With conservative leadership assuming dominance in the United States’ federal government, Americans have been forced to watch many human rights that were previously fought for be revisited by the Supreme Court. Now, there have been requests for the Court to dispute Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 ruling granting marriage equality to same-sex couples. The Lanthorn Editorial Board sees this as yet another attempt by the federal government to force the American people to align with conservative and often religious values.
Kim Davis, a former Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk, who spent six days in jail in 2015 for refusing to issue a marriage license over religious grounds, is petitioning the Court to revisit the case. Davis and her attorney filed the petition in July over First Amendment rights, which the Supreme Court could consider in late 2025 or early 2026. If they decide to review it, a decision will be made in June 2026. While we recognize that individuals may disagree over religious beliefs, we don’t agree that debates based on religious values should affect the right to obtain a marriage license. Religion should not interfere with government jobs or influence federal policy in ways that restrict citizens’ private lives.
Davis is represented by the Liberty Counsel, a Christian ministry with the mission of upholding “family values” and “religious freedom.” However, the Southern Poverty Law Center, an advocacy group for justice issues, has listed the ministry as an anti-LBGTQ+ hate group. Liberty Counsel denies this title, yet to us, the language used on their website simply comes off as derogatory and malicious, such as referring to consenting gender-affirming care as “medical mutilating surgery.”
Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver stated he believes the case could result in Obergefell being overturned, saying, “We need four justices for certiorari and five to win. We believe this is the case that can overturn Obergefell.” The LGBTQ+ community and its allies across the country disagree, hoping Davis’s case is not strong enough to invoke change from the Court. Yet, conservative changes to our political climate are leaving many people, including us, uneasy. We agree this situation is cause for concern, and following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, is a trend indicator of a conservative overhaul to the federal government.
If revisited by the Court, the overturn of Obergefell v. Hodges would not invalidate existing same-sex marriages – only future ones. Protected by the 2022 Respect for Marriage Act, any state constitutions that would otherwise ban same-sex marriages are required to recognize already-existing ones. This is a small comfort in light of the discriminatory laws and bills being passed, but one that is necessary to acknowledge when considering the impacts of overturning Obergefell v. Hodges.
This petition is particularly troubling in states like Michigan, where same-sex marriage isn’t codified in the state’s Constitution. Although nullified by Obergefell v. Hodges, if overturned, Michigan would revert to previous provisions in the state Constitution. Although attempts have been made to codify same-sex marriage into state law, no bill has passed to amend the Michigan Constitution. As LGBTQ+ couples in Michigan anxiously await the Court’s decision to reconsider the case, there is no comfort provided by state law. The lack of support on a national level is one thing, but the additional lack of support on a state level is even more upsetting. Knowing that local and state elected officials haven’t protected the right to marriage for all is isolating and, ultimately, devastating.
The timeframe of this all is especially jarring, as the final decision will be reviewed during Pride Month – a time during which the LGBTQ+ community has historically made immense progress, including the Stonewall riots and Obergefell v. Hodges itself. While most likely not intentional, we still think the timing feels like a low blow to activists who have fought hard to achieve the same legal autonomy as heterosexual couples. Beyond the timing, we consider the fact that the case is even being reviewed to be an insult to the previous strides made toward equality.
As we witness this ongoing debate, we can’t help but question the changes being made to our political climate and their inherent correlation to religious beliefs and values. To us, organizations like Liberty Counsel use religion to force traditional values on Americans, some of whom do not agree with the organizations’ rhetoric. Using words such as “liberty” and “freedom” while rallying for the reconsideration of the right to marriage equality is obtuse. In no way can full freedom ever be exhibited when certain religious values are forced upon people by their government. To us, using the legal system to enforce religion is a danger to the separation of church and state.
The use of a religious system to create and enact laws, as well as using those laws to enforce the same religious system, sets an extremely dangerous and unconstitutional precedent. This directly goes against the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states the government cannot enact laws establishing or endorsing a particular religion. By using religious texts as evidence for why same-sex marriage should not be allowed, the state pushes certain values over others in a country where hundreds of religions are practiced.
Furthermore, Davis’ petition comes amid other legislation being passed that further oppresses the LGBTQ+ community. The elimination of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives, bans on gender-affirming care for transgender minors and blocking trans athletes participating in sports are particularly noteworthy. These attacks on the private lives of LGBTQ+ people – both adults and youth – have set the precedent that the federal government is not only allowed to interfere with the private lives of citizens, but is actively encouraged by Americans willing to sacrifice the safety and well-being of others for a culture rooted in traditional and religious values.
