Marriage Equality in Texas
In the United States of America, there has been legislation concentrating upon marriage equality for same-sex couples. Predominantly in Texas, there has been legislation that has both supported and opposed marriage equality for same-sex couples. The following will examine the legislation of Texas, regarding marriage equality, in order to discuss the various sides of the issue.
Firstly, the political issue of marriage equality in Texas has been an overwhelmingly predominant issue throughout the course of the past few decades. The state has also passed an abundance of legislation protecting as well as opposing same-sex marriage since the second half of the twentieth century. “Beginning with Maryland, Texas, and Colorado
…show more content…
The Texas Defense of Marriage Act, “eliminating the freedom to marry for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Texans in same-sex relationships”, (Equality Texas 1) was also passed in the Texas Legislature in 2003. It was followed by an amendment, which was quite similar, to the Texas Constitution in 2005. “Restricting the freedom to marry runs counter to basic Texas values like self-determination and the freedom of people to live their lives without government interference. Both the Texas Constitution and Texas Statute should be amended so that all Texans have the freedom to marry the person they love.” (Equality Texas 1) Proponents of marriage equality in Texas have worked extensively for the cause. The Equality Texas Foundation is an organization which strongly supports marriage equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Texans. Concerning legislation, the foundation aggressively advocates for the elimination of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Equality Texas argues that, “The state’s unconstitutional ban on marriage between same-gender-loving adults places an unfair—and unequal—burden on their freedoms and their families. But the struggle is about more than marriage equality.” (Equality Texas 1) By focusing on civil liberties and rights for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Texans, The Equality Texas Foundation has been instrumental in creating awareness of …show more content…
The federal judge in San Antonio, Texas, “ruled that Texas ' ban on same-sex marriage violates the U.S. Constitution and demeans the dignity of gay couples "for no legitimate reason." Judge Orlando Garcia then granted two plaintiff couples ' request for an injunction barring the state from enforcing the ban.” (Keen 1) One of the couples sought to be married in Texas while the other couple had already been married in Massachusetts, but desired to be recognized by the state of Texas. In Garcia’s ruling, he states that, “the Texas bans violate the guarantees of due process and equal protection of the U.S. Constitution.” (Keen 1) These basic fundamental civil liberties and rights have laid the foundation for the vast majority of supporters of marriage equality within
Lawrence v. Texas 539 US 558 (2003) Case Facts: In September 1998, a same-sex couple in Houston, Texas were arrested in their own apartment after police found them engaging in a consensual, intimate, sexual act. The two men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, were convicted of violating the Texas “Homosexual Conduct” Law, which made it a Class-C misdemeanor for same-sex adults to engage in sexual intercourse and considered it illegal sodonomy. The statute was created in 1973 after the state changed its criminal code to end the banning of heterosexual anal or oral sex. The sheriff deputies arrested and charged the couple for performing “deviate sexual intercourse” as listed in the mentioned in the Texas statute.
Karina Dyal PHIL 340: Ethics and Law Legal Brief Assignment—Lawrence v. Texas 04/01/17 Case: Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) Facts: Oral and anal sex between two individuals from the same gender was deemed illegal—implemented through a Georgia statute. Hardwick who was an adult male, was charged in 1982 for violating the statute by engaging in sexual activities with another male in his home. The case was not pursued by the District Attorney, who also decided to not have the case presented before a grand jury. Hardwick went to the federal district court where he questioned the statute’s constitutionality. Issue: Does the U.S. Constitution give homosexual individuals the fundamental right to have sexual intercourse, and therefore renders the laws
In my brief I will explore the effect of the Loving V. Virginia (1967) on the case of Obergefell V. Hodges (2015) and how it led to legalization of same sex marriage. I will prove that the 9th amendment which addresses the right to marriage did not specify that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I will also prove that the precedents set by prior cases reflected on the decision of the supreme justice. I will first explain the prior cases and discuss their rulings and reflect on the reason judges chose this. I will then discuss the Obergefell v. Hodges case and its similarity to prior cases .
In the United States Constitution, our 14th amendment states that “[no state shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the laws” (Dictionary.com). The case Lawrence vs Texas, which started in 1998, in Harris County, was a case that was deeply investigating homosexual’s 14th amendment. It all began when four law enforcement officers were responding to a false call about a person armed with a firearm. After arriving at the house and going in they encountered John Lawrence and Tyron Garner engaging in "deviate sexual intercourse, namely anal sex, with a member of the same sex" (supreme.justia.com). According to the Texas sexual offenses a “deviate sexual [act]” is stated in the “Texas Penal Code Title 5.
