The Obergefell v. Hodges: Same Sex Marriage

Published on
January 24, 2023
Written by
Angel Murphy
Category
Divorce

Background on the Obergefell v Hodges Case

In American legal history, few issues have generated as much controversy and garnered as much public attention as same-sex marriage as in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. The reasons for this are varied. Part of the controversy stems from America’s cultural past. For most of its history, there have been religious objections to same-sex marriage. Other people have objected on other grounds as well. These objections kept same-sex marriage universally illegal, across all jurisdictions, all the way until the late 20th century.During the latter half of the 20th century, issues surrounding same-sex marriage began to receive more and more scrutiny. Ultimately, some states legalized same-sex unions. However, not all state governments followed this trend. So prior to the Obergefell case, there were still many states which forbade same-sex marriages.

Obergefell v. Hodges Case Bundle of Lawsuits

One thing that readers may not be aware of is the fact that the Obergefell case is actually a bundle of different cases. These cases – 6 separate cases in total – all involved the same issue of same-sex marriage. Although the fact scenarios in each case were somewhat different, the cases derived from different states.One of the key cases which received substantial attention in the Obergefell opinion was DeBoer v. Snyder. This was a case from Michigan involving two female partners and their children. The couple initially launched the DeBoer case. They claimed that Michigan’s adoption law was unconstitutional as currently written.Prior to Obergefell, Michigan’s adoption law forbade adoption by same-sex couples. Only single individuals or married couples (limited to opposite-sex partners in Michigan at that time) could legally adopt children.Aside from Michigan, the other cases bundled in the Obergefell lawsuit derived from Ohio, Tennessee, and Kentucky.

The Obergefell v. Hodges Case Ruling & Its Impact

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court justices ultimately ruled against the state bans on same-sex marriage, and so subsequent to Obergefell same-sex unions instantly became legal throughout the nation. The reasoning of the Supreme Court may be quite complex for those without technical expertise. Basically, the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of personal liberty and pointed out that marriage is a fundamental expression of personal choice. Allowing bans on same-sex marriage, therefore, would be an offensive infringement of personal liberty, in violation of the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause. Because of this reality, the majority held that such bans are indeed unconstitutional. Several arguments, including the notion that same-sex unions diminish the value of marriage as an institution did not move the majority.We can scarcely overstate the significance of this case to our present society. Now, all 50 states and all other territories subject to U.S. legal authority must recognize same-sex marriages. Given its far-reaching impact, we shouldn’t be surprised at all to know that this case is considered a landmark decision by American society. Even though this matter is essentially resolved from a legal perspective, controversy still persists regarding the desirability and propriety of same-sex marriage.Many Americans, particularly those with strong religious convictions, continue to hold that these unions should not be permitted. For now, however, Obergefell has put a major aspect of this debate to rest.

Contact The Murphy Law Firm for More Information

If you’d like to learn more, reach out to The Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-493-9116.

Angel Murphy

Personable. Passionate. Persistent.

Divorce|Divorce Cases|Family Cases|family law cases|gay marriage|liberty|Maryland Dicorce Cases|Maryland Divorce|Maryland Divorce Cases Now|Maryland Family Cases|Maryland Family Court|Maryland Family Law|Maryland Family Law Cases|Maryland Prevailing Family Cases|Obergefell Case|Obergefell v Hodges Case|Obergefell v Hodges Law Case|Obergefell v Hodges Legal Case|Prevailing Maryland Divorce Case|same sex marriage|Trending Maryland Family Law Cases|Understanding Divorce Cases

Subscribe to our newsletter

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Articles & Resources

March 4, 2024

Rudnick v. Rudnick (2023) & Unconscionability in Maryland Prenuptial Agreements

In Rudnick v. Rudnick (2023), a prenuptial agreement signed in 1992 became the subject of dispute during the couple's divorce in 2019. The agreement, which prohibited the division of assets or alimony, was initially considered fair but was deemed unconscionable at the time of enforcement. Massachusetts law, where the case arose, applied an unconscionability analysis at the time of enforcement. The courts ruled in favor of the wife, highlighting the importance of skilled legal representation well-versed in relevant state laws.

April 1, 2024

Carrington v. Richards (2017) & the Role of Participation in Custody Modification

In Carrington v. Richards (2017), a custody battle turned tragic due to the mother's failure to participate in court proceedings. Initially seeking full custody of their son, the father was awarded sole custody when the mother failed to appear at the final hearing. Despite subsequent attempts to overturn the decision, the mother's non-compliance with court orders and absence from proceedings hindered her case. Ultimately, the father's custody was affirmed, but the case took a devastating turn when the mother shot and wounded the father. This case underscores the importance of active participation in custody proceedings and the serious consequences of non-compliance.

March 29, 2024

Wiles v. Wiles (2017) & Modifying Alimony to Obtain a Longer Payment Period

In Wiles v. Wiles (2017), a divorced couple faced a dispute over alimony modification. Initially granted alimony for a limited duration, the ex-wife sought to extend the payments indefinitely and increase the monthly amount. Despite the ex-husband's opposition, the trial court granted the modification based on the ex-wife's claim of a change in circumstances. On appeal, the appellate division upheld the decision, emphasizing the need for a "material" change in circumstances to justify altering the alimony award, which would otherwise result in a harsh or inequitable outcome.

March 22, 2024

Hernandez v. Matiendo (2017) & the Impact of Previous Litigation on Visitation Modification

In family law, while the concept of "double jeopardy" may not apply, courts generally avoid relitigating settled issues without a change in circumstances. This principle was highlighted in the case of Hernandez v. Matiendo (2017), where a mother sought to modify a visitation order established in a Puerto Rican court. Despite her claims of sexual abuse, the Maryland court upheld the original order, emphasizing that the issue had already been litigated in Puerto Rico.

March 25, 2024

Mullen v. Robbins (2017) & How Settlement Agreements Impact Alimony Modification

In the case of Mullen v. Robbins (2017), a high-earning physician learned the importance of careful contract language when dealing with private agreements during divorce. Despite reaching a private agreement on alimony, the ex-wife sought modification in court citing a change in circumstances due to health issues. The trial court ruled in her favor, emphasizing the need for a "material change in circumstances" to modify private agreements. The appellate division upheld the ruling, highlighting the importance of precise contract language in determining modifiability.