Supreme Court asked to overturn gay marriage

Legislators in Idaho called on Monday to the Supreme Court to regret Obergefell v. HodgesThe Landmark 2015 decision that declared the nationwide right of marriage of the same sex.

Newsweek Has contacted legislators in Idaho for comment via E email.

Why it matters

Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 that overturned Roe v. WadeGiving states the opportunity to ban abortion raised concern that other rights criticized by Conservatives could be at risk.

Obergefell was decided with a 5-4 vote. But since then, President Donald Trump’s three have appointed a 6-3 conservative majority in the country’s highest court. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, two Conservative Judge, who disseminated from the 2015 -Decision in Obergefellhas previously suggested that the decision to establish a right to marriage of the same sex should be reconsidered.

Voting from Gallup shows that a majority of Americans continue to believe that the marriage between couples of the same sex should be legal (69 percent), although the support has fallen slightly from the record height of 71 percent registered in 2022 and 2023. The vote found a wide partisan gap In support of marriage of the same sex by 83 percent of Democrats in support compared to only 46 percent of Republicans.

What to know

Idaho -Representators House voted to adopt the resolution – the House’s joint memorial 1 – which calls on the Supreme Court to knock down Obergefell Monday. All 9 House Democrats and 15 Republicans opposed the decision, but it adopted a 46-24 vote.

“Since legal decisions are not laws, and only legislators elected by the people can adopt laws, Obergefell is an illegitimate overreach,” the decision says.

“Idaho -Legislation calls on the Supreme Court of the United States to return Obergefell and restore the natural definition of marriage, an association of a man and a woman. ” ”

What people say

State representative Heather ScottA Republican who sponsored the measure, said During Monday’s consultation: “The federal government does not have authority to just ‘do I want the federal government to create rights and for us, for Idahoans?’

“So what if the federal government redefined property rights or nationalized wandering rights? What does it look like if they came up with a certain new fair use policy or come up with different ways of defining property rights? It is not a decision for the judges, it is a decision for the states.

The house’s minority leader Ilana Rubela Democrat, said One of her sons who is gay was talking to her about the decision. “He was really worried about whether he will ever be blocked to marry his long -standing girlfriend and be able to live in this state.

“Not everyone in Idaho understands that this does not have legal influence. It is deeply troubling to some of these people, and it does not make them like their legislature do not want them here and do not want them to be able to live the full rights that everyone else can.

Which justices have said about gay marriage

In a simultaneous opinion to the court’s decision overturning BeetThomas urged the right to review other precedent, including decisions that protect marriage of the same sex, gay sex and the use of birth control.

“In future cases, we should consider all of this court’s material proper procedure including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell, “ he wrote.

“Because any noun proper process decision is ‘detectable wrong’, we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ set out in these precedent. “

Thomas, along with Alito, also called on the right to reconsider Obergefell When the court said in 2020 that it would not hear a case from a Kentucky County office, who was sued to refuse to issue marriage licenses to couples of the same sex.

“Because of Obergefellthose with sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage will have it increasingly difficult to join society without driving after Obergefell And its effect on other anti -dismantling laws, “Thomas said in a statement at the time.

“It would be one thing whose recognition of marriage of the same sex had been discussed and adopted through the democratic process in which the people decide not to provide statutory protection for religious freedom under state law. But it is a completely different one when the court forces However, this election of society its creation of Attual Constitutional Rights and its unevenly interpretation of the free training clause that leads them with religious objections in the swindlers.

“Besides Obergefell Enables courts and governments to feel religious supporters who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman like Bigots, making their religious freedom worries so much easier to reject. “

What is the next

The resolution Still images need the approval of the IDAHO senate, which is also controlled by Republicans before any request could be sent to the Supreme Court.

If the senate approves it does not require the governor’s signature as a new law would, According to to Idaho Capital Sun.