Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Page Number: 91

14 

OBERGEFELL v. HODGES 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

adopt and enforce its laws.  In our country, that process is
primarily  representative  government  at  the  state  level, 
with  the  Federal  Constitution  serving  as  a  backstop  for 
that  process.  As  a  general  matter,  when  the  States  act 
through  their  representative  governments  or  by  popular
vote, the liberty of their residents is fully vindicated.  This 
is  no  less  true  when  some  residents  disagree  with  the 
result;  indeed,  it  seems  difficult  to  imagine  any  law  on 
which all residents of a State would agree.  See Locke §98,
at 49 (suggesting that society would cease to function if it 
required  unanimous  consent  to  laws).    What  matters  is 
that  the  process  established  by  those  who  created  the
society has been honored. 

That  process  has  been  honored  here.    The  definition  of 
marriage  has  been  the  subject  of  heated  debate  in  the
States.  Legislatures have repeatedly taken up the matter
on behalf of the People, and 35 States have put the ques-
tion  to  the  People  themselves.    In  32  of  those  35  States, 
the  People  have  opted  to  retain  the  traditional  definition 
of marriage.  Brief for Respondents in No. 14–571, pp. 1a– 
7a.  That  petitioners disagree with the result of that pro-
cess  does  not  make  it  any  less  legitimate.    Their  civil 
liberty has been vindicated. 

B 

Aside  from  undermining  the  political  processes  that 
protect  our  liberty,  the  majority’s  decision  threatens  the 
religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect.

The history of religious liberty in our country is familiar: 
Many of the earliest immigrants to America came seeking 
freedom  to  practice  their  religion  without  restraint.    See 
McConnell,  The  Origins  and  Historical  Understanding  of 
Free  Exercise  of  Religion,  103  Harv.  L. Rev.  1409,  1422–
1425  (1990).    When  they  arrived,  they  created  their  own
havens for religious practice.  Ibid.  Many of these havens 
were  initially  homogenous  communities  with  established