CJ225_MooreW1Assignment

docx

School

Grantham University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

225

Subject

Political Science

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AgentWolverine690

1 Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. Ashley Moore University of Grantham CJ225 Judicial Process Professor T.R. Hoefle January 16, 2024

2 Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. Court's decision and reasoning for the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. The case of Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S 2015 served to define marriage and precisely same-sex marriage, a crucial provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses which the court decision focused on defining (HUSL, 2023). In a 5-4 vote, the Court ruled that the refusal of states to recognize same-sex marriage was against the Constitution. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority rule with was also signed by Justice Kagan, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Ginsburg who were in support of this ruling. This decision challenged the laws that most states had upheld denying same-sex couples the right to marry each other (HUSL, 2023). Justice Kennedy stressed the provisions that the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provided served as the basis for understanding this law. In their reasoning, this majority judge bench argued that marriage was an essential component of the pursuit of happiness for any citizen. They contended that Due Process protected the liberty of anyone wishing to pursue happiness, which marriage provided in this case. While supporting this, they also argued that discrimination against sexual orientation went against the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Justice Kennedy was emphatic about the role marriage between two people played in society and to the person (Cornell Law School, 2023). According to him, marriage, as a union between people, embodies family, devotion, fidelity, love, and sacrifice, making it a more significant component of society that should be protected under the law. He also added that since it is part of the Constitution, marriage is "inherent in the liberty of the person" and the more reason it deserves protection. Nonetheless, while dissenting, Justices Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, and Alito thought that by ruling the way it

3 did, the Court was playing the role that states should have played ("Obergefell v. Hodges," 2015). How does the Court's decision illustrate the intersection of law and politics? The Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. illustrates the intersection of law and politics due to its timing and the Justices' interpretation of the law. In this case, the decision was a form of judicial activism encompassing the justices interpreting the law based on the prevailing circumstances. Typically, based on the dissenting opinion, the issue of same-sex marriage was a democratic role that required participation from the public (Cornell Law School, 2023). Instead, as the majority decision ruled, same-sex marriage was a constitutional provision that was to be upheld. Notably, during the ruling of this case, there were political and societal tensions about same-sex marriages. Politically, different functions argued on the same-sex marriage issue. Socially, the society was also accepting the existence of the minority sexual groups. With this evolving perception, it was more common that the acceptance of same-sex marriage was a considerate matter. As such, the intersection between law and politics came about as support of same-sex marriage from a political standpoint influenced how the majority of Justices ruled on the case. While it was common for the decision about same-sex marriage to be a democratic decision, the fact that they chose to interpret the Constitution to fit the rising political pressures shows where the intersection occurs. In this case, politics and the dynamic society influenced the overall interpretation of the Constitution as law.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 What are the legal ramifications of the Court's decision? What about the political ramifications? The primary legal ramification of the Court's decision was the recognition of same-sex marriage as a human right. Emphasizing this fact was the central aspect of this Court. In this case, the ruling of this Court came at a time when states were banning same-sex marriages in their jurisdiction which in turn impacted the right of minority couples to exercise their right of marriage as enshrined in the constitution. Challenging this law, the Court argued that same-sex marriage was a fundamental right "inherent in the liberty of the person." This ruling was, therefore, a legal ramification as it defined the law concerned with same-sex marriage. Notably, the other legal ramification it served was to define the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the Equal Protection Clause and Due process, mainly related to same-sex marriage. In this case, based on the ruling, the clauses defined same-sex marriages as an essential aspect of law. With this precedence, the Fourteenth Amendment would, therefore, be necessary in determining future cases related to same-sex marriages ("Obergefell v. Hodges," 2015). On the other hand, the significant political ramifications of this court decision have been the political polarization influenced and continue to influence today's political arena. Since then, liberals have been more concerned about LGBTQ+ rights and have consequently used it as a campaign tool to convince voters about their election to political offices (Khuu, 2017). Similarly, conservatives who continue to view the Court's decision as a judicial overreach have opposed this decision. Some have also used this as a campaign strategy to convince voters to get their votes. Overall, this issue of same-sex marriage has led to the political division of two major sides: one who has been in support and others against this right.

5 References Cornell Law School. (2023, February). Obergefell v. Hodges . LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obergefell_v._hodges HUSL. (2023, January 6). HUSL library: A brief history of civil rights in the United States: Obergefell v. Hodges . HUSL - Welcome to the Library - HUSL Library at Howard University School of Law. https://library.law.howard.edu/civilrightshistory/lgbtq/obergefell Khuu, N. (2017). Obergefell v. Hodges: kinship formation, interest convergence, and the future of LGBTQ rights. UCLA L. Rev. , 64 , 184. Obergefell v. Hodges . (2015). https://content.grantham.edu/academics/GU_CJ425/Assignments/ Obergfell_v_Hodges.pdf

CJ225_MooreW1Assignment

Related Documents