In a landmark ruling, a divided Supreme Court June 26 said
same-sex marriage is constitutional nationwide.
"The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond,
two persons together can find other freedoms, such as
expression, intimacy, and spirituality," wrote Justice
Anthony Kennedy for the 5-4 majority. "This is true for all
persons, whatever their sexual orientation."
In a second part of the ruling, the court affirmed that every
state must recognize marriages performed in other states, a
question that will become moot as the first part of the
opinion is enacted. As of June 26, 36 states, the District of
Columbia and Guam allowed same-sex marriage. Some of those
states passed laws allowing it, while others have done so
under court ruling.
Recognizing in several places the role of religious beliefs
in the questions surrounding same-sex marriage, Kennedy said
toward the conclusion of his 28-page opinion that "it must be
emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious
doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere
conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should
not be condoned."
The First Amendment ensures protection for religious
organizations and individuals as they seek to teach the
principles "that are so fulfilling and so central to their
lives and faiths," he continued, and to "their own deep
aspirations to continue the family structure they have long
revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex
marriage for other reasons.
"In turn, those who believe allowing same-sex marriage is
proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious
conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree
with their view in an open and searching debate. The
Constitution, however, does not permit the state to bar
same-sex couples from marriage on the same terms as accorded
to couples of the opposite sex."
Statement by Arlington Bishop Paul S. Loverde and Richmond
Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo on Supreme Court Marriage
Decision.
"Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires states to issue
marriage licenses to two persons of the same sex, and
requires a state to recognize as marriage the union of two
people of the same sex when it was lawfully licensed and
performed out-of-state. We are deeply distressed by this
decision which fails to uphold marriage as the union which
unites one man and one woman. This fundamental institution,
grounded in natural law, predates any religion or nation.
"All persons have inviolable dignity and deserve love and
respect. Unjust discrimination is always wrong. However, our
commitment to marriage is a matter of justice and fidelity to
our Creator's original design. Marriage is the only
institution uniting one man and one woman with each other and
with any child who comes from their union. Redefining
marriage furthers no one's rights, least of all those of
children.
"As Bishops, we believe it is more vital than ever that we
share the Church's consistent witness to the truth about
marriage, and we call on Catholics and those concerned for
the common good to continue to pray, live and speak out with
charity about the true nature of marriage. The truth cannot
be marginalized.
"We will join with our brother bishops from across the
country when we shortly share an additional statement from
the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which will provide
further analysis."
More on the decision
Obergefell v. Hodges bundled four cases out of the 6th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals, from Tennessee, Michigan, Kentucky
and Ohio, each of which had limited marriage to heterosexual
couples. The circuit court upheld the state prohibitions on
same-sex couples being entitled to marry.
The plaintiffs who sued raised a variety of issues that
affected them. James Obergefell, for whom the case is titled,
sued after the state of Ohio refused to list him as the
surviving spouse on the death certificate of his husband,
John Arthur, who he married in Maryland. A Michigan couple
sued after they were denied the right to jointly adopt the
children they are raising together. Two other cases
challenged Tennessee's and Kentucky's refusal to recognize
their marriages from other jurisdictions.
Shortly after the opinion was announced, Kentucky Gov. Steven
Beshear ordered county clerks to immediately begin issuing
marriage licenses to same-sex couples who seek them. The
Associated Press reported that same-sex couples in some
jurisdictions in Georgia, Texas and Arkansas already were
being married.
Kennedy was joined in the majority by Justices Stephen
Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
The four justices who dissented in the ruling did so with
vehemence. Each wrote a separate dissent, with different
combinations of the four signing onto each others' opinions.
Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justices Antonin Scalia
and Clarence Thomas, focused primarily on the argument that
the court was acting precipitously, ruling on a matter that
the states are still considering.
Roberts made appoint of acknowledging that the petitioners
seek marriage "because of their respect - and need - for its
privileges and responsibilities."
If their intent was "to demean the revered idea and reality
of marriage," he said their claims "would be of a different
order."