Earlier this year, the Supreme Court in the case Obergefell v. Hodges, the court heard a case in which the plaintiffs argued that a ban on same sex marriage violated certain provisions of the 14th Amendment. The plaintiffs specifically argued that the ban violated the concept of protection of liberty. The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that same-sex marriage is legal across all 50 states because they view marriage as a union of two people and not solely as a union of a man and a woman. Although it was a 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court, the majority opinion stated that the 14th Amendment was being violated. The dissenting opinion on the other hand, focussed on several ideas. The minority believed that the Supreme Court decision short circuited
…show more content…
Nelson case, the Supreme Court revisited the issue of same sex marriage in the case Obergefell v. Hodges and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the legalization of same sex marriage in a 5-4 split decision. The majority rule believed that the 14th Amendment was being violated when couples of the same gender were applying for marriage licenses and getting denied. They believe that all people no matter what sexual orientation you are, have the right to marry and that it is a freedom that all people should have. On the other hand, the minority thought differently, the four judges who voted on same sex marriage being unconstitutional all wrote their own dissenting opinion behind there justification to vote against same sex marriage. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his dissenting opinion that, “Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea, should be of no concern to us. Under the Constitution, judges have power to say what the law is not what the law should be.”(Dissenting Opinions in the Supreme Court’s Same Sex Marriage Ruling) John Roberts is saying that it should not be up to the Judicial Branch and the Supreme Court to make laws, they should only be able to interpret them. John Roberts and all of the other dissenting justices have a similar opinion that, with this ruling, they are making a law for same sex marriage, not interpreting the Constitution. They also think that legalization of same-sex marriage should be voted on by each individual state and not legalized throughout all 50 states. John Roberts also says, “Five Lawyers, deemed themselves chosen, to burst the bonds of history” .”(Dissenting Opinions in the Supreme Court’s Same Sex Marriage Ruling) He is saying that this is not the Supreme Court 's decision to decide the law on same-sex marriage and individual states should vote on whether they think it is legal or not. The dissenting justices bring up a very valid point that it is not there
Nelson case, the Supreme Court revisited the issue of same sex marriage in the case Obergefell v. Hodges and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the legalization of same sex marriage in a 5-4 split decision. The majority rule believed that the 14th Amendment was being violated when couples of the same gender were applying for marriage licenses and getting denied. They believe that all people no matter what sexual orientation you are, have the right to marry and that it is a freedom that all people should have. On the other hand, the minority thought differently, the four judges who voted on same sex marriage being unconstitutional all wrote their own dissenting opinion behind there justification to vote against same sex marriage. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his dissenting opinion that, “Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea, should be of no concern to us. Under the Constitution, judges have power to say what the law is not what the law should be.”(Dissenting Opinions in the Supreme Court’s Same Sex Marriage Ruling) John Roberts is saying that it should not be up to the Judicial Branch and the Supreme Court to make laws, they should only be able to interpret them. John Roberts and all of the other dissenting justices have a similar opinion that, with this ruling, they are making a law for same sex marriage, not interpreting the Constitution. They also think that legalization of same-sex marriage should be voted on by each individual state and not legalized throughout all 50 states. John Roberts also says, “Five Lawyers, deemed themselves chosen, to burst the bonds of history” .”(Dissenting Opinions in the Supreme Court’s Same Sex Marriage Ruling) He is saying that this is not the Supreme Court 's decision to decide the law on same-sex marriage and individual states should vote on whether they think it is legal or not. The dissenting justices bring up a very valid point that it is not there