Obergefell v. Hodges

***Obergefell v. Hodges*** was a landmark decision United States Supreme Court case. The Court held that the recognition and provision of same-sex marriage is a fundamental right. They ruled it is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

## Not one lawsuit

The U.S. Supreme Court case, _Obergefell v. Hodges_, is not the result of one lawsuit. Instead, it is the result of a consolidation of six lower-court cases originally representing sixteen same-sex couples, seven of their children, a widower, an adoption agency, and a funeral director. The original cases hail from the four states of Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. All six federal district courts ruled for the same-sex couples and other claimants. The lead plaintiff in the case was Jim Obergefell. He had challenged Ohio's ban on same-sex marriage. He filed the lawsuit because he could not put his name on his partner, John Arthur's death certificate. Ohio would not recognize their marriage in Maryland.

## Decision

The dissents in the Obergefell case argued that this decision was not based in law. Chief Justice Roberts, in his dissenting opinion, explained the Obergefell plaintiffs’ “‘fundamental right’ claim falls into the most sensitive category of constitutional adjudication.” The claim is not based on a right mentioned in the constitution. Instead, it was argued that it discrimination against “a right implied by the Fourteenth Amendment’s requirement that ‘liberty’ may not be deprived without ‘due process of law.’”

On June 26, 2015, _Obergefell_ requires all states to issue a license to marry between all people of the same sex. It requires all states to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.

## Infobox (scotus case)

- **litigants**: Obergefell v. Hodges
- **arguedate**: April 28
- **argueyear**: 2015
- **decidedate**: June 26
- **decideyear**: 2015
- **fullname**: James Obergefell, et al., Petitioners v. Richard Hodges (politician), Richard Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health, et al.
- **usvol**: 576
- **uspage**: ___
- **parallelcitations**: 135 S. Ct. 2584; 192 L. Ed. 2d 609; 83 U.S.L.W. 4592; 25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 472; 2015 WL 2473451; 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4250; 2015 BL 204553
- **docket**: 14-556
- **oralargument**: http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2014/2014_14_556/argument-1
- **opinionannouncement**: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
- **related**: _Bourke v. Beshear_, _DeBoer v. Snyder_, _Tanco v. Haslam_, _Love v. Beshear_.
- **holding**: The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State. United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed. _Baker v. Nelson_ overturned.
- **scotus**: 2010–2016
- **majority**: Kennedy
- **joinmajority**: Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
- **dissent**: Roberts
- **joindissent**: Scalia, Thomas
- **dissent2**: Scalia
- **joindissent2**: Thomas
- **dissent3**: Thomas
- **joindissent3**: Scalia
- **dissent4**: Alito
- **joindissent4**: Scalia, Thomas
- **lawsapplied**: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, U.S. Const. amend. XIV
- **overturned previous case**: _Baker v. Nelson_ (1972)