Equality and the Rule of Law by Professor Jeffrey Fisher

As co-counsel for the Kentucky plaintiffs (and, before them, the Oklahoma plaintiffs) in the marriage equality litigation, I helped draft over one hundred pages of briefs in the Supreme Court arguing for the right of lesbians and gay men to marry on the same terms as everyone else. Upon receiving today’s decision, however, I find myself somewhat at a loss for words. Perhaps this is because – at least right now – I’m more interested in taking in what the Court’s opinion means than in quibbling over what it says. The decision means that gay people can fully share in the dignity, protections, and fulfillment of marriage, and it means that our country is a better place. Read more »

Obergefell: A No-Doubter by Professor Jane Schacter

In baseball, towering home runs are often called “no doubters.” Today’s opinion in Obergefell delivered that kind of victory to those advocating constitutional marriage equality. In no uncertain terms, with pointed rhetoric about dignity, and with no apology for the constitution’s tradition of evolving understandings, the Court said squarely and unmistakably that the fundamental right to marry long recognized as part of the due process clause also protects same-sex couples. There were narrower ways the opinion could have been written, but the majority did not choose that path. Or perhaps I should say: Justice Kennedy did not choose that path. Read more »

Living Traditions: Justice Kennedy Embraces Evolving Traditions by Professor Bernadette Meyler

Readers of Justice Kennedy’s opinions in Lawrence v. Texas (2004) and United States v. Windsor (2013) will find many familiar notes in the language of Obergefell’s majority decision. “Dignity” (9 times) and “liberty” (24 times) are paramount, as before, and the opinion emphasizes how exclusion from marriage “disparages” or “demeans” gays and lesbians. What strikes a new key is Kennedy’s emphasis on the balance between timelessness and innovation in institutions central to our society.

At oral argument, Kennedy had worried some supporters of same-sex marriage by referring to how “the word that keeps coming back to me in this case is—is millennia, plus time.” Read more »

Obergefell: A Victory for Children by Professor Michael Wald

The Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (and three other cases) is obviously a landmark decision of enormous importance to gay individuals and the interests of liberty and equality. As someone whose career has focused on the needs and interests of children, I look at the decision from another perspective. Obergefell also is a landmark in the recognition of the rights and interests of children.

In his opinion, Justice Kennedy cites as one of the major reasons “for protecting the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families…. By giving recognition and legal structure to their parents’ relationship, marriage allows children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives…. ” Read more »

And here, a Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic student weighs in…

Helping to Build the Marriage Equality Case by Alex Twinem, JD ’16

Today’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges represented the successful culmination of a four-month endeavor for myself and the other students in the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, where we assisted in writing the briefs for petitioners from Kentucky. But for countless others, this is the result of decades of activism and persistence in the face of inequality. Read more »