Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Page Number: 15

10 

OBERGEFELL v. HODGES 

Opinion of the Court 

thoughtful  District  Court  decisions  addressing  same-sex
marriage—and  most  of  them,  too,  have  concluded  same-
sex  couples  must  be  allowed  to  marry.  In  addition  the 
highest  courts  of  many  States  have  contributed  to  this
ongoing dialogue in decisions interpreting their own State
Constitutions.  These  state  and  federal  judicial  opinions 
are cited in Appendix A, infra. 

After  years  of  litigation,  legislation,  referenda,  and  the
discussions that attended these public acts, the States are
now divided on the issue of same-sex marriage.  See Office 
of  the  Atty.  Gen.  of  Maryland,  The  State  of  Marriage
Equality in America, State-by-State Supp. (2015). 

III 

Under  the  Due  Process  Clause  of  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment,  no  State  shall  “deprive  any  person  of  life, 
liberty,  or  property,  without  due  process  of  law.”    The 
fundamental  liberties  protected  by  this  Clause  include
most  of  the  rights  enumerated  in  the  Bill  of  Rights.  See 
Duncan  v.  Louisiana,  391  U. S.  145,  147–149  (1968).    In 
addition these liberties extend to certain personal choices
central  to  individual  dignity  and  autonomy,  including 
intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs. 
See,  e.g.,  Eisenstadt  v.  Baird,  405  U. S.  438,  453  (1972); 
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 484–486 (1965). 

The  identification  and  protection  of  fundamental  rights 
is  an  enduring  part  of  the  judicial  duty  to  interpret  the
Constitution.  That responsibility, however, “has not been 
reduced  to  any  formula.”  Poe  v.  Ullman,  367  U. S.  497, 
542  (1961)  (Harlan,  J.,  dissenting).    Rather,  it  requires
courts  to  exercise  reasoned  judgment  in  identifying  inter-
ests  of  the  person  so  fundamental  that  the  State  must
accord them its respect.  See ibid.  That process is guided 
by many of the same considerations relevant to analysis of 
other constitutional provisions that set forth broad princi-
ples rather than specific requirements.  History and tradi-