Hodges (2015) the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, applying to same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples. This case was brought forward by numerous groups of same-sex couples who were suing their relevant state agencies to challenge the constitutionality of those states’ same-sex marriage laws. The Supreme Court found that there is no difference between same-sex marriages and opposite-sex marriages, therefore, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the Due Process Clause. This is policy making because the Supreme Court forced states to change their laws by deciding that it was against the constitution to not only ban the recognition of same-sex marriages that occurred in states that allowed it, but also making same-sex marriage legal in all states. Government officials even those who do not believe in the law change must abide by it, by allowing same-sex couples their now legal right to be married and receive the benefits that opposite-sex married couples receive; changing the way that citizens and the government interact in societal ways but also financial
Burwell, Obamacare, and Obergefell v. Hodges, same-sex marriage. In King v. Burwell, Sotomayor was recognized as an influential voice, having opposed the arguments that opposed the law. In Obergefell v. Hodges, Sotomayor joined the other justices in passing the same-sex marriage act nationally. I believe because of Sotomayor’s background, being a minority and growing up in Bronx New York, has made her to be a voice for those who are afraid to be heard. America is a melting pot of many cultures and nationalities, our government should reflect the
The uphill battle being fought by this community and its controversial “moral code” is not one that will go away. Romer v. Evans was a case created to define and uphold equal protections for all citizens of America despite their choices. The 2nd Amendment infringed upon these rights and resulted in a court case based on a cultural war. A single characteristic does not define an individual and discrimination against that has proven to be detrimental to America throughout its history. The United States Supreme Court decision implemented a positive string of events for the gay community, it was solely based on the constitutionality of the amendment
Since it legal to all 50 states, there should be no unsettling, should be only uniformity of laws regarding gay marriage across the Unites States. How do we know when social or political inequality exists? What does it mean to be "equal”? Are equity and equality the same things? Should our constitution merely provide the potential for equality to exist?
To the extent of compromising would be through obeying all documents that overlap Native Americans having equal rights and overriding the 5th amendment so that the boundaries of each individual citizen is followed in the Bill of Rights How can Native American citizens, who live under the absolute power of congress, have equal constitutional protection such as, the 5th amendment on a tribal government case? So, as our government prospers in these liberties, we as citizens, may abuse our rights allowing the government to control our individuality, resulting in compromising amendments in the
The court felt that the government was discriminating against Arkansas Times based upon their content, which goes against the First Amendment. “It took longer than we thought but it was all worth it in the long run. The court did the right thing in the end and hopefully our case can help another newspaper or magazine that feels discriminated against,” Hanson told us after hearing the final
He maintained that affirmative action policies violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution which says that all citizens should have an equal protection of law. However, the court ruled out that the affirmative action policy is constitutional and can be used as a one of many factors in admissions processes. However, it should not be zero-sum, where the increased opportunities for the minorities come at the expense of the majority groups ( Brunner and Rowen
She reveals that there were other people who tried to help Tom, even though the outcome was unfavorable for them. Even though this could’ve given Tom an advantage, there was no possible outcome that would’ve been in Tom’s favor. When Scout asks him why he already knows why Tom won’t win the trial, Atticus immediately says, “Simply because we were licked a hundred years before we started” (Lee 78). Atticus knew that even with all of the advantages Tom could receive, there would be no way to win the trial. Due to the other testimonies, along with Bob Ewell’s tough, cruel reputation, Tom was pre-destined to be declared guilty, never having a chance to present his testimony to an unbiased
The ratio of the House of Lords is that all five judges agreed to uphold the rape conviction, declared that a marital rape exemption doesn’t exist in the English Law. The meaning of ratio decidendi of a case is the principle of Law on which a decision is based. For example, when a judge delivers judgement in a case like R v R he outlines the facts and arrives at a decision, for which he gives the ratio. Ratio is the binding part of a judicial decision.  Lord Keith mentioned that the opinion that section 1(1) of the Act of 1976 presents no obstacle to the House declaring that in present day the alleged marital rejection in rape forms no part of the Law of England.
This can be reflected in the LGBT+Rights Movements, with activists wanting equality between straight cisgender people and LGBT+ people, and show how a person’s sexuality or gender identity does not reflect their personality. In a New York Times article on the 2015 Supreme Court decision granting marriage equality, Adam Liptak quoted Justice Kennedy, saying “without the recognition, stability and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated through no fault of their own to a more difficult and uncertain family life”. The marriage laws at issue here thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples.” Although this quote is on the issue of marriage equality, it outlines the theme of the LGBT+ movements: they want equality, they want recognition, and they want safety. Like in the book, where Lee mostly uses the setting of a courtroom to make her point, one of the many LGBT+ Rights Movement’s tactics also uses the legal system to make their movement move forward, and uses its environment as a way to peacefully debate different discriminatory laws and policies.
Zachary M. Zapata @01450686 firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com CRJ 4013-901 Alexis de Tocqueville Assignment In the DeLeon v. Perry same sex marriage case we learned of the diversity and disparity in individual rights. As of recent, same sex marriage has become a major issue in the United States and the development of equality for all. Although there are many opposed to same sex marriage suggesting the validity of constitutionality not one individual is against the due process of law. The due process of law is derived from the 5th and 14th Amendments and were established to protect individuals civil liberties and basic rights to life. Alexis de Tocqueville speaks of the spirit of the law affecting change and development.