a history of saying who can't get married in an ugly way." The amendment required approval in both the Senate and the House of Representatives before being placed on the ballot for approval by voters. However, the measure failed to pass before the end of the legislative session in May 2023. In June, activists announced that they had initiated a petition to repeal the same-sex marriage ban. The petition required more than 170,000 signatures to be collected, verified, and submitted by May 6, 2024; however, it did not appear on the 2024 ballot.

## Recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions

Missouri statutes prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriages validity performed in other jurisdictions, though this provision is now unenforceable. On November 14, 2013, Governor Jay Nixon issued an executive order allowing same-sex couples married in other jurisdictions to file a combined Missouri income tax return if they file their federal return jointly. Four conservatives, three associated with the Missouri Baptist Convention and one a former St. Charles County Executive associated with Focus on the Family, filed Messer v. Nixon in Cole County Circuit Court on January 8, 2014, seeking to prevent the practice. The lawsuit was unsuccessful.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit, Barrier v. Vasterling, challenging the state's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions in state circuit court on February 11, 2014, on behalf of eight same-sex couples, later joined by two more. Oral arguments were held on September 2 before Judge J. Dale Youngs in the Jackson County Circuit Court in Kansas City. On October 3, Judge Youngs ruled that Missouri's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions violated the plaintiffs' right to equal protection under both the state and federal constitutions. He ordered the state to recognize such marriages and held the state responsible for the plaintiffs' legal expenses. On October 6, the Missouri Attorney General, Chris Koster, announced the state would not appeal the decision. Members of the Missouri General Assembly sought to intervene in the suit and appeal the decision, but the court rejected their petition as filed too late for the court to act.

## Lawsuits
### Federal cases
#### Lawson v. Kelly

In June 2014, Jackson County denied marriage licenses to two same-sex couples, which provided, according to Jackson County Executive Mike Sanders, a better vehicle for a lawsuit than the St. Louis case. On June 24, the ACLU filed Lawson v. Kelly in circuit court on behalf of the two same-sex couples who had been denied marriage licenses there. Jackson County officials said it was up to the Attorney General to defend the state's position. Attorney General Koster intervened and had the case moved to federal district court. U.S. District Court Judge Ortrie D. Smith ruled for the plaintiffs on November 7, finding that Missouri's ban denied the plaintiffs their fundamental right to marry and discriminated against them on the basis of gender, but not on the basis of sexual orientation. He ordered only Jackson County to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and stayed his order pending conclusion of any appeal. Despite the stay, Jackson County began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples immediately following the decision. On November 21, the plaintiffs asked Judge Smith to lift his stay given that St. Louis had been ordered to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in State of Missouri v. Florida and noting that the state took no position on the request. He refused on November 25, noting that licenses might be issued "that could later be determined to have been issued in error" if his decision was reversed.
Attorney General Koster filed a notice of appeal in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 5. On December 8, the same-sex couples also filed a notice of appeal to contest the district court's rejection of their claim of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
On December 10, the couples asked the Eighth Circuit to vacate the district court's stay or hear their appeal on an expedited basis. On December 20, the couples asked the Eighth Circuit to consider their request to vacate the stay in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal the previous day to grant a stay in a Florida case, Armstrong v. Brenner. The state replied to the couples' motion on December 24, calling the request for expedited consideration premature given the likelihood that in January the U.S. Supreme Court would agree to hear a same-sex marriage case. The state's brief did not mention the district court's stay. On January 9, 2015, the couples asked the Eighth Circuit for a "prompt ruling" on their request, noting that the state had offered no argument against lifting the stay and that the Supreme Court had not accepted a petition for certiorari in a same-sex marriage case that day. They wrote: "there is no equitable reason to hold the current case in perpetual limbo". On January 21, the state asked the court to suspend proceedings pending action by the U.S. Supreme Court in similar same-sex marriage cases. The couples supported that request only if the court lifted the stay. On January 22, the court refused both to lift the stay and to suspend proceedings. It agreed to expedite the case. On February 9, the plaintiff couples again asked the Eighth Circuit to lift the stay, citing the Supreme Court's refusal to grant a stay in Searcy v. Strange, a same-sex marriage case from Alabama.

#### Obergefell v. Hodges

On June 26, 2015, following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex marriage bans violate the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, the plaintiffs asked the Eighth Circuit to lift the stay, and the state asked the court to dismiss its appeal of the district court decision. As a result, same-sex couples began immediately marrying throughout Missouri. Angie Boyle and Laura Zinszer, together for 19 years, were the first couple to receive a marriage license in Columbia on June 26. On July 7, 2015, Governor Jay Nixon issued "Executive Order 15-04", ordering all state departments and agencies to immediately take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with the Obergefell decision.
Attorney General Koster reacted to the ruling by stating, "The history of our country has always been one of moving toward inclusion and equality. I applaud the court for their courage and strong sense of fairness. Missourians should be seen as equals under the law; regardless of their gender, race, or whom they love." Governor Nixon also welcomed the court decision, "Today's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges is a major victory for equality and an important step toward a fairer and more just society for all Americans." Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler said she was "disappointed", "Decisions on marriage policy should be left in the hands of the 50 states, allowing those who wish to define marriage as being between one man and one woman, as we did in Missouri, to do so. Today's ruling tramples on the voice of the people."

### State cases
#### State of Missouri v. Florida

In June 2014, St. Louis officials licensed four same-sex marriages in order to provide the basis for a lawsuit when the state ordered them to stop the practice. St. Louis Circuit Judge Rex Burlison held a hearing in the suit, originally State of Missouri v. Carpenter, on September 29 in state circuit court. He ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on November 5, ruling that Missouri's refusal to license same-sex marriages violated the Missouri and federal constitutions. Attorney General Koster announced plans to appeal the ruling to the Missouri Supreme Court, but not to seek a stay of the ruling's implementation because "[f]ollowing decisions in Idaho and Alaska, the United States Supreme Court has refused to grant stays on identical facts." Attorney General Koster and the Recorders' Association of Missouri said Judge Burlison's order only applied to the city of St. Louis, where the city's marriage license department began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. St. Louis County, where an official said "We believe it's a county-by-county decision", began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the next day.

#### In re Marriage of M.S.

After a circuit court in St. Louis County denied him a divorce sua sponte, a man married in Iowa to a man now incarcerated in a Missouri prison appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court on March 13, 2014, which heard oral arguments on December 3. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision on February 10, 2015, holding that the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction because the plain language of the Missouri Constitution provides that Missouri circuit courts have jurisdiction over all civil cases and matters (and a petition for dissolution of marriage is a civil case), and remanded the case back to the lower court.
In February 2014, a Boone County judge granted a divorce to two women, Dena and Samantha Latimer, who had married in Massachusetts in 2009.

## Demographics and marriage statistics

The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services has collected data on the number of same-sex marriages performed in Missouri since 2016, as shown in the table below. Jackson County, St. Louis County, and the city of St. Louis together account for about half of all Missouri same-sex marriages, with Greene, St. Charles, Boone, Clay, Jasper, Jefferson, and Cape Girardeau counties together accounting for about one-fourth. As of 2021, Shelby County is the only county in Missouri where no same-sex marriage has taken place. The first same-sex marriages in Montgomery and Oregon counties were performed in 2019.
Data for 2015 is incomplete as several counties continued to issue licenses with the terms "groom" and "bride" until they were updated for 2016. The state recorded 471 marriages between two women and 255 marriages between two men in 2015. The median age at marriage was higher for same-sex spouses than for opposite-sex spouses in 2015, at 39.9 years to 30.3 years.
Number of marriages performed in Missouri :
| Year | Same-sex | Same-sex | Same-sex | Unspecified | Opposite-sex | % same-sex |
| Year | Female | Male | Total | Unspecified | Opposite-sex | % same-sex |
| 2016 | 974 | 603 | 1,577 | 205 | 39,965 | 3.78% |
| 2017 | 833 | 450 | 1,283 | 52 | 38,981 | 3.18% |
| 2018 | 749 | 409 | 1,158 | 347 | 38,187 | 3.23% |
| 2019 | 710 | 358 | 1,166 | 456 | 35,112 | 3.17% |
| 2020 | 749 | 344 | 1,093 | 116 | 33,216 | 3.18% |
| 2021 | 780 | 372 | 1,152 | 124 | 35,978 | 3.09% |
The 2020 U.S. census showed that there were 9,634 married same-sex couple households (3,978 male couples and 5,656 female couples) and 9,146 unmarried same-sex couple households in Missouri.

## Public opinion

Public opinion for same-sex marriage in Missouri :
| Poll source | Dates administered | Sample size | Margin of error | Support | Opposition | Do not know / refused |
| Public Religion Research Institute | March 9 – December 7, 2023 | 375 adults | ? | 61% | 35% | 4% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | March 11 – December 14, 2022 | ? | ? | 63% | 36% | 1% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | March 8 – November 9, 2021 | ? | ? | 65% | 35% | <0.5% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | January 7 – December 20, 2020 | 816 adults | ? | 62% | 33% | 5% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | April 5 – December 23, 2017 | 1,505 adults | ? | 58% | 35% | 7% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | May 18, 2016 – January 10, 2017 | 2,171 adults | ? | 51% | 41% | 8% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | April 29, 2015 – January 7, 2016 | 1,761 adults | ? | 48% | 45% | 7% |
| Public Religion Research Institute | April 2, 2014 – January 4, 2015 | 1,102 adults | ? | 47% | 44% | 9% |
| New York Times/CBS News/YouGov | September 20 – October 1, 2014 | 1,226 likely voters | ± 3.6% | 41% | 47% | 12% |
| Public Policy Polling | May 24–27, 2012 | 602 voters | ± 4.0% | 36% | 52% | 12% |
| Public Policy Polling | September 9–12, 2011 | 632 voters | ± 3.9% | 32% | 59% | 9% |