Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
Page Number: 47.0

8 

OBERGEFELL v. HODGES 

ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting 

Loving, 388 U. S., at 6–7. 

The  majority  observes  that  these  developments  “were
not  mere  superficial  changes”  in  marriage,  but  rather
“worked  deep  transformations  in  its  structure.”    Ante,  at 
6–7.  They  did  not,  however,  work  any  transformation  in 
the core structure of marriage as the union between a man
and a woman.  If you had asked a person on the street how 
marriage was defined, no one would ever have said, “Mar-
riage is the union of a man and a woman, where the woman 
is  subject  to  coverture.”    The  majority  may  be  right  that
the  “history  of  marriage  is  one  of  both  continuity  and
change,”  but  the  core  meaning  of  marriage  has  endured. 
Ante, at 6. 

B 
Shortly  after  this  Court  struck  down  racial  restrictions
on marriage in Loving, a gay couple in Minnesota sought a 
marriage  license.  They  argued  that  the  Constitution 
required  States  to  allow  marriage  between  people  of  the
same  sex  for  the  same  reasons  that  it  requires  States  to
allow  marriage  between  people  of  different  races.    The 
Minnesota  Supreme  Court  rejected  their  analogy  to  Lov-
ing,  and  this  Court  summarily  dismissed  an  appeal. 
Baker v. Nelson, 409 U. S. 810 (1972).

In the decades after Baker, greater numbers of gays and 
lesbians began living openly, and many expressed a desire 
to have their relationships recognized as marriages.  Over 
time,  more  people  came  to  see  marriage  in  a  way  that
could  be  extended  to  such  couples.    Until  recently,  this
new view of marriage remained a minority position.  After 
the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in 2003 inter-
preted  its  State  Constitution  to  require  recognition  of 
same-sex  marriage,  many  States—including  the  four  at 
issue  here—enacted  constitutional  amendments  formally 
adopting the longstanding definition of marriage. 

Over the last few years, public opinion on marriage has