Announcing the acceptance of four appeals that relate to issues of same-sex marriage in America, the U.S. Supreme Court takes the first step toward addressing directly one of the hottest political questions of the past decade. State after state in the nation has either passed laws permitting gay marriage or attempted to restrict and avoid recognizing marriage between partners of the same gender. Finally the Supreme Court will take the question head on and issue an urgently needed explanation of the constitutional implications of marriage.

Eagerly Awaited

A majority of U.S. states and D.C. now allow gay marriage. At last the highest court in the country has agreed to hear cases that raise two key issues: whether or not individual states are required to license same-sex marriages, and whether states are required to recognize valid gay marriages from other states, where they were performed under the law.

Many states have tried to forbid gay marriage, by law or state constitutional amendment, and courts have struck down most of those laws as unconstitutional attempts to discriminate against same-sex partners that want to be married. The fact is that a significant portion of the population wants to be legitimate, respected, and acknowledged in their marriage relationships. It is also a fact that many people are uncomfortable with same-sex relationships for various cultural and religious reasons.

Marriage Equality

Four Cases Distilled to Two Questions for Review

Agreeing in January to consolidate four federal appeals court cases, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on two questions presented by those lower court decisions, and issue a ruling sometime in June. Those two simple “questions presented” are:

• Does the 14th Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex?
• Does the 14th Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out of state?

Setting an oral argument period of 90 minutes on the first question and one hour on the second, the court will hear arguments from lawyers for and against the questions presented, and review written briefs submitted by the parties and amicus curia, or “friends of the court,” groups such as the ACLU and others who are permitted to file legal briefs in the case.

Anxiously Anticipated

Scholars and legal experts debate the meaning of early signs to how the court may rule. Some say the careful framing of the two distinct questions allows ample room for a ruling that may stop short of finding a constitutional right to marriage. Others say the court is merely clarifying with precision the questions that it will answer in the decision, expected in June. While the Supreme Court, like every other court in the country, rules directly only on the cases before them in a particular legal appeal, this decision will reverberate through courts and city halls throughout the country.

Who Decides for Whom?

Nine justices with a range of life experiences and backgrounds are the final word on legal disputes involving the U.S. Constitution or federal laws. By design, the federal legal system allows the individual states a great deal of latitude in making laws and enforcing policies, so long as they do not impinge on rights guaranteed under the constitution to citizens. One state may restrict alcohol consumption, to take a famous example, while the neighboring state is permitted to allow sales of any kind of booze at any time.

Embrace Equality

As more people become familiar with issues that had been out of sight and out of mind about sexual preferences and relationships, some attitudes grow more understanding. While the debates and legislative fights over same-sex marriage have been bitter and acrimonious at times, it is true that attitudes change as awareness develops. More people are accepting of same-sex relationships, and many people hope that as the Supreme Court addresses the issue and hands down a ruling, the nation will come to accept all sexual orientations and preferences as deserving of respect and dignity.