An appeal to overturn the legalisation of same-sex marriage has been rejected, but does this mean we’re in the clear?
BY KLARA FERRAIOLI-SCHUBERT, IMAGE BY GETTY
Former Kentucky court clerk, Kim Davis, issued an appeal to overturn the 2015 ruling of Obergefell v Hodges. On Monday, without disclosing any reasoning, the Supreme Court rejected this appeal.
Davis’ appeal garnered nationwide attention, as many feared that the Supreme Court’s decision would echo the 2022 ruling which overturned Roe v Wade, a legislation passed in 1973 which legalised abortion US. This 2022 ruling triggered widespread outrage both within the US and internationally.
The landmark decision of Obergefell v Hodges in 2015 ruled that marriage was a right guaranteed to same-sex couples in the US. A victory for LGBTQIA+ rights, there have been approximately 600,000 same-sex marriages since, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA. Their research also found that these couples are raising nearly 300,000 children.
Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, Davis refused to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples, where she claimed that her faith prevented her from adhering to the ruling.
“For me, this would have been an act of disobedience to God,” said Davis at the time.
Davis has also previously argued that the First Amendment’s religious protections should protect her from legal liability in this matter. This argument was similarly rejected by the Court of Appeals.
Following the rejection of Davis’ appeal, LGBTQIA+ activist groups have praised the Supreme Court for upholding vital legislation. President of The Human Rights Campaign, Kelley Robinson, said: “When public officials take an oath to serve their communities, that promise extends to everyone – including LGBTQ+ people.”
“The Supreme Court made clear today that refusing to respect the constitutional rights of others does not come without consequences”
Despite the Supreme Court’s rejection of Davis’ appeal, this does not establish any binding precedent. If another appeal were to threaten to undermine or overturn Obergefell, the Supreme Court would be obligated to review the appeal once again.
In the past decade, the Supreme Court has strengthened religious rights in the US, expanding faith-based exemptions to certain laws at the expense of LGBTQIA+ rights. The current Supreme Court is more conservative than the Court which passed Obergefell, with six conservative Justices out of the total nine.
Advocate for LGBTQIA+ rights, Lambda Legal, has reported that in the past year, at least nine US states have considered bills criticising Obergefell or have sought to limit same-sex marriage. As of October, a ruling passed in Texas established that judges who refused to perform same-sex marriage based on their religious beliefs will not face legal sanctions.
Earlier this month, New Yorkers celebrated the appointment of Zohran Mamdani as Mayor of New York City, a strong advocate for LGBTQIA+ rights who published a plan in May to protect queer New Yorkers. With Mamdani’s appointment and the Supreme Court’s rejection of Davis’ appeal, many are hopeful for the future of LGBTQIA+ rights in the US. Although the Supreme Court’s decision signals relief for the time being, the foundations of Obergefell are still being tested.
Love media made by and for LGBTQIA+ women and gender diverse people? Then you’ll love DIVA. We’ve been spotlighting the community for over 30 years. Here’s how you can get behind queer media and keep us going for another generation: linkin.bio/ig-divamagazine
Did you know that DIVA has now become a charity? Our magazine is published by the DIVA Charitable Trust. You can find out more about the organisation and how you can offer your support here: divacharitabletrust.com
