Strict Constructionism Vs Same Sex Justice

1064 Words5 Pages
The justices of the Supreme Court of the United States have the choice of following one of the two judicial philosophies when ruling on federal cases. Some justices prefer the philosophy of judicial activism which allows for the justices to go beyond the printed words of the constitution when interpreting the amendments and their meanings to allow them to slightly use their personal views of right and wrong. This is used in many major cases involving civil rights to conform to the times of change. Strict constructionism is the second judicial philosophy used by Supreme Court justices. When this philosophy is followed, justices typically adhere to what the constitution clearly states in black and white. These justices try to hold onto…show more content…
Hodges received a substantial amount of attention due to the ruling in favor of Obergefell declaring same-sex marriage legal in all fifty states and the failure of any state to recognize and uphold a same-sex union was deemed unlawful. The justices of the Supreme Court ruled with a 5-4 majority with Justice Anthony Kennedy delivering the opinion. In the opinion, the Court claimed that the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protected the right to marry regardless of whether the couple is same or opposite-sex. The majority of the justices believed that the right to marry is one of our fundamental liberties as American citizens and the gender of the couple does not change this. The Due process Clause restricts states from depriving the people of life, liberty, or property without due process of law (Griswald, 96). The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is what the Court followed to make it required for states to uphold marriage licenses of same-sex couples from other states. The reasoning behind this being that the denial of same-sex couples to marry is the denial of same-sex couples’ equal protection under law. If the right to marry is guaranteed to opposite-sex couples, then the equal protection of rights and liberties need to be offered to same-sex…show more content…
The legislative branch makes the laws, the judicial branch interprets the laws, and the executive branch enforces the laws. The Supreme Court of the United States falls under the judicial branch of government. The role of the Supreme Court is to practice judicial review by deciding whether the laws in question are constitutional or not. In the case of Obergefell v. Hodges the Supreme Court did more than just interpret the law and decide if it is constitutional, the justices of this case took the duties of the legislative branch by adding their own views and establishing law. The unelected Supreme Court justices did not find anywhere in the Constitution that established marriage as a fundamental right that needed protection. Instead, these justices practiced judicial activism. Whether or not marriage between same-sex couples should be legalized and recognized is a matter falling under the responsibilities of state legislature and their electorates. If marriage were to be defined anywhere in the constitution as a right or liberty of the American people then the Supreme Court’s actions could be justified, but this is not the case. The justices implied marriage as a fundamental liberty and established a law to protect it. When establishing law it is crucial and mandatory that it comes from elected officials that are following the wishes of their electorates. If the

More about Strict Constructionism Vs Same Sex Justice

Open Document