Texas would include its help for a tradition called to correct the American Constitution under a measured endorsement of the federal laws. Transgender individuals are not the predators. Transgender individuals will probably be the casualties. Texas' public officials do not have the choice of translating the constitution in a way that would enable them to deviate from the particular dialect of the
Texas was a success not only for the convicted John Lawrence and Tyron Garner but a success for the entirety of the LGBT community. The reason for this is because I believe it laid the foundation for other changes and ordinances set in place by the United States government to insure more freedom to individuals who identify as something other than heterosexual, such as same sex marriage. In terms of the verdict I believe the Supreme Court rightfully defended the rights of the people by ensuring that their freedoms could not be removed from them based on something as sexuality. However there were some issues with the case that I would like to identify that should have been touched upon when this occurred. First is that when the police enter Lawrence’s apartment they did not in fact have a search warrant, which is needed to enter the home.
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
Obergefell v Hodges first originated when same-sex couples sued the state governments of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee in disagreement to the constitutionality of those states ' bans on same-sex marriage and refusal to recognize any legal marriages that took place outside the jurisdiction of the state. The couples argued the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was violated by the state 's’ exclusion of same-sex marriages. In the trial courts of the fourth, seventh, ninth, and tenth districts, state level bans on same-sex marriage were declared
Although marriage and civil unions should be recognized under the Full Faith and Credit Clause it was not because this clause was primarily used for judicial rulings and was not thought to apply to marriages or civil union licenses. This deals with the recognition of same sex marriages in states, it also deals with the relationship between states. At the time some states such as New York recognized same-sex civil marriages but whether these unions were recognized in other states was an entirely different story. This went on for a while until it was determined that DOMA was not only discriminatory but also went against the Full Faith and Credit
Huckabee stated, “This ruling is not about marriage equality, it’s about marriage redefinition. This irrational, unconstitutional rejection of the expressed will of the people in over 30 states will prove to be one of the court’s most disastrous decisions, and they have had many” (“Mike Huckabee”). Former Arkansas Governor and Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee opposes same sex marriage and believes Americans must defend, protect and preserve traditional marriage (“Values”).
To elaborate, on June 26, 2015, the US supreme court made gay marriage legal in all 50 states. As a state that is strongly fixed on both individualistic and more specifically, traditionalistic values, the platform of these political cultures in Texas were challenged through means of media. A culture that is based on traditional values strives away from changes and is resistant to accepting new laws, such as the legalization of same sex marriage. However, pop culture and widespread media shared amongst the citizens of the state of Texas, opened and shaped the debate over this issue. In fact, “scholars agree that the news media have become more attentive to and supportive of lesbian and gay rights over time.”
In the majority opinion written on the Obergefell et al. v. Hodges Supreme Court case on June 26, 2015, the court decided that states were required to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples as well as recognize such licenses from other states on the basis of the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision held wide ramifications for policy implementation throughout the nation, especially in those states that had not already legalized same-sex marriage. This unilateral action by the federal government created a complicated responsibility for state and local governments to integrate the broad new legal proceedings effectively. The problems that arise in the local governments following such federal decisions challenge the nation’s federalist system,
Matthew Feeler Political Science 101 M/W Byron 11/17/16 Midterm: Question 1 The 14th Amendment was created after the civil war in 1868 and the underlying premise of the amendment gives equal protection and rights to slaves. This main idea was obviously the cause of the civil war and gaining freedom from slaves. Although, another part of the Amendment was what is known as the “due process” in which citizens are granted rights to life, liberty, and property. A huge topic of controversy for years has been the idea of same-sex couples being able to marry, and recently in 2015 the supreme court ruled that same sex marriage is legal which to some was very surprising, although some believe that with the 14th amendment, this is a right that should
There are so many people in America that dislike and discriminated against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people just because of their sexuality. Texas was an entire state that discriminated against this group of people. The Lawrence v. Texas case change history for the better. If Lawrence had not filed a case, sodomy could still be illegal. Finally, the Courts noticed that the Fourteenth Amendment was not being fully fulfilled.
In 2015, the Obergefell v. Hodges case ended the “state bans on same-sex marriage”, therefore legalizing same-sex marriage (Important Supreme Court Cases). Now, “same-sex couples can now receive the benefits...of marriage that were largely exclusive to heterosexual couples” (Koch). The ruling has led to the modern fight for gay civil rights. Exposure to the LGBTQ+ community, the southern “Bathroom Bills”, and other fights for transgender rights, and the press for more LGBTQ+ representation in the media has erupted from this case. Both rulings had very big impacts on their respective communities.