With recent Supreme Court decisions, particularly Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, many people have expressed concerns about the future of same-sex marriage. As an attorney practicing in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, I want to provide reassurance: same-sex marriage remains secure, and the decision in Dobbs does not affect the rights established under Obergefell v. Hodges.
What the Dobbs Decision Actually Says
The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs focused exclusively on overturning Roe v. Wade and returning decisions about abortion to the states. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in his concurring opinion, went out of his way to clarify the scope of the decision:
"To be clear, then, the Court’s decision today does not outlaw abortion throughout the United States. On the contrary, the Court’s decision properly leaves the question of abortion for the people and their elected representatives in the democratic process. Importantly, the Court today also does not overrule Griswold v. Connecticut, Eisenstadt v. Baird, Loving v. Virginia, or Obergefell v. Hodges; and does not cast doubt on those precedents."
This statement makes it clear that the Dobbs decision applies solely to abortion and does not affect other substantive due process rights, including the right to same-sex marriage.
Justice Thomas’s Separate Opinion: Why It’s Just His View
Justice Clarence Thomas, in a separate concurring opinion, suggested that the Court should reconsider certain substantive due process precedents, including Obergefell. He wrote:
"In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents."
However, it’s important to note that Thomas was the only justice to express this view. His opinion does not represent the majority of the Court and is considered dicta, meaning it’s a personal opinion without legal force. Furthermore, the majority opinion in Dobbs, written by Justice Samuel Alito, explicitly stated that the decision does not affect other rights.
Why the Future of Marriage Equality Looks Bright
Justice Thomas and Justice Alito are the two oldest justices on the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas, in particular, is widely believed to be the justice closest to retirement. The fact that no other justice joined him in his view about reconsidering Obergefell is a strong indication that the Court is not inclined to revisit same-sex marriage rights.
Looking ahead, younger justices appointed to the Court are likely to continue supporting same-sex marriage, reflecting the legal and societal progress that has made marriage equality a firmly established principle.
Marriage Equality in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania
All three states where I practice law—New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania—currently support marriage equality.
New York and New Jersey have firmly established same-sex marriage rights. New York passed the Marriage Equality Act in 2011, and New Jersey legalized same-sex marriage in 2013 following a state court ruling. Both states are majority-liberal, making it unlikely that these protections will change.
Pennsylvania, while a swing state, legalized same-sex marriage in 2014 through the federal court decision Whitewood v. Wolf. While the state’s political landscape can shift, its long-standing recognition of marriage equality has made it a key protection for same-sex couples.
States Must Recognize Legal Marriages from Other States
Even if some states were to change their stance on marriage equality, it is important to emphasize that every state must recognize a legal marriage performed in another state. This principle, rooted in the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, ensures that couples who are married in one state are recognized as legally married across the country, no matter where they live.
For example, if a same-sex couple marries in New York or New Jersey, their marriage must be recognized as valid in every other state, even if that state does not perform same-sex marriages. This offers an additional layer of protection for same-sex couples, regardless of how individual states may choose to legislate in the future.
Final Thoughts
It’s understandable to feel anxious about recent Supreme Court decisions, but the protections for same-sex marriage are strong and unlikely to change. Even if federal protections for marriage equality were reconsidered—a scenario that is highly unlikely—states like New York and New Jersey would maintain their strong protections for same-sex marriage, and the Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that your legal marriage is valid nationwide.
If you have specific concerns about your rights or need legal advice, please don’t hesitate to contact my office at ames123.com. At Ames Law Group, we are committed to providing clarity and support in uncertain times.
Contact us today if you have questions or need assistance.