"Over 60 percent of the country will no longer have marriage equality if the U.S. Supreme Court reverses it. Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were deemed unconstitutional by the 2015 ruling, Obergefell v. Hodges. This could change if the court were to revisit and reverse the ruling, as it did with , which previously deemed abortion bans unconstitutional. If the Supreme Court reverses Obergefell and determines bans against marriage equality"
"are not unconstitutional, lower or federal court rulings that declared the bans are unconstitutional will be invalidated as they are bound to Supreme Court precedent. This means states would be able to enforce their bans even if they weren't apart of the Obergefell lawsuit. The only state with a marriage equality law still on the books that would not be enforceable is Iowa, where the state Supreme Court - the next highest authority after the U.S. Supreme Court - deemed the ban unconstitutional."
Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were deemed unconstitutional by the 2015 ruling Obergefell v. Hodges. If the Supreme Court revisits and reverses Obergefell, lower and federal court rulings that struck down bans would be invalidated because they are bound to Supreme Court precedent. States with existing bans could then enforce those bans even if they were not parties to the original case. Iowa's state Supreme Court previously invalidated its ban, so a reversal would require the state court to reconsider. The Respect for Marriage Act preserves federal recognition but does not require states to allow same-sex marriages.
Read at Advocate.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